[
PLEASE LOGIN TO POST TO THE FORUM
]
|
|
|
zackly
|
Sat, 23 February 08 11:08 GMT
|
Ngib3. I think we're in broad agreement.
Under "Rucking a Hand" Whistleblower gives us a timely reminder of recent IRB v IRFU rulings.
If the defending team in trying to win a ruck, is impeded by the grounded ball carrier "latched" or "bridged" on the ground, then stamping is likely to result.
I have some U18 games coming up - great news ! - so will see what the coaches & TV Showbiz mimics are getting up to !
|
|
|
Nigib3
|
Thu, 21 February 08 18:25 GMT
|
zackly: I can't disagree at all, but it's what's being coached and what you see on tv.
Should we ping it every time? I would say only if it prevents a fair contest for the ball (or there's a safety issue through poor technique and the back of the neck is exposed to oncoming). For the most part, either the ball gets to the back of the ruck so fast it makes no difference, or there's a counter-ruck and the ball is available the other side; in which case the guy on the ground allows access to the ball or is penalised.
|
|
|
zackly
|
Thu, 21 February 08 17:10 GMT
|
Nigib3. But the second part of LoG 15.5 (b) IS broken by the Tackled Player remaining on the ground near the ball : viz.
<<< A tackled player must immediately pass the ball or release it. That player must also get up or move away from it at once. >>>
So this "latching" could be interpreted as a means of RETAINING possession (not winning it) unfairly, once any defender(s) appears to contest it.
Pinning a grounded Ball Carrier down near the ball - even after it's been released by him - and even with only a notional grip or arm pressure on him - or even by mental (coached) inertia - creates the foundation for sealing off his side's possession of the ball from defenders. ILLEGALLY. His body is on the line, blocking defenders' access to the ball.
Hence Law 15.5(b) applies - PK.
And the grounded Ball carrier may find himself subject to some heavy "shoeing" (as Moore Mouth would justify it) unthinkingly encouraged by the referee's lack of earlier response - with the rucking (defending) side then penalised - unfairly, because of the referee's earlier failure to act !
This message edited on Thu, 21 February 08 by zackly
|
|
|
Nigib3
|
Wed, 20 February 08 14:00 GMT
|
Latching is being coached at U16 level in my son's school and in various forms across the county.
The coach's explanation of latching as opposed to bridging is that the player's weight stays on the feet, and the arms link across each other (not grabbing the player on the ground) above the prone player with shoulders above hips. Arms can rest on the player on the ground, but with no weight. The safety issues of exposed neck, shoulders below hips etc are thus avoided. And because there is, theoretically, no gripping of the player on the ground, the whole thing is legal. (there are times when I wish we could post a video rather than try and explain it as inelegantly as I just have!)
This requires an amount of flexibility and dexterity that I believe is beyond most people, but is a way of 'legalising' bridging. But it is, apparently, what is being coached at this age group up to international level.
Since this is a tactic to win ball at the breakdown, the timing is important and the time from the setup to an opposition player engaging and thus setting up a ruck is usually pretty instantaneous. Provided it's not a "classic" bridge, I'm inclined to let it go provided there are no obvious safety issues (and the laws remain unbreached).
|
|
|
pg
|
Tue, 19 February 08 23:44 GMT
|
PS I am receiving word that latching, squeeze etc is being coached at U14 level in my county. Need to advise county coaches accordingly!
|
|
|
pg
|
Tue, 19 February 08 23:43 GMT
|
didds
I think what you are describing is 'leech and clean' as exmplified by the AB's.
We are becoming random buzz word generators ...
|
|
|
didds
- scrumtime@hotmail.com
|
Tue, 19 February 08 12:32 GMT
|
My 2p... if you had asked me what "latching" was before I;d read this thread I would have quickly opined that it is the act of driving a ball carrying team mate through a tackle. e.g. ball carrier entering the contact area has a team mate "latch" onto" his behind ... ie bind onto him rather like a flanker to a prop say at a scrummage, and provide extra impetus through the tackle.
However, the definition of "latch" being "sealing" makes perfect sense in the topic being heralded by the Staffs Union.
cheers
didds
|
|
|
the whistleblower
|
Sun, 17 February 08 21:24 GMT
|
Aussie Rob: <<we've discussed 'latching' before (although not by that name). I seem to remember the consensus was that it is legal provided shoulders stay above hips and that it doesn't occur for too long (as it may then be considered as preventing the tackled player from exercising his options). >>
Bearing in mind that the tackler and tackled players have to exercise their options "immediately", and that this is by implication faster than "at once", I suggest that the legal window of opportunity to latch is so vanishingly small as to make the practice effectively illegal.
There are at least three objections to latching; preventing the exercise of options; hips below shoulders (which is a matter of technique admittedly, so the better players could probably do it - but the post spoke of U.13 to U.19, where skills may not be finely honed as yet); and the fact that it's most likely that some weight will be borne by the arms in bracing for contact, meaning that the latching player is off his feet (as defined) at the tackle.
|
-------------------------
Whistleblower |
|
|
stewie
|
Sun, 17 February 08 11:01 GMT
|
Can't recall where or when, but the technique known as "squeeze ball" was banned for all age groups below U19 in England (and for some women's matches dependant upon league). I would guess it was reference to this that was the source of the original e-mail.
This message edited on Sun, 17 February 08 by stewie
|
|
|
aussie rob
|
Sat, 16 February 08 20:07 GMT
|
we've discussed 'latching' before (although not by that name). I seem to remember the consensus was that it is legal provided shoulders stay above hips and that it doesn't occur for too long (as it may then be considered as preventing the tackled player from exercising his options).
|
|
|
TimHandley
|
Sat, 16 February 08 16:32 GMT
|
Zackly, Good points. Firstly though, SRUSR is the Staffordshire Rugby Union Society of Referees. They received the email from the North Mids Society. At Stoke U13s, we've always coached latching or sealing, whichever term is acceptable, and are now wondering where the impetus for this email started. To get clarification, I put this thread up. I read the 'sealing' thread you refer to and like yopu, I see it all the time. bridging seems less reasonable as it's only a few inches away from killing the ball completely. Although there are only two replies to this thread, taking those with the 'sealing' comments, the only thing wrong with latching is the shoulders below hips point. Another thing that worries me, though, is the apparent differences between the amateur and professional games given that the ELRA teaches that the two are different. Yet players, coaches, and refs all watch the professional game and expect to see things done 'properly'. Somewhere along the line, what's done professionally becomes 'done properly' because that's where many will take their lead from.
Regards, Tim
|
|
|
zackly
|
Sat, 16 February 08 14:17 GMT
|
Tim Handley
"Latching" does indeed seem a novel disguise for describing grabbing the shirt of the grounded ball carrier by a supporting team-mate. Perhaps you can enlighten us further :
Who are SRUSR ?
Who (if anyone) directed them to circulate this advice to N. Midlands clubs & referees ?
Why is the warning about coaching/teaching/encouraging illegal techniques restricted to Junior Rugby (U13-U18) ? Why not Adult rugby as well ?
You'll see that iIllegal post-tackle techniques have been under discussion for months in this Forum under Sealing & Bridging, : started by this entry :
<<< Dan Cottrell Wed, 26 September 07 12:19 GMT
I know what the laws say about contact with the grounded player, but it seems at most of the levels I watch to be ignored. That is the first supporter into a contact situation where his teammate is on the ground, seals off the ball by grabbing his shirt (though hips below shoulders). Am I being a stick in the mud for not coaching it or am I misinterpreting the law? >>>
It emerged that these illegal post-tackle techniques could have an origin in the RFU coaching guidance. RFU_Tackle_Coaching_-_kingsleyjones712.pdf
However they have recently been confirmed as "best practice" by the recent two rounds of Siz Nations Showbiz games on TV. Why is someone trying to ban in Junior Rugby in some corner of England what the boys (like their older brethren) will want to imitate / emulate - and are otherwise encouraged to do so ? !!
This message edited on Sat, 16 February 08 by zackly
|
|
|
ob
|
Fri, 15 February 08 21:38 GMT
|
Presumably latching is the technique of grabbing hold of the tackled player so as to make it difficult for opponents to drive you away.
|
|
|
TimHandley
|
Fri, 15 February 08 19:04 GMT
|
|just received (thro SRUSR)the following email, which is being circulated to N Mids clubs and referees.
Dear Colleague,
We are concerned of frequent reports that "bridging, latching and squeeze ball" is occurring in U13-U18 matches. Would you please bring to the attention of the coaches of your U13-U18 sides that all of these actions are contrary to the RFU Regulations and if permitted or coached by your Club would invalidate their RFU insurance cover.
Coaching, teaching or encouraging Squeeze ball and entering with shoulders below the hips is specifically banned and recently disciplinary action has been taken against "coaches" breeching this Regulation.
In the interests of safety please ensure that these activities do not take place within your Club and its U13-U18 Teams. (End of email)
I know what bridging and squeeze ball are - but what's latching? Perhaps we know it by another name. (Answers concerning baby mammals learning to suckle can be left for another time!)
Tim (Stoke RUFC)
|
|
|
|
|
|
