Super Rugby: Chiefs - Crusaders in Hamilton (6/7/2012)

[Darwin]

I'll repeat my above point: In all my years of watching/playing rugby I've seen people do this a million times and it has never been penalised. Nor should it, otherwise you would just have to fall over close enough to the line and nobody could stop you stretching out to score.

Really - I haven't seen this particular situation much at all! It would be very different had Ellis been over the try line or Kerr-Barlow was on his feet. However it happened in the field of play, and Kerr-Barlow was not on his feet therefore:

(if you assume Kerr-Barlow is the tackler, which he probably wasn't...)

15.4 THE TACKLER
(a) When a player tackles an opponent and they both go to ground, the tackler must
immediately release the tackled player.
Sanction: Penalty kick
(b) The tackler must immediately get up or move away from the tackled player and from the
ball at once.
Sanction: Penalty kick
(c) The tackler must get up before playing the ball and then may play the ball from any
direction.
Sanction: Penalty kick

I don't think I would consider Kerr-Barlow the tackler, hence the following laws are probably more applicable....

(a) After a tackle, all other players must be on their feet when they play the ball. Players are on
their feet if no other part of their body is supported by the ground or players on the ground.
Sanction: Penalty kick
Exception: Ball goes into the in-goal. After a tackle near the goal line, if the ball has been
released and has gone into the in-goal any player, including a player on the ground, may
ground the ball.

15.7 FORBIDDEN PRACTICES
(a) No player may prevent the tackled player from passing the ball.
Sanction: Penalty kick
(b) No player may prevent the tackled player from releasing the ball and getting up or moving
away from it.
Sanction: Penalty kick
(c) No player may fall on or over the players lying on the ground after a tackle with the ball
between or near to them.
Sanction: Penalty kick

If Kerr-Barlow had been on his feet he would have been able to prevent the try:

22.4 OTHER WAYS TO SCORE A TRY
....
(e) Tackled near the goal line. If a player is tackled near to the opponents' goal line so that
this player can immediately reach out and ground the ball on or over the goal line, a try is
scored.
(f) In this situation, defending players who are on their feet may legally prevent the try by
pulling the ball from the tackled player's hands or arms, but must not kick the ball.

There is no law that I can find that states that a defending player can dive on an attacking player in the field of play and prevent them from releasing the ball (regardless of where the defending player is). If someone can find that law I will readily admit I am wrong!

 

[InsaneAsylum]

just trying to understand the ruling here: so if tkb had rolled away before whitelock (I think?) came in, ellis should have been pinged for not releasing the ball?

 

[Darwin]

just trying to understand the ruling here: so if tkb had rolled away before whitelock (I think?) came in, ellis should have been pinged for not releasing the ball?

Ellis is entitled to play the ball immediately once tackled (e.g. pass the ball, or place the ball in any direction). If Ellis didn't play the ball immediately (e.g. before Whitelock came in) he would have been penalized for not releasing (I think it is clear that he didn't get a chance to release the ball though...)

 

[Shovenose]

The International Rugby Board's protocol, as currently in use, states:
Area of Adjudication
The areas of adjudication are limited to Law 6. 8 (b), 6.8 (d) and 6.8 (e) and therefore relate to:
Grounding of the ball for try and touch down

Touch, touch-in-goal, ball being made dead during the act of grounding the ball.

The TMO must not be requested to provide information on players prior to the ball going into in-goal (except touch in the act of grounding the ball).

 

[Darwin]

The International Rugby Board's protocol, as currently in use, states:
Area of Adjudication
The areas of adjudication are limited to Law 6. 8 (b), 6.8 (d) and 6.8 (e) and therefore relate to:
Grounding of the ball for try and touch down

Touch, touch-in-goal, ball being made dead during the act of grounding the ball.

The TMO must not be requested to provide information on players prior to the ball going into in-goal (except touch in the act of grounding the ball).

There is no doubt the TMO made the correct call based on the current protocol. My point is that regardless of the current protocol awarding a try was the correct call (and if Ellis had failed to score, a penalty try would have been more than justified).