Ruck Rules

[BroadhurstMonk]

I was just wondering if the rule still existed that if you take the ball out of the ruck and get tackled or touched by an apponent it is holding the ball - the rule was brought in two years ago and seems to have dissapeared this year - just wondering if I missed a rule change somewhere!

 

[magpies42]

I was just wondering if the rule still existed that if you take the ball out of the ruck and get tackled or touched by an apponent it is holding the ball - the rule was brought in two years ago and seems to have dissapeared this year - just wondering if I missed a rule change somewhere!

i still think its there, rucks have just adapted better and only take it out if they are certain they can dispose of it.

 

[BroadhurstMonk]

i still think its there, rucks have just adapted better and only take it out if they are certain they can dispose of it.

I have watched at least 10 instances in the last two weeks of football where a ruckman has taken the ball direct from the ruck, been tackled and there has been a ball up - it drives me crazy as I thought the rulle still existed!

 

[magpies42]

I have watched at least 10 instances in the last two weeks of football where a ruckman has taken the ball direct from the ruck, been tackled and there has been a ball up - it drives me crazy as I thought the rulle still existed!

could be wrong, i dunno

 

[Hadders]

From what I've seen they're not as harsh on it as they were when it was first introduced. It seems now that if a ruckman takes the ball out of the ruck and gets tackled he is given a chance to dispose of it.

Much better interpretation of the rule IMO, it stops the ridiculous situation of ruckmen letting the ball bounce because they're too afraid to grab in case they get pinged for holding the ball.

 

[BroadhurstMonk]

From what I've seen they're not as harsh on it as they were when it was first introduced. It seems now that if a ruckman takes the ball out of the ruck and gets tackled he is given a chance to dispose of it.

Much better interpretation of the rule IMO, it stops the ridiculous situation of ruckmen letting the ball bounce because they're too afraid to grab in case they get pinged for holding the ball.

Totally agree would just be nice to know when these changes happen!

 

[Frederlick]

Have only seen it a couple of times this year, but it is still being paid. If they have changed their tunes I wish they would apply it to holding the ball in packs ,which is plain ridiculous at times.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

It has gone out of fashion, like so many umpiring interpretations before and since.

I thought it was ridiculous. Fair enough if they want to say "that's your prior opportunity" when a ruckman takes it out of the ruck duel, but players in normal play can often put out a stiffarm, evade three would-be tacklers, baulk, take a bounce and then get tackled, and the umpires would still let them get slung around 720 degrees before blowing the whistle.

It's as though in general play, the umpires forgot that the "prior" in "prior opportunity" means before they got tackled. They only applied it for the ruckmen, who merely had to be impeded for 0.00001 of a second and the free against was awarded.