Lifting jumpers while ball still in play.

[Fajardo]

I know it's allowed to lift jumpers off of restarts and kick-offs. But is it allowed to lift while ball is in play both in offense and defense?

It would be pretty hard to pull off in defense so let's talk about an attacking team. Let's say the ball's at the opposition 22 in a ruck with the FH getting ready to receive and kick an up and under while having a pod of 3 forwards behind him to be on side for the kick. FH kicks, the pod runs up (preferably with a lock) and goes under the high ball and the jumper goes for it while being lifted. Is that allowed?

 

[HarryPeters]

Not sure on the ruling of this, but I'm thinking it could be obstruction? Because all the opposition would have to do is attempt the catch the ball and calim that one of the holders was obstructing them.

Then again, I have no idea. Good question.

 

[Fajardo]

Don't think it'd be obstruction if the lifters are on the sides of the jumper just like during kick-offs and restarts. Even then I don't think you'd need 2 jumpers since you see teams like the Boks only having one lifter per jumper during kick-offs lol.

 

[Conal]

need to get smart cooky to answer this he is the man on the rules

 

[lucky number 7]

how about lifting from goaline to catch a ball barely going over the bar from penalty or from conversion ...??

 

[dullonien]

To answer lucky number 7's question. This used to be allowed, but was stopped a couple of years ago I think.

As for the original, I'm not sure if there's anything against it. However it's probably a little impractical in a game as it'd be hard for the lifters and jumpers to get into position to catch the ball (with the jumper supported by lifters) whilst staying onside from the kick. The only time I can see it being useful is from a cross kick etc. close to the opposition line. Good question though...

 

[Fajardo]

I don't think it'd be too hard since the jumpers and lifters have a few seconds to get in position as long as it's a short distance and you get some real height. It would be really useful when you're at the opposition goal line and you're having difficulty breaking their line. Get a really high up and under, jumpers + lifters get the ball and in case you don't want the opposition holding the jumper up in the in-goal line while he attempts to ground it, get a 4th person to receive the ball from the top.

Although it might seem like a cheap tactic, I reckon it would be pretty difficult to execute it since you'd have to rely on a perfect kick and the jumper/lifters have to be there right on time to catch the ball.

 

[Conal]

if legal could be fantastic for cross feild kicks

 

[smartcooky]

I can't see anything wrong with it, although IMO it would be very difficult for the pod to set themselves up without obstructing defending players.

Also, assuming they succeeded in getting everything set up and catching the ball, they would have to be careful not to commit the same type of obstruction that sometimes happens when forming a maul after a line-out, or when receiving a kick-off/restart, where the catcher comes down with the lifters between him and potential tacklers.

I have asked your question on the rugbyrefs forum, and I'll post some of the replies here in the next couple of days.

 

[Fajardo]

if legal could be fantastic for cross feild kicks

I think it would be fairly difficult with cross-kicks since the ball would have to travel quite low which won't give the pod enough time to set up for the catch. Unless you're only aiming to gain a few metres on the other side of the pitch or simply just to change the position of the ball.

I can't see anything wrong with it, although IMO it would be very difficult for the pod to set themselves up without obstructing defending players.

Also, assuming they succeeded in getting everything set up and catching the ball, they would have to be careful not to commit the same type of obstruction that sometimes happens when forming a maul after a line-out, or when receiving a kick-off/restart, where the catcher comes down with the lifters between him and potential tacklers.

I have asked your question on the rugbyrefs forum, and I'll post some of the replies here in the next couple of days.

Yeh, I thought about that. That's why I thought that if you're doing something like this, have a 4th player ready to catch the ball before the jumper's feet touches the ground. I think that would be legal since the jumper is still considered to be in the air so there would be no reason for obstruction?

 

[smartcooky]

The only other thing I can add at this stage, is that this would not be permitted at any junior levels in which line-out lifting and restart/kickoff lifting is not allowed.

In NZ this is all JAB grades from U13 & U13W down. Not sure about other countries.

I'm sure some of our junior coaches will be able to advise.

 

[TRF C A Iversen]

I think it would be fairly difficult with cross-kicks since the ball would have to travel quite low which won't give the pod enough time to set up for the catch. Unless you're only aiming to gain a few metres on the other side of the pitch or simply just to change the position of the ball.


Yeh, I thought about that. That's why I thought that if you're doing something like this, have a 4th player ready to catch the ball before the jumper's feet touches the ground. I think that would be legal since the jumper is still considered to be in the air so there would be no reason for obstruction?

The big danger for the attacking player in this move is committing too many players to this one point on the field with a reasonable chance of not receiving the ball. If done well, fair enough, if the ball is spilt towards the defence, counter-attack options would be very good in relation to the gaps where four players (counting the halfback style player you'd have as 2nd receiver) have gone up to contest the ball.

 

[Fajardo]

That's true but like I said, this tactic would really only be useful when the attacking team is at the opposition goal line and just can't get through. Most of the time in those cases, most if not all the forwards in both teams are bunched up in the breakdown area(s) with the attacking team's forwards usually doing pick-and-go's to get over with one guy picking it up supported by 2-3 forwards. So instead of doing that, have the rest of the forwards break off to form the jumping/receiving pod. A counter-attack would be dangerous but I don't think the defending team would opt to do that since it's different from a turnover at the breakdown. I think most of them would be thinking of the safest options.

 

[smartcooky]

None of the referee have any problem with the idea from a legal perspective, but....

It really does take a great deal of practise and arrangement.

a few season ago I tried with a couple of senior teams I coached (L8) to get a receiving pod to work this way (ie receiving a KO).

Whilst accepting that at L8 they aren't the greatest of abilities, nevertheless they found it almost impossible to set up, lift and catch with timing. Its an area of the elite game that I do truly admire - they make it look so easy.

Only illegal for penalties and conversions, so fine in open play.

But I can't see in practice how it would be used in a dynamic match situations on all but very rare occasions.

Dedicating a pod of 3 players to catch the ball, when one would normally do it is opening up potential defensive gaps elsewhere.

Which is similar to CAIversons' s concerns about opening yourself up for a counterattack.

I know you dismiss those concerns, and perhaps where you come from, the defending team will be looking for safe options but that can be a mindset thing.

I am sure that here, the defending team will be looking first to exploit the defensive gaps created by that tactic should it go wrong, and the safety options would come second.

 

[Fajardo]

I think we've got different things in mind when thinking about a play like this. Normally a counter-attack would be the first option in a turn-over but it's not like a turn-over from a ruck. The ball is in the air and the defenders looking to take the ball would naturally be jumping for it so as soon as they hit the ground and if they even manage to take it cleanly, there will be no time to distribute it. Keep in mind that this tactic would generally be useless anywhere else on the pitch except for when the attacking team is only a few inches away from the opposition goal line.

No doubt it would be pretty difficult to perform but I still think it could be do-able with a really good kicker and of course, practice with the forwards. I'll try it out next month or whenever I can and will post updates.

 

[ranger]

I think we've got different things in mind when thinking about a play like this. Normally a counter-attack would be the first option in a turn-over but it's not like a turn-over from a ruck. The ball is in the air and the defenders looking to take the ball would naturally be jumping for it so as soon as they hit the ground and if they even manage to take it cleanly, there will be no time to distribute it. Keep in mind that this tactic would generally be useless anywhere else on the pitch except for when the attacking team is only a few inches away from the opposition goal line.

No doubt it would be pretty difficult to perform but I still think it could be do-able with a really good kicker and of course, practice with the forwards. I'll try it out next month or whenever I can and will post updates.

But its not like a turn over from a ruck as you rightly put it, its a turnover from a kick. Which is even more deadly, especially if a back claims it. Imagine someone like Christian Cullen or Israel Dagg fielding a kick and then not only does he see a staggered line, but 4 blokes are huddled together out of the way. Thats game over that is

 

[Fajardo]

Imagine the situation I'm talking about first. Like I said, the only effective use of this tactic is when you're a few inches away from the try line. It's not like a clearance kick or a punt where the receiver usually has a lot of space to work with, it's an up and under... How many successful counter-attacks have you seen from an up and under that only goes as far as 5 meters? How many players do you see trying to catch an up and under without jumping for it? As good as Christian Cullen was, I don't think he'd be able to side-step anyone while he's in the air trying to grab the ball.

 

[Shaggy]

Imagine the situation I'm talking about first. Like I said, the only effective use of this tactic is when you're a few inches away from the try line. It's not like a clearance kick or a punt where the receiver usually has a lot of space to work with, it's an up and under... How many successful counter-attacks have you seen from an up and under that only goes as far as 5 meters? How many players do you see trying to catch an up and under without jumping for it? As good as Christian Cullen was, I don't think he'd be able to side-step anyone while he's in the air trying to grab the ball.

I guess the point is that if the defending player (most likely the winger or full back) successfully takes the ball in the air, there will be gaps created as a result of the three players involved in the lift, so the ball can be off loaded to someone else like Cullen or Dagg, or if they could exploit the holes themselves once they landed (you can't tackle a player in the air)

... aside from this, the whole thing sounds like it would be difficult to execute to me ... the lifted player and the lifting players would have to start from behind the kicker, and would most likely need to be almost stationary to execute the lift successfully

 

[Fajardo]

I guess the point is that if the defending player (most likely the winger or full back) successfully takes the ball in the air, there will be gaps created as a result of the three players involved in the lift, so the ball can be off loaded to someone else like Cullen or Dagg, or if they could exploit the holes themselves once they landed (you can't tackle a player in the air)

... aside from this, the whole thing sounds like it would be difficult to execute to me ... the lifted player and the lifting players would have to start from behind the kicker, and would most likely need to be almost stationary to execute the lift successfully

Yep but the thing is, the high kick only goes 5 or so meters. If the pod is unsuccessful in the lift at least they'll be where the ball is supposed to land, if not the pod, the 4th receiver I was talking about earlier in the thread.

It would be pretty difficult to execute and there's a lot of angles to take when performing the move. But if the ball drifts too far away from where it's supposed to go and and the pod has difficulty getting there then there's a high possibility of being able to counter-attack like you said.

 

[Tomsey]

To answer lucky number 7's question. This used to be allowed, but was stopped a couple of years ago I think.

Correct. John Eales jumped up and caught a long range penalty goal attempt before it could go over the posts whilst playing for the Reds I think. They changed the rules after that so you couldn't do it. He wasn't being lifted though, just jumped by himself.