Stripping Rule

[ByRd]

Watching games this year, i (and im sure many others still dont understand) the stripping rule and how it is to be interpreted. Watching the Toyota cup over the weekend, it was my belief that if a defender put his hands on the attacker but feel off the tackle then you can not strip the ball but so far this season i have seen it ruled both ways so i just wanna know what the official rule is???

 

[Different kind of Rabbit]

The big problem with the stripping rule is that no-one actually knows what it is and the interpretations on the field by the officials show this. Unless the rule is changed so that the interpretation is black and white, you will have officials f#cking it up every week. Either make it totally illegal to strip the ball or totally legal!

Same goes for the held rule. I saw one occasion on the weekend where a player was picked up from the field of play (about 5 metres out) and carried back in goal and a dropout was awarded. I have seen countless other occasions where this is ruled a penalty as forward momentum is stopped and the ref calls held.

 

[The Engineers Room]

What they need to do is make it the first player in can strip the ball even if there is another defender as long as the player with the ball is either still moving forwards or attempts to pass the ball.

 

[Goldthorpe]

Get rid of the rule completely. Gets rid of the grey areas. If you can't hold onto the ball you shouldn't be playing.

 

[abpanther]

Agreed, make it like the NFL, stripping is legal, responsibility is on the ball carrier to hold onto the pill.

 

[*Paul*]

Even though it didn't happen before, people seem to think that without the rules, that's all the defenders will do.

 

[Sans Souci Sainter]

Get rid of the rule completely. Gets rid of the grey areas. If you can't hold onto the ball you shouldn't be playing.

I suppose that would be all she wrote for Big Rylesy then!

 

[Frailty]

The rule is that a strip can only occur in a one on one tackle.

In regards to players falling of tackles:

• If a player attempts a one on one tackle, but falls off (before any other defender comes into the tackle) the next defender can strip the ball (as long as his tackle is one on one)
• If there are two defenders in a tackle and one falls off, the ball CAN NOT be stripped by the remaining player as there were previously more than one defender in the same tackle.

Hope this clears things up.

 

[jimmythehand]

the reason the rule was introduced is because teams were getting 3 players in to a tackle and another one to try and strip the ball. How can you expect someone to hold onto it in a situation like that?

Are you sure that's right frailty? I thought you couldn't strip the ball if someone had just fallen off a one-on-one tackle either. Got a source?

 

[The Engineers Room]

My understanding is only the player that makes first contact can do it and before anyone else touches the player.

Removing the rules will further reduce offloads and creative play. Teams will gang tackle more often.

My interpretation would mean that players trying to advance the ball can be stopped by the defenders.

I would like to add to it that when the ball is stripped no matter where the ball goes it should be play on for both sides and a zero tackle to whichever team regathers it.

 

[Ike E Bear]

Knowing that it is illegal to strip the ball gives players more freedom to look for offloads ... which is where some of the more exciting broken-play football (from a spectator point of view) gets going.

Even still, it is a calculated risk to dangle out the ball because the players arm can be heavily knocked or an illegal strip can go unnoticed. Ball security is still important (but could be more so).

IMO, no stripping rule = more boring football.

I have no problem with the rule except in terms of the inconsistency of its ruling.

A "strip" should have to be a strip. You see loose carries all the time and too often the attacker is rewarded for it ... the defender is trying to wrap up the ball, touches it and then it fires out because the attacking player is barely holding it. That's not a strip. The defender needs to work the ball and pull it away - forward or sideways - from the attacker (with a reefing, jerking, raking or twisting motion) to be a strip. Touching or knocking the ball in the course of a tackle is not stripping.

A strip can be easily recognised at normal speed and should only require one viewing on replay (if required) to adjudicate on ... another angle might be optimal, but if you can't see a strip at normal speed with two different angles then one probably didn't happen.

If they applied a more rigorous definition of a "strip" and limited replays to one viewing of up to two angles at normal speed, I think we'd be right. It'd be more consistent and the replays wouldn't stop play for very long ... the standard should be 15-20 seconds, if a video ref can't make a ruling in that time, then it should be noted as a failure to perform their job adequately. Simple.

I wouldn't mind if they erred on the side of not awarding penalties, as long as disruptions are minimised and loose carries aren't rewarded.

 

[green eyed mike]

I think there needs to be a stripping rule and I think they have the rule about right. The real problem is the consistency of its application and having the video ref involved.

9/10 times if it looks like a strip it is a strip, if it doesn't it isn't. Leave it up to the refs, let them get a few wrong and get on with the bloody game.

 

[perverse]

the rule should be as simple and plain as day. if there are 2+ defenders in the tackle at the time of the strip - it's a penalty. whenever it is a one on one situation and the ball is stripped it should be play on. if there are 2+ defenders involved in the tackle and all but 1 drop off and the 1 left over strips it - fair game as far as im concerned.

case closed.