Law discussion - Rolling to clean

The player must have the ball before you are allowed to tackle/grab him.

It has been law from the start and is so now.

Law 10.4 Foul Play

(fl) Playing an opponent without the ball. Except in a scrum, ruck or maul, a player who is not in possession of the ball must not hold, push or obstruct an opponent not carrying the ball.

Sanction: Penalty kick

But what would rugby be without exceptions, and the most obvious exception in this case is the 'clean-out'.

Law 15.7 FORBIDDEN PRACTICES

(d) Players on their feet must not charge or obstruct an opponent who is not near the ball.

Sanction: Penalty kick

Presumably to do so near the ball is all right, and 'near' in the laws is defined as 'Within one metre'.

So that would mean that within a metre of a tackle, you are allowed to play an opponent who does not have the ball.

Even in terms of this elasticised law, playing the man with out the ball is often illegal and ignored. There even are cases when an opponent away from the tackle/ruck/breakdown is played by an opponent behind him, seemingly with impunity.

But let's stick to the clean-out, playing a man without the ball. It may not always be legal right at the place of the tackle

Blue player arrives at a tackle, and reaches down for the ball. Red opponent drives in on Blue reacher.

That can be legal. It could also be grossly illegal. It could be debatable. It's the last one we want to look at – the debatable aspect of the action.

It is legal for Red to drive into Blue. If Blue has the ball up off the ground, Red is playing an opponent who has the ball. If the ball is still on the ground, Blue's contact forms a ruck, which we shall deal with later.

The grossly illegal contact is the 'neck roll', which became so prominent during the World Cup and was severely penalised as well it should.

Because I am cleaning out, does not give me the right to act in any way Y choose. Because you are offside does not give me the right to kick you or hit you with a meat axe.

Law 10 is quite clear:

Law 10.4 (e) Dangerous tackling

A player must not tackle (or try to tackle) an opponent above the line of the shoulders even if the tackle starts below the line of the shoulders. A tackle around the opponent's neck or head is dangerous play.

Sanction: Penalty kick

It is illegal because it is dangerous and wrong and stays so even in a 'clean-out', as also is the case with a form of tip tackle to clear the decks, which requires far stiffer action than seems to be happening now.

But what about the other one – where it is below the neck and the player is rolled away or brought down. Does the fact that it is less dangerous make it legal? In other words is 'not as bad' good?

First when Red makes contact with Blue and the ball is on the ground, a ruck is formed.

Law 16. Law 16 DEFINITIONS

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.

Law 10.4 (k) DANGEROUS PLAY AT SCRUM, RUCK OR MAUL

Players must not intentionally collapse a scrum, ruck or maul.

Sanction: Penalty kick.

And it stands alone:

Law 16.3 RUCKING

(a) Players in a ruck must endeavour to stay on their feet.

Sanction: Penalty kick

(b) A player must not intentionally fall or kneel in a ruck. This is dangerous play.

Sanction: Penalty kick

(c) A player must not intentionally collapse a ruck. This is dangerous play.

Sanction: Penalty kick

The body roll is certainly an infraction of (c) and quite often of (a) and (b) as well.

It is illegal in itself and could have dangerous consequences for Blue. To get to the ball, Blue often has to place his feet in confined spaces which can mean injury, especially to knees, when he is rolled away with his feet pinned by players on the ground.

At present this form of clean-out is regarded as all right – not as bad as the neck roll and good for not being as bad. But it is not all right in terms of the law as it now stands. And anything that can contribute to top rugby's epidemic of joint injuries should be avoided.

If the present law trial that abandons side-entry becomes widespread and indeed law, this form of clean-out could become more prevalent and more dangerous.