All Blacks - From Pillars to Stonewalls

[Lindommer]

It appears that much of confusion (grey area open to interpretation) comes from the definition of a ruck which is: "A ruck is a phase of play where one or more players from each team, who are on their feet, in physical contact, close around the ball on the ground." The phrase "close around the ball" is quite ambiguous. It suggests that you can form a ruck and then drive over the ball but you can't form a ruck too far in front of the ball to stop the opposition competing (the stonewall that Blue identified). But how far in front is no longer "close around the ball"? Example 5 by Dam0 seems to raise the problem squarely.

Depends on whether "close" is a verb or an adverb. I'd suggest it's a verb as there isn't another in that definition but it's definitely ambiguous.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

I will qualify my comments by saying that Youtube is blocked at my work so I watched the footage again on a smartphone screen so it was hard to see the finer details.

I think that is it close to the edge but (with the benefit of hinsight and six replays) I would say Smith formed the ruck illegally. There is no test for "close around the ball" but I think that Smith forming the ruck in front of the tackled player was too far from the ball. My gut reaction is that when the ruck is formed that far in front of the tackled player, as the tackled player will place the ball behind them, there is no way Argentina could have contested for the ball.

I could live with that interpretation

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Depends on whether "close" is a verb or an adverb. I'd suggest it's a verb as there isn't another in that definition but it's definitely ambiguous.

You have expressed my instinctive reaction perfectly

 

[Scotty]

I don't have a issue with this wall, provided it is just at the front of the ruck and not beyond it. It would be quite easy for a team so inclined to knock one of the wall backwards over the ruck and likely into the wall members one half back.

This is nothing compared to the AB and Crusaders 'taking up the space' as far as 5m past the ball that was occurring frequently a few years ago. In fact I think a method that might help retain possession for the attacking team would benefit rugby in the long term.

 

[ACT Crusader]

This is nothing compared to the AB and Crusaders 'taking up the space' as far as 5m past the ball that was occurring frequently a few years ago. In fact I think a method that might help retain possession for the attacking team would benefit rugby in the long term.

Ahhhh I'm getting all nostalgic with you reminding me of the So'oialo and Collins era

 

[cyclopath]

Ahhhh I'm getting all nostalgic with you reminding me of the So'oialo and Collins era

I think the "Conrad" is a far more dynamic move than the Easter Island statue presence of those 2 in the opposition lines. But they were elegant at it.
But seriously, this thread is an interesting discussion, and I hope it can continue to evolve and not descend into trans-Tasman point scoring, despite the fact Aussie Blue started it from Sydney!

 

[ACT Crusader]

Cyclo, Conrad's just a gangly looking guy that looks like his 16yo. Surely he doesnt get up to these old head moves .

I must say that the taking of space was effectively utilised by Horwill, Samo, Beau Robinson and S. Finger for the Reds in 2011. Simmons was the exponent of the ruck work 5-6 metres past the ball. I remember a test match last year when he pushed that envelope and got pinged for it. Simmons much to his surprise had that shocked look on his face as of to say - "I've gotten away with that all year Sir"

 

[cyclopath]

Cyclo, Conrad's just a gangly looking guy that looks like his 16yo. Surely he doesnt get up to these old head moves .

I must say that the taking of space was effectively utilised by Horwill, Samo, Beau Robinson and S. Finger for the Reds in 2011. Simmons was the exponent of the ruck work 5-6 metres past the ball. I remember a test match last year when he pushed that envelope and got pinged for it. Simmons much to his surprise had that shocked look on his face as of to say - "I've gotten away with that all year Sir"

Simmons really needs to work on his face. He looks guilty even when not being penalised. He and S Fainga'a were at it a bit, but to be honest, they were not subtle enough. Strangely, Samo, who is about as conspicuous as can be, was less obvious.
Conrad has made a career of looking unlikely, but consistently producing. The run through the ruck flailing and grabbing defenders and looking a bit dorky in the process is his super power. We could use a Conrad.

 

[Scotty]

Simmons really needs to work on his face. He looks guilty even when not being penalised. He and S Fainga'a were at it a bit, but to be honest, they were not subtle enough. Strangely, Samo, who is about as conspicuous as can be, was less obvious.
Conrad has made a career of looking unlikely, but consistently producing. The run through the ruck flailing and grabbing defenders and looking a bit dorky in the process is his super power. We could use a Conrad.

We could use a Conrad more than any other I reckon. The difference between him and the likes of AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) is stark.

 

[cyclopath]

We could use a Conrad more than any other I reckon. The difference between him and the likes of AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) is stark.

We sure could.
And any Kiwis, I was having a laugh, Conrad is one of the ABs I rate the highest. Superb player.

 

[Scarfman]

I think the "Conrad" is a far more dynamic move than the Easter Island statue presence of those 2 in the opposition lines. But they were elegant at it.
But seriously, this thread is an interesting discussion, and I hope it can continue to evolve and not descend into trans-Tasman point scoring, despite the fact Aussie Blue started it from Sydney!

Yep, I'm very conscious of being on my best behaviour. Having said that, I have been bleating to an ever-dwindling circle of friends for years that Conrad is the ABs 2nd biggest cheat. He basically does somethign illegal at every ruck and maul. To balance that, I can't stand Fainga'a for the same reason.

The videos:

#1 - at least he's bound to the ruck, if even by one hand. Borderline, but probably let it go.

#2 - Not really what we're talking about. A maul that gets split like that? Probably a penalty but no big deal.

#3 - It's McCaw at 0:07 - 0:10 that makes me want to turn the TV off. He is offside. The Argie who comes through? Again, not what we're talking about. He thought he was coming through the gate, the ref didn't, end of.

#4 - No, haven't got a problem with that.

#5 - Conrad? A bit more dodgy, but unless he was already on my "watch" for doing similar stuff, I'd let it go.

Much better examples of this phenomenon in my video. But I really don't want to revisit that video. It produces insanity. The Kiwi mind tears apart from the opposing forces of what they're seeing and what they want to see.

 

[Dam0]

I know that none of you are naive enough to think this is an All Black tactic, and not a rugby tactic. Right?

I wonder how many Wallaby offences you can count in this short piece of play. If we go by the GaGR standard I don't know if I have enough fingers and toes ...

If we just stick to the alleged "taking the space" or "building a wall" offences I see:

0:06 Barnes comes in from the side and clears out someone not bound to a ruck
0:12 Dennis wanders in around the side and takes up an offside position not connected to anything
0:24 Hooper wanders in even more blatantly and lingers offside, again unconnected to the ruck


Now I'm not arguing that all of these should be penalised. I am saying that the title of the thread should not be "All Blacks - From Pillars to Stonewalls" rather than "Rugby Players - From Pillars to Stonewalls".

I appreciate that when watching sport it is natural to notice all the offences of the opposition and miss all the same ones of your own team, but lets not kid ourselves.

 

[Dam0]

Much better examples of this phenomenon in my video. But I really don't want to revisit that video. It produces insanity. The Kiwi mind tears apart from the opposing forces of what they're seeing and what they want to see.

Well, the original post referred to the Pumas v AB's game so I naturally went looking for examples from that game. Admittedly I only did the first half, but if the ones that I found don't illustrate the problem then perhaps that is indicative that the problem is overstated (?)

(And I also am on my best behaviour)

 

[cyclopath]

I know that none of you are naive enough to think this is an All Black tactic, and not a rugby tactic. Right?

I wonder how many Wallaby offences you can count in this short piece of play. If we go by the GaGR standard I don't know if I have enough fingers and toes .

If we just stick to the alleged "taking the space" or "building a wall" offences I see:

0:06 Barnes comes in from the side and clears out someone not bound to a ruck
0:12 Dennis wanders in around the side and takes up an offside position not connected to anything
0:24 Hooper wanders in even more blatantly and lingers offside, again unconnected to the ruck


Now I'm not arguing that all of these should be penalised. I am saying that the title of the thread should not be "All Blacks - From Pillars to Stonewalls" rather than "Rugby Players - From Pillars to Stonewalls".

I appreciate that when watching sport it is natural to notice all the offences of the opposition and miss all the same ones of your own team, but lets not kid ourselves.

I think Blue made it clear enough in his post, which was pretty fair, I think.
People are showing multiple examples, this is all good.
Relax.

 

[Gagger]

Mnyeh, but you gotta hand it to the guy who walks from the complete wrong end of the field and just hangs around at the edge of the ruck, that got me giggling.

Great thread and effort with the vids. FAncy turning it into a blogpost someone?

 

[Inside Shoulder]

I know that none of you are naive enough to think this is an All Black tactic, and not a rugby tactic. Right?

I wonder how many Wallaby offences you can count in this short piece of play. If we go by the GaGR standard I don't know if I have enough fingers and toes .

If we just stick to the alleged "taking the space" or "building a wall" offences I see:

0:06 Barnes comes in from the side and clears out someone not bound to a ruck
0:12 Dennis wanders in around the side and takes up an offside position not connected to anything
0:24 Hooper wanders in even more blatantly and lingers offside, again unconnected to the ruck


Now I'm not arguing that all of these should be penalised. I am saying that the title of the thread should not be "All Blacks - From Pillars to Stonewalls" rather than "Rugby Players - From Pillars to Stonewalls".

I appreciate that when watching sport it is natural to notice all the offences of the opposition and miss all the same ones of your own team, but lets not kid ourselves.

Well Higgers it totally offside at the first maul - is he not?

 

[Dam0]

I think Blue made it clear enough in his post, which was pretty fair, I think.
People are showing multiple examples, this is all good.
Relax.

I am pretty relaxed I think.

I'm not entirely sure I can quite go along with you that Blue made that point in his original post, but I am sure that was merely an oversight on his part.

Apologies if my post was interpreted as being angry or unnecessarily argumentative; that was not the spirit I intended.

 

[Dam0]

Well Higgers it totally offside at the first maul - is he not?

I am somewhat reluctant to comment as I don't want to distract too much from the very interesting thread we are creating but yes. IMO, Higgers commits 3 offences there;

# He comes in dramatically from the side (cf the Carter and McCaw ones from earlier);
# He plays at the face/head of a player;
# He pulls the maul down (even though it is a Wallaby maul, only the ball carrier may collapse a maul - a point that is sometimes overlooked)

 

[Blue]

Cyclo, Conrad's just a gangly looking guy that looks like his 16yo. Surely he doesnt get up to these old head moves .

I must say that the taking of space was effectively utilised by Horwill, Samo, Beau Robinson and S. Finger for the Reds in 2011. Simmons was the exponent of the ruck work 5-6 metres past the ball. I remember a test match last year when he pushed that envelope and got pinged for it. Simmons much to his surprise had that shocked look on his face as of to say - "I've gotten away with that all year Sir"

Actually now I remember Simmons being warned in he Sharks playoff game and then being warned at least once or twice again and not carded. I seem to remember a couple of times it was done in or near the red zone where it could have the biggest effect on the game i.e. quick ball in red zone.

And yes, he looked very sheepish. "Moi?"

 

[Scarfman]

To conclude, though, there's no evidence here of the tackle/ruck distinction that I thought Dam0 wanted to make.

If the hypothetical example of pillars/stonewall is at a ruck, then you simply cannot stand in an offside position.