In the case of the tackle, the principle includes the following sentence – "The actions of the players involved in the tackle must ensure a fair contest and allow the ball to be available for play immediately".
So here are a few of the actions which to my mind are not ensuring a fair contest.
Tacklers must immediately release the ball carrier after both players go to ground.
They must immediately move away from the tackled player and from the ball or get up.
You have probably noticed that after a tackle, the tackler these days usually rolls or attempts to roll away pretty quickly, to avoid penalty.
They should roll "east – west" or sideways and not back on the opposition side of the tackle.
But what I often notice is opposing players diving on top of them as soon as the tackle is made and deliberately preventing a tackler from moving away.
The tackler is trapped and thus unable to comply with his obligation to roll away or get back to his feet.
A penalty against the tackler is almost inevitable at the top level of rugby.
Sometimes, this penalty could be the difference between winning and losing a game.
There is nothing in the law book that covers this action of opposing players, so in that respect it is not illegal.
Is it "fair play?" You be the judge.
But there is another possible ruling, one often used by referees of schoolboy or even adult club rugby in this situation.
And that is "if there is doubt about which player did not conform to law, the referee orders a scrum."
A far fairer outcome, in my opinion.
If the tackle has been completed and a ruck has been formed because the ball is now on the ground and one or more opponents are on the feet over the ball, there are a few things I see that should be enforced more rigorously.
Paragraph 7 says players joining a ruck must bind onto a team mate or an opponent.
The bind must precede or be simultaneous with contact with any other part of the body.
Watch closely in the test match and see how many times a player joining a ruck binds onto another player in this manner.
More often than not, the player joining the ruck leads with the shoulder in an attempt to move an opponent away from the ball.
Any "binding" is often incidental, if at all.
Paragraph 12 states that players at a ruck must endeavour to stay on their feet.
How is diving into the ruck, shoulder first, endeavouring to do that?
Paragraph 16b says players must not intentionally collapse a ruck or jump on top of it.
It is pretty difficult to detect an action that causes a ruck to collapse when multiple players end up off their feet and on the ground at what is now called a ruck, but you do see players jumping or diving on top as described above.
A lack of a binding action is the usual giveaway in this situation and you do see these players being penalised from time-to-time.
Another area where I see players acting in contravention of the laws and not being penalised is when they dive on the ball as it is emerging after a tackle or ruck.
In this situation "emerging" means within a metre of the tackle or ruck.
If a player gains possession of the ball at a tackle he cannot then go to ground with the ball, unless he himself is tackled.
Such players go to ground with the ball so that their players can then stand over them until the cavalry arrive and are thus preventing a fair contest for the ball. All Blacks are very good at this action.
Players also cannot dive on the ball as it is emerging from a ruck.
Again, "emerging" means within a metre of the edges of the ruck.
It is understandable players would want to go to ground if they see the ball lying there like a treasure waiting to be claimed.
All they have to do to comply with the law is stay on their feet, pick up the ball, and play continues.
Trouble is, there might be a lot of opponents nearby, so in order to gain possession they dive on the ball.
Again, by this action they are decreasing the chances of opponents on their feet gaining possession while they wait for players of their team to arrive and seal off the ball. A fair contest?
World Rugby (the old IRB) need to have a think about these trends in the game.
If the illegal actions I have been describing are being allowed in the interest of allowing the dominant team to play with the ball because they have got possession, then either the rules need to be changed to allow actions such as charging into a ruck or diving on the emerging ball ruck, or the referees need to be more vigilant in ruling fairly with these laws.
And I haven't even mentioned the TMO. Good viewing of the test.
