Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

'So many of you have asked' - Nigel Owens' offers take on hotly debated KO carry

Nigel Owens / PA

Over the weekend a carry by Cardiff Blues frontrow Dmitri Arhip against local rivals Scarlets in the PRO14 ignited a debate over what constitutes a legal ball-carry in rugby.

ADVERTISEMENT

Arhip went unpunished for the collision that saw Scarlets back row Sione Kalamafoni knocked unconscious, with some claiming that the prop had used his forearm as weapon. Arhip, who is known within Welsh regional rugby for his huge upper body strength, ‘bounces’ 6’4, 117kg Kalamafoni, leaving the Tongan needing a HIA.

Crucially, the Moldovan prop’s arm was tucked into his chest going into contact, a measure some referees are using to determine whether or not the carry constitutes ‘leading with the arm’. However the collision with Kalamafoni was with his non-ball-carrying arm, which for some suggested aggravated an allegation of foul play.

Welsh rugby journo Simon Thomas believed it should have been punished with a red card but conceded that the majority found the carry to be fair. “I haven’t done a poll, but looking at my timeline, the verdict on the Arhip incident appears to be about 60-40 no red. And past and present players are pretty overwhelmingly of a view that there was no foul play. So, I accept I am in the minority on this one.”

Tom Shanklin summed up how many players viewed the hit: “Play on. Elbow was tucked when contact made, he braces himself and uses arm to push 8 away. Head to elbow rather than elbow to head.”

Former England fullback Ben Foden pointed out that Kalamafoni’s tackle technique was a mitigating factor.”For what it’s worth if the tackler didn’t come in and try and smash the ball carrier he wouldn’t have been knocked out – he chose the wrong tackle technique IMO. I’m not sure what people want the ball carrier to do while carrying the ball.”


Referee Nigel Owens then entered the chat, after numerous fans queried him about the collision. His answer to the tweet from RugbyPass columnist Andy Goode was a little ambiguous, pointing out that the tackler’s technique was ‘irrelevant’.

“So many of you have asked.

ADVERTISEMENT

“All I’ll say is that you cannot take the tackler technique as part of the decision process. You have to judge has there been foul play by ball carrier, ie has he lead with the forearm? Whether you think the tackle is bad technique or not is irrelevant.”

Penalising ball carriers for ‘leading with the arm’ has always been a grey area in rugby. Canada’s Jebb Sinclair was infamously red-carded by referee Mike Fraser for running through Scotland’s Ruaridh Jackson in 2014. It cost Canada the shot at taking the lead going into the final minutes of the match and was a decision panned by many fans at the time.

Goode also posted a similar incident from 2016, albeit where the ball carrier’s arm wasn’t tucked when the contact occured. “The Dimitri Arhip carry is dividing opinion, here’s Alafoti Faosiliva being sent off in 2016 for a similar action in the carry. Thoughts on this?”

The margins are very fine on this one and it may surprise some that World Rugby’s Laws are not clear on the matter. Law 9, 23. states: “A ball-carrier is permitted to hand off an opponent provided excessive force is not used,” which is hardly explicit.

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 1 hour ago
Does South Africa have a future in European competition?

I rated Lowe well enough to be an AB. Remember we were picking the likes of George Bridge above such players so theres no disputing a lot of bad decisions have been made by those last two coaches. Does a team like the ABs need a finicky winger who you have to adapt and change a lot of your style with to get benefit from? No, not really. But he still would have been a basic improvement on players like even Savea at the tail of his career, Bridge, and could even have converted into the answer of replacing Beauden at the back. Instead we persisted with NMS, Naholo, Havili, Reece, all players we would have cared even less about losing and all because Rieko had Lowe's number 11 jersey nailed down.


He was of course only 23 when he decided to leave, it was back in the beggining of the period they had started retaining players (from 2018 onwards I think, they came out saying theyre going to be more aggressive at some point). So he might, all of them, only just missed out.


The main point that Ed made is that situations like Lowe's, Aki's, JGP's, aren't going to happen in future. That's a bit of a "NZ" only problem, because those players need to reach such a high standard to be chosen by the All Blacks, were as a country like Ireland wants them a lot earlier like that. This is basically the 'ready in 3 years' concept Ireland relied on, versus the '5 years and they've left' concept' were that player is now ready to be chosen by the All Blacks (given a contract to play Super, ala SBW, and hopefully Manu).


The 'mercenary' thing that will take longer to expire, and which I was referring to, is the grandparents rule. The new kids coming through now aren't going to have as many gp born overseas, so the amount of players that can leave with a prospect of International rugby offer are going to drop dramatically at some point. All these kiwi fellas playing for a PI, is going to stop sadly.


The new era problem that will replace those old concerns is now French and Japanese clubs (doing the same as NRL teams have done for decades by) picking kids out of school. The problem here is not so much a national identity one, than it is a farm system where 9 in 10 players are left with nothing. A stunted education and no support in a foreign country (well they'll get kicked out of those countries were they don't in Australia).


It's the same sort of situation were NZ would be the big guy, but there weren't many downsides with it. The only one I can think was brought up but a poster on this site, I can't recall who it was, but he seemed to know a lot of kids coming from the Islands weren't really given the capability to fly back home during school xms holidays etc. That is probably something that should be fixed by the union. Otherwise getting someone like Fakatava over here for his last year of school definitely results in NZ being able to pick the cherries off the top but it also allows that player to develop and be able to represent Tonga and under age and possibly even later in his career. Where as a kid being taken from NZ is arguably going to be worse off in every respect other than perhaps money. Not going to develop as a person, not going to develop as a player as much, so I have a lotof sympathy for NZs case that I don't include them in that group but I certainly see where you're coming from and it encourages other countries to think they can do the same while not realising they're making a much worse experience/situation.

144 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Does South Africa have a future in European competition? Does South Africa have a future in European competition?
Search