Rugby FAQ's: Rucks and Mauls

By Ian B
June 26 2003

Rugby FAQ's: Rucks and Mauls- 1 Why do referees never penalise players standing sentinel at rucks and mauls? They are clearly in front of the back foot and not bound-on or even touching, they make no attempt to get back onside and are potentially obstructing play I think as a matter of principle standing at sentinel (guard / guard dog) is ok - it's when they stand in front of the back foot it becomes an offence in law. Personally I would remind players not to stand there "in case they give a penalty away" but frankly there are so many offences that *could* be penalised, if they're not interfering, there's no requirement to penalise. If they cause an obstruction, penalty, simple, but usually they affect play by influencing players to do other things. I know that's no real explanation, but I can't speak for other refs There was a lot of talk at the end of last season (2002/3) about players clearing out a path for the scrum half's sniping runs around the fringe, yet players are rarely pinged for clearing out their opposites who are standing guard. What are the laws regarding this as from the touchline it appears to be a free for all? Tough call. If a player is pulled or tackled or obstructed without the ball, then it's a penalty. Sometimes these 'shirt tuggings' or 'pulling-ins' are hard to spot if the ref is watching the ball carrier, and touch judges are watching the ruck / tackle / scrum area for the late punch / stamp / niggle etc, but the law says that any non participating players should be standing behind the hindmost foot of their own player to be in an onside position. However, the intention is that they will be closer to the next breakdown - namely at the breakdown after their own fly half or inside centre is tackled, but 'standing' in an offside position isn't an offence in itself until they try to take part. If defending players are standing offside at a ruck, they aren't penalised until they try to make the tackle, so in the same way attacking players aren't *offside* until they obstruct someone or go into the tackle zone from in front of the back foot. But I hear what you're saying....it will depend on the individual referee's interpretation of intent as well of course. When a player is on his feet trying to get the ball from a player on the ground, if the standing players' knees were on the player on the ground's chest thus preventing him getting up and preventing himself from going to ground, could this be blown up for? A player is deemed to be off his feet IF he is not supporting his own body weight with his feet. Therefore, as you describe it, the player was off his feet by definition, and should have been required to release the ball and the ball carrier, so yes, it should be blown for because of the tackler not rolling away / not releasing the ball carrier. Last season (2002) I thought it was brought in that a player cannot roll the ball back through their legs when on the ground doggy fashion. Is this called squeeze ball, if so why? This seems to have become the norm now. Is it still illegal to do this? The squeeze ball was identified as a way that players and coaches had developed as a way of slowing release of the ball down at the tackle situation. It also makes it more difficult for the opposition to access the ball simply on account of the fact that there is the LENGTH of a body over the ball as opposed to the WIDTH. What was said last year (2002/3) was that squeeze ball is ok if the ball is "posted" immediately. So for example, say at normal speed "there's the tackle, there's the ball" and you would have a good guide as to the length of time a player has to shove it back between his legs. So in answer, it was the slow release of the ball that was penalised, not the technique. However, it is illegal at U18 level (NOT U19). At Under 18's, players are considered still to be "school boys" (or minors at least) and therefore not capable of making a life decision, so it is a banned technique. At U19, they are legally considered adults, though I know a few referees at local level who will still not allow it, as it could be considered risky at best putting your neck forward and exposing it to opposition boots. It only takes one stamp. Players can get penalised for not releasing the ball - but sometimes, in all seriousness, the have something like 10 rugby players on top of them. The player could be trying for all his worth to get it out but with that much 'lard' on top of him, but just can't ... is it just "the way the cookie crumbles" or can this be taken into consideration? When a tackle happens, the referee has to manage the whole situation. The ref has to consider three players - the tackler (did he roll away?), the ball carrier (did he release or play the ball?) and the next man arriving (did he stay on his feet?). At tackle, if all three of these happen properly and everyone does as he should, the "pile up" will only happen as a result of a failed ruck or maul. If there are loads of players on the floor, the penalty will go against the first man to go to ground voluntarily. If the ref considers that the ball may have been trapped between the ball carrier and the tackler, he will blow really quickly and have a scrum to re-start the game, possession going to the side going forward (if he considers neither ruck nor maul were formed). If you hear a ref say "it's a mess", then look for the ball going to the side going forward. If the ball is unplayable because it's trapped, he will consider whether the ball was on the floor (ruck, possession to the side who took it into the ruck) or off the floor (maul, ball turned over to tackling side). The ball is clear from a tackle situation or ruck and a player from an onside position moves towards the ball. If he dives on it close to the ruck/tackle this is penalised. But if, in diving down, he collects the ball and ships it on backwards moments before hitting the deck, presumably this is OK. So far so good. Suppose one hand touches the floor before the other scoops and ships, is this "off your feet"? Or does it have to be a knee/body in contact with the floor to be deemed off your feet? If the ball is clearly OUT of the ruck etc, then it should be fair game. I think this is one area of huge inconsistency with referees - when is the ball out of a ruck or a maul? Unless the ball rolls out from behind the hindmost foot accidentally, there's no way a player should be able to start from an onside position and play the ball, and if that DID happen, he'd have to be very very quick, given the speed of the game. Let's just say that at a ruck situation I would be disappointed to see a player going to ground voluntarily unless the ball had clearly come out of the ruck area due to sloppy control. I'd only add that there's something about intent here as well. Incidentally, exactly the same as the ball coming out of the scrum. When players clear out over a ruck, they quite often dive right over the top, while their bodies are not in contact with the ground, they are laying all over players who are. This seems to be rarely penalised unless it is the first player there, why is this? It's that intent thing again and refereeing at a high level of rugby like Leicester is different from refereeing lower down the levels of rugby. What referees are looking for is best captured by the image of aeroplanes taking off, not crashing, so imagine in your mind's eye a player approaching a ruck with a low body. If his shoulders and head are up, he's looking to clear a player out who is trying to compete for the ball and turn it over because he's looking at the player he's going to drive off the ball). If his head is down, he's looking at the ball (more often than not) and looking to go to ground to secure / seal off / kill it. There will be times when the clearing player winds up on the ground because of his body position and the position of the man he's clearing. Diving over the top is clear killing of the ball, and usually gets penalised. As regards the first man there getting penalised, think again about penalties at the tackle and the referee's priorities - tackler, ball carrier and arriving player. It's not until you have two players, one from either team, on their feet and in contact with each other and the ball on the floor that a ruck is formed. Once the ruck is formed, all sorts of other laws start to apply - offside lines (there aren't any at the tackle), hands in the ruck etc Can you clarify hands in the ruck? Once that ruck is formed, the ball may not be handled (penalty offence), and basically players who are on the floor (and therefore out of the game) try to handle the ball back with their hands, when what is really needed is for players to stay on their feet and drive over the ball leaving it there for the scrum half to deal with. This is another reason why it's so important to get the tackler out of the way - he could get trampled and seriously injured. Now you'll say that you see players handing the ball backwards at a ruck to help it out that gets allowed and I agree it can be confusing but, again, think about intent. If the ball is already "won" and secure, most referees have no problem with it being helped back as long as the competition for possession is already over. It serves to speed up the game.