Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 28 of 28

Thread: Hand-off heights

      
  1. #21

    Resident Club Coach
    didds's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    N/A
    Grade
    Club Coach
    Join Date
    27 Jan 04
    Posts
    10,426

    Default Re: Hand-off heights

    Quote Originally Posted by OB.. View Post
    The ball carrier has virtually no choice when a tackler comes in low. As long as he does not deliver a fend as a sort of punch, I see no problem.

    The tackler has multiple choices. if he choses to go high and makes contact with the head, that is at his own risk of foul play.
    I don't disagree at all.

    I _think_ what others are alluding to is when the tackler chooses to come in high, and the ball carrier's fend is to the tackler's head/chin/throat/neck/face, with force.

    And if it isnt what they meant then I'll ask that, in the interests of clarity.

    didds

  2. #22
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    Cardiff Society of Welsh Rugby Union Referees
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    05 Jan 18
    Posts
    2,142

    Default Re: Hand-off heights

    Quote Originally Posted by OB.. View Post
    The two situations are NOT equivalent. Therefore they do NOT require exactly the same treatment.
    I'm not arguing for "exactly the same treatment". Defining something as "foul play" still allows for latitude: PK only, PK +YC or PK+ RC.

    A 6 foot 7 second row faced with trying to tackle a 5 foot 7 scrum half Faces similar problem to your Fijian. But he's still not allowed to make contact with the head.
    Last edited by Marc Wakeham; 23-05-21 at 12:05.

  3. #23

    Advises in England
    OB..'s Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Glos & District
    Grade
    Adviser (grass roots)
    Join Date
    07 Oct 04
    Posts
    22,829

    Default Re: Hand-off heights

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Wakeham View Post
    [...]

    A 6 foot 7 second row faced with trying to tackle a 5 foot 7 scrum half Faces similar problem to your Fijian. But he's still not allowed to make contact with the head.
    To be clear: are you saying the 5'7" scrum half ball carrier is not allowed to fend against the 6'7" second row who is coming low by placing a hand on the top of his head?
    He trudg’d along unknowing what he sought,
    And whistled as he went, for want of thought.
    The Referee by John Dryden

  4. #24

    Referees in England
    Phil E's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Staffordshire and Royal Navy
    Grade
    8
    Join Date
    22 Jan 08
    Posts
    15,160
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Hand-off heights

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Wakeham View Post
    Either ban contact with the head full stop. OR allow contact and leave the referee to decide as to whether it should be considered dangerous play.
    Quote Originally Posted by didds View Post
    I _think_ what others are alluding to is when the tackler chooses to come in high, and the ball carrier's fend is to the tackler's head/chin/throat/neck/face, with force.
    The referee already decides on whether a Hand-off is dangerous/foul play?

    If the Fend is with force, that is foul play and can be dealt with by a PK and (if neccesary) a card.

    Law 9 Foul Play
    24. A ball-carrier is permitted to hand off an opponent provided excessive force is not used.
    Sanction: Penalty.

    Follow my Award Winning blog The Rugby Ref


  5. #25

    Referees in America
    thepercy's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    New York State Rugby Referees Society
    Grade
    Level 1
    Join Date
    21 Sep 13
    Posts
    900

    Default Re: Hand-off heights

    For the fairness crowd

    New law proposal:

    Any player may make contact with their opponents head and/or neck, as long as it's done with the palm of the hand and is not a strike or excessive force is not used. All head and neck contact is forbidden for U19 players regardless of use of palm and force used.

    I think it would be rare and ineffective to use this type of action in a tackle, but for fairness sake.

  6. #26
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    Cardiff Society of Welsh Rugby Union Referees
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    05 Jan 18
    Posts
    2,142

    Default Re: Hand-off heights

    Quote Originally Posted by OB.. View Post
    To be clear: are you saying the 5'7" scrum half ball carrier is not allowed to fend against the 6'7" second row who is coming low by placing a hand on the top of his head?
    Apologies. The other way round makes more sense.

  7. #27
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    Cardiff Society of Welsh Rugby Union Referees
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    05 Jan 18
    Posts
    2,142

    Default Re: Hand-off heights

    Quote Originally Posted by Phil E View Post
    The referee already decides on whether a Hand-off is dangerous/foul play?

    If the Fend is with force, that is foul play and can be dealt with by a PK and (if neccesary) a card.

    Law 9 Foul Play
    24. A ball-carrier is permitted to hand off an opponent provided excessive force is not used.
    Sanction: Penalty.

    True. but the referee always did that with tackles But WR still felt the need to outlaw acts specifically. Contact wit hthe head was specifically outlawed but not in repect of the hand off.

    For me it is odd tht we exclude a deliberate act by the ball carrier and not by the tackler. Still them's the laws we work within.

  8. #28
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    Sydney North Referees
    Grade
    Select Grade
    Join Date
    29 May 12
    Posts
    49

    Default Re: Hand-off heights

    Quote Originally Posted by thepercy View Post
    For the fairness crowd

    New law proposal:

    Any player may make contact with their opponents head and/or neck, as long as it's done with the palm of the hand and is not a strike or excessive force is not used. All head and neck contact is forbidden for U19 players regardless of use of palm and force used.

    I think it would be rare and ineffective to use this type of action in a tackle, but for fairness sake.
    Fair call. To outlaw a ball carrier from fending to the head would be unworkable, since it would be so difficult to fend and avoid the head, it would effectively outlaw the fend.

    Edit: Although I sit in the camp that sees no real problem with the current laws. Consistency is a good thing, sure. But trying to make the laws black and white is never going to happen.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •