The Ruck.

I know this must be getting tedious, but the ruck is an absolute farce. In the last 8 minutes France did a belly flop at every ruck.

When the ball carrier is charging into contact the support runners bind with him and then just keep on charging when the ball carrier is tackled.

They all go off their feet and simply kills the ball. There is no chance for a counter ruck becuase at any given point as many as 5-6 bodies will be lying on the ground.

South Africa in 2010 did the same thing to kill the last two mintues when they drove in the same fashion, on that occassion they got penalised and Australia converted a penalty from the hlafway to win the match.

How could the referee not have penalised France at any one of a number of rucks.

The SH teams get blown to pieces for going of their feet, irrispective of it being the attacking or defending team.

It seems the co-ordinated belly flop is standard practice in the Six Nations, and it hasn't only been france doing it.

You might as well just change the law.

It needs fixed big time.

I think you need to rewatch the WC final again, NZ had cart blanche at the breakdown in the final 20 mins!!!

This coordinated flop works quite effectively, as in general 1 players get pinged for sealing off when isolated or a turnover can occur, yet when there are forwards piling through in 4's or 5's a turnover is highly unlikely anyway, so the defencive side keep out of the battle, allowing a longer more secure defencive line.

Also if Ireland were smarter they would've employed the old 'let the ball carrier through to a tackler behind and blitz the support runners'

At the moment in Super15 the referees are playing some different unterpratation
in the rucks.Especially targetting sealing off,first phase play is now being given more prominence.Something like twice as many lineouts and scrums,the bedrock of forward play.Refs are reporting offences post match there too League style.A lot of Citings over the last weekends matches plus tighter TMO use.
Are we getting yet another SH v NH Rules application difference?

Agree with emack. I think in the NH we often see the attacking team rucking over the carrier nut then putting their hands on the ground or the ball carrier and essentially lying on top of him. The refs in the super 15 ares much better on this.

It must be a forward thing to understand whats going on in there as Ive no idea half the time. Since I seem to always be looking for where the damn ball is (as any good back should!) I must be missing all those techy bits.

So although I agree they need to be changed...I've no idea how!

The Aussies will soon be lobbying for rugby league style rules

Well my point is at every ruck players are off their feet and closing the ball off, now the team trying to play within the law is at a disadvantage becuase they stop competing for the ball then, and the transgressing team has all the benefit.

It is a bug bear of mine that isn't going to go away.

In a case like this let the law then stipulate they may go off their feet, then at least both team do it legally and the contest is fair.

I have to say the ruck is referred far better in the SH not in the NH.

You get away with far too much in the NH

I read that several law changes were going to happen concerning scrum/ruck/maul .Only ruck laws in SH seem to being doing it at the moment
Congrats on your elevation to moderator Biltong,I`ll have to watch it now or go the way of The Grey Ghost.!!!

Rory_Gallagher wrote:It needs fixed big time.

Absolutely. Deregulate it, allow all sorts. The forwards will have to get out of midfield then and we may get our game back.

Thanks alan, problem is when they say changes to the laws, it sually means just another bylaw will be added to even further complicate it.

Biltong a moderator! I´m going to start a Bryce Lawrence tribute thread and see if you moderate yourself.

Bring back the ruck I say. Far more popular and relevant now than Bring back Buck.

I remember at one stage that France were given a penalty for Irelands tackler not releasing. I thought at the time that it was a bit odd since Healy (the tackler) had rolled away and POM was on his feet trying to get the ball, i was certain that was a penalty to Ireland for France hanging on.

Its a very difficult job for the refs but some seem to know whats going on and some seem to guess (a little bit like the scrums).

The best ref i have seen this 6N was Joubert, he was up with the ball, stood in all the correct positions and i cant remember him making a bad call. There is a glaring difference in how the SH refs interperate play than to that of their NH counterparts.

I will simply just walk away, before they made me a mod I was interrogated under a bright light for 24 hours, and they kept saying to me "Bryce Lawrence is a hero" whlst seeing if I lost my cool.

After 24 hours of remianing cool they gave me the badge.

What they don't know is I repeated to myself " Bryce Lawrence is a zero"

Well done biltong.
Hes a mod hes a mod hes a mod yeah yeah yeah yeah
hes a mod hes a mod hes a mod...he wont change anymore

Us older. Kiwis will know that ray columbus song.
One of lawrences favourite tracks i believe...

The breakdown is a farce. What's the point of the ref yelling RUCK if you can't use your feet???

We now have breakdowns where you can't use your hands or your feet !

What has this great game come to .....

offload wrote:The breakdown is a farce. What's the point of the ref yelling RUCK if you can't use your feet???

We now have breakdowns where you can't use your hands or your feet !

Pretty soon once the first ruck is formed 2 minutes into the first half we will be watching a bunch of players, watching a referee, watching the ruck until he blows for half time.

Now do yoy believe me when i say,it is becoming like rugby league!!!bring back the Ruck and police it properly.

Make the ball the offside line and tell the assistant referees to watch the blind side.

Wrong Question Biltong it should have been,"PDV IS A GREAT BOK COACH"

alan, my subconscious would not allow me to even contemplate that thought.

Shame on you for even suggesting that, I am however thankful it wasn't you who did the interrogation.

It's quite simple, policing the ruck more is not the answer, it's policing it less I feel.

Let the attacking team police their side of the ruck, then every defending player will think twice before throwing themselves in the wrong side Mccaw stylee!!!

Hance you need to simplify the laws.

Thats all easy but when i saw Joubert ref the ruck, it was clean and very few penalties. Maybe its not a case od simplifing the laws but more a case of cloning Joubert?

But Billy, even joubert has games where there are contention regarding his way of officating the rucks.

Yes but they are few and far between. Its not about removing the contensiousness of refs rulings, more so as to reducing them.

If only one man in the world is capable of enforcing the rules (and there is debate about that even) the rules are too difficult for the refs and MUST be changed.

C.F.

http://v2journal.com/different-coloured-shirt.html

You see billy, even my solicitor agrees with me. and they love laws to be complicated with lots of loop holes for those that can read between the lines to alter the common perceptions of people.

I just feel that this may be one of those cases where the less amount of law there is, the more open it is to interpeation and the more a mess it could potentially turn out to be.

eirebilly wrote:Thats all easy but when i saw Joubert ref the ruck, it was clean and very few penalties. Maybe its not a case od simplifing the laws but more a case of cloning Joubert?

You mean he let things go? Who decides what should be let go and what shouldn't? If they're being let go when have them in the laws?

I hate the term "interpretation". Why can't they just use the laws god dammit.

Because every ruck has several things that can be penalised by both sides. The ref has to decide whether any are worth stopping the game for and if so which was the worse/happened first.

which is a pathetic state of affairs.

gowales wrote:I hate the term "interpretation". Why can't they just use the laws god dammit.

That's exactly the point. The laws are too complex, contradictory and at the breakdown multiple offenses can occur in parallel. "Interpreting" what happened is often the refs only choice.

Glas a du wrote:which is a pathetic state of affairs.

Why is it that all fans can see this (and don't start me on the scrum!) and yet the authorities are content to keep their heads firmly up their a****

I think a few things could use some clarification. One is the completion of a tackle. I was under the impression that if any part of your body other than your feet touch the ground during a tackle then it counts as complete. Sometimes you see someone penalised for going on one knee and back up again and others when they're not.

I would it that if you're tackled at all you have to release the ball. 'Held' or not. Currently we have situations where some is tackled but not 'held', a ruck forms but becuase the player wasn't 'held' he just keeps crawling foward. The defending team can't play the man on the floor and he doesn't stand up. All they can do is try to play the ball but he keeps crawling forward. Stupid.

Because radically simplifying the laws would lead to them losing their cushy little numbers in tinkering with them interminably. Politics, dear boy.

The real problem is normally one team is allowed to flop over at the breakdown, while the other isn't. How can anyone possibly win against that?