PDA

View Full Version : [Mini/Midi] U11 NROP - Ripping



merge
25-09-16, 17:09
Hi all,

I was hoping for some guidance about when and how to penalise players ripping the ball and not passing at U11s.


6 (b) Where the ball has been ripped from the ball carrier, whether by the attacker or defender, the ball must be passed immediately away from the contact area.


I presume the sanction is a free kick (as for the many offences without stated sanction)?

Did people last year draw a distinction between "handing" the ball to a teammate and "ripping" or does there always have to be a pass?
Should the player who ripped the ball be allowed to kick?


On a related note rule 10 (b) draws a careful distinction between (i) ball kicked into in-goal by the attacking team and made dead by a defender and (ii) kicked, carried or sent into in-goal by the attacking team and crosses touch-in-goal/dead ball line. I'm inclined not to take the combination of these two literally if a defender rips the ball from an attacker while in-goal and grounds it for a "22", unless there is common practice it should be a free kick?

Thanks.

Flish
25-09-16, 20:09
The ripping rule is at U10 too, which is my age group, we take a rip as being something you know if you see it, a simple handing of the ball to a team mate can be interpreted as a pass away. I try to avoid penalties here unless obvious and repeat, i.e. I've warned and explained what I want to see.

The free kick is an odd one, at U10 a free pass is clearly defined as the catch all, even for some occasions that would be a drum n the adult game. Quick glance at U11 regs and I can see a clear definition of when you do award a free kick, when a free pass, and when a scrum, bu no 'everything else'. As the free pass has mostly been replaced with a free kick at U11 you wouldn't be far wrong to sell that as the right penalty

outcast
26-09-16, 15:09
I'm in the same boat (U11 this season) and have drawn the conclusion that the free-kick is replacing the free pass in all situations except when ball has gone into touch and, more curiously, high tackles. I still don't understand why the latter receives a lighter sanction when it can, potentially, be so dangerous??

AntonyGoodman
27-09-16, 08:09
Hi Guys,

The idea behind this rule is to get the kids to move the ball away from the breakdown. I always said that if the ball was ripped/handed to a player (where there was no separation of the ball through the air) the receiving player should pass the ball. As Flish says, as long as you are clear with the way you ref this up front, all should be good. "That was ripped, pass the ball" shouted at the time usually stops you having to blow the whistle.

Yes, the sanction is a free kick.

No, the ripper should not kick. The player they pass to of course can.

I think you would be a bit unkind though to not award a "22" in the in goal scenario you describe.

Hope this helps,

Thanks,

Antony

Flish
27-09-16, 08:09
Hi Guys,

The idea behind this rule is to get the kids to move the ball away from the breakdown. I always said that if the ball was ripped/handed to a player (where there was no separation of the ball through the air) the receiving player should pass the ball. As Flish says, as long as you are clear with the way you ref this up front, all should be good. "That was ripped, pass the ball" shouted at the time usually stops you having to blow the whistle.



Albeit my kids are a year behind in terms of experience, but if not an obvious pass that I'm happy with normally a shout of 'pass it out' generates a pass within 1 or 2 steps and am happy.

Hijacking slightly, what's the consensus on scrum half with hands in the ruck at U10, we only have a 1 on 1 contest so quite often you get one from each side fishing for the ball. I'm trying to call hands out until the contest is clearly won (or the ball flies) out, does that sit with expectations, or too harsh. In my mind there needs to be a contest so let it play out, then pass away?

AntonyGoodman
27-09-16, 08:09
Yep, and if appropriate, clear shout of who has won it so that you don't end up with the two SHs scrabbling for the ball. "Won by blue, hands off red"

Thanks,

Antony

nimblehippo
05-10-18, 14:10
Yep, and if appropriate, clear shout of who has won it so that you don't end up with the two SHs scrabbling for the ball. "Won by blue, hands off red"

Thanks,

Antony

I've seen this a fair bit, and IMO it gives refs way too much control. They are effectively deciding who wins the ruck rather than letting the players compete properly. Some schools train their boys to get their first and will call the ruck won before there's been a real chance to compete, based on who gets there first. One v One rucking can get a little messy, but if a scrum half comes through the gate (and team mates legs) and gets his hands on the ball, what is wrong with that? It encourages quick recycling and gets the ball into open play. Surely the shout should be to encourage a side to use it, rather than telling a side not to compete.

mcroker
05-10-18, 15:10
If it's getting all rather messy than a shout of "blue ball" can avoid having to give a whole host of penalties as at this point there is almost always somebody going in the side, and somebody offside. I take the point about the ref. deciding, but once the competition is over (perhaps because of minor-infringements), I like to get the ball played away.

I don't think I've ever penalised for not passing at the back of a ruck (perhaps I should) a shout of "must pass" usually elicits the pass, and failing that I reset without turning over possession.

Simon Duffy
28-01-19, 14:01
I coach and ref U11s and lots of the teams we play against have clearly been coached to try and rip the ball from the ball carrier with no attempt to tackle.

But at what point does that become a tackle without arms?

When a defender does this, he invariably has contact with the attacking player, but instead of wrapping his arms around the attacker, they are going to rip the ball instead.

Given the focus on keeping the tackles low and penalising incomplete tackles (i.e no arms) does anybody have any guidance on whether this tactic is deemed dangerous and where it wouldbe convered in the laws? I've been penalising defenders where I see the attackers head going back in the contact or I think the contact has been dangerous, but I cant see that its legal in any circumstance for the 1st defender to go to rip the ball, because, by definition they cant be wrapping their arms around the attacker.

Thanks for the help.

crossref
28-01-19, 15:01
Might this go in a cycle.. with teams coached to rip, ball carriers will keep tighter hold on the ball ..

Flish
28-01-19, 16:01
Don't know about coached to rip (although some of ours that play League have been), 2but we certainly see a lot of greedy players who go for the ball and try to trip because ball = tries. We try to discourage this and get them to earn the ball (tackle / ruck / maul to gain possession). Either way I've not see a dangerous rip attempt, other than a few flailing elbows, and once coached to maul a rip attempt that's not immediately successful often becomes a maul anyway (which only has a 5 second lifespan at this age) so I wouldn't worry too much about it.