[
PLEASE LOGIN TO POST TO THE FORUM
]
|
|
|
the whistleblower
|
Wed, 27 February 08 17:41 GMT
|
correct on all counts
|
-------------------------
Whistleblower |
|
|
HighsideUK
|
Tue, 26 February 08 18:52 GMT
|
So once you are off your feet you can reach out with arm(s) and momentum is fine but any extra wriggling around/driving forward/trying to get up/rolling over is illegal.
Seems quite straightforward.
On the face of it, it is a bit of a paradox that that unless the player is held it is not a tackle and yet the tackler must release immediately.
I suppose in fact the release only needs to happen after a very short delay that establishes that the player has indeed been held.
|
|
|
the whistleblower
|
Tue, 26 February 08 15:27 GMT
|
Double movement is a term borrowed from Rugby League, where it is (or used to be, when I dabbled) illegal. It is descriptive of the situation where the tackled player realises that his momentum won't take him over the line, and adds a bit of extra oomph.
In Union, because the tackled player is allowed to reach out and score, the urge to give a bit of extra oomph comes when the tackled player realises his arm isn't quite long enough. In my view, the provision of oomph is a failure to comply with the tackle law (which requires immediate placement, or failing that, release), and should be penalised. I have colleagues in the Society who rationalise differently, but I believe we'd all penalise the addition of extra oomph.
Whether you call it a double movement or not doesn't bother me, except insofar as it can confuse those spectators who aren't aware that the attacker is entitled to reach out, in what is clearly a separate movement from the one that got him to the deck in the first place.
|
-------------------------
Whistleblower |
|
|
callump
|
Mon, 25 February 08 14:14 GMT
|
The try looked good to me, and i am a Scot!
|
|
|
ob
|
Mon, 25 February 08 13:37 GMT
|
The term "double movement" does not appear in the laws, and is very misleading. I wish commentators would stop using it.
Law 22.4 (e) "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."
That is what is usually being referred to.
Both the tackler and the tackled player have to release before getting to their feet to play the ball. Any tackled player who gets to his feet with the ball should be penalised.
I cannot comment on the Bowe incident, as I have not seen it.
|
|
|
Johnno884
|
Mon, 25 February 08 10:26 GMT
|
In the Ireland - Scotland match the first try for Tommy Bowe looked like a double movement. My question is this: Can you actually have a double movement?
Surely when a tackle is made, the tackler should automatically release the player tackled and allow him to stand up. By not doing so the tackler has denied a guaranteed scoring opportunity therefore a penalty try should be awarded. In the event a tackled player commits a double movement and is penalised.
Can there be a double movement?
Was the Bowe try not a double movement?
|
|
|
|
|
|
