Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Rugby 101 - Know your rucks from your mauls!

Options
1…1213151718…23

Comments

  • Options
    #422
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 40,981 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    Synode wrote: »
    So what if a player falls on the ground after catching a high ball. His team mates create pillars to protect him - has a ruck been formed as there is at least one person over the ball?

    And that's the very question being discussed :)


  • Options
    #423
    pickarooney
    Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 35,090 Mod ✭✭✭✭pickarooney


    No tackle = no ruck as far as I'm aware. His team-mates can form a circle around him as there's no offside line.


  • Options
    #424
    nsa0bupkd3948x
    Closed Accounts Posts: 783 ✭✭✭nsa0bupkd3948x


    If the ball is kicked to touch, can the player standing in touch knock the ball back into play and then fall in touch?

    I could have sworn the rules were changed that the player must land in play, but can start from in touch? Basically jump into the playing surface.


  • Options
    #425
    The Lost Sheep
    Registered Users Posts: 14,967 ✭✭✭✭The Lost Sheep


    Alejandra Sweet Taster wrote: »
    If the ball is kicked to touch, can the player standing in touch knock the ball back into play and then fall in touch?

    I could have sworn the rules were changed that the player must land in play, but can start from in touch? Basically jump into the playing surface.
    The laws were changed..

    The ball is not in touch or touch-in-goal if:
    The ball reaches the plane of touch but is caught, knocked or kicked by a player in the playing area.
    A player jumps from in or out of the playing area, catches the ball then lands in the playing area and it doesnt matter if the ball reached the plane of touch.

    A player can jump from the playing area and knock/catch/release the ball back into the playing area and then land in touch or touch-in-goal and its play on even if ball was over the plane of touch


  • Options
    #426
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 14,983 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    The Lost Sheep wrote: »
    The laws were changed..

    The ball is not in touch or touch-in-goal if:
    The ball reaches the plane of touch but is caught, knocked or kicked by a player in the playing area.
    A player jumps from in or out of the playing area, catches the ball then lands in the playing area and it doesnt matter if the ball reached the plane of touch.

    A player can jump from the playing area and knock/catch/release the ball back into the playing area and then land in touch or touch-in-goal and its play on even if ball was over the plane of touch

    I thought the change meant that this was no longer the case , that once the ball crosses the plane of touch it is out - the exception being as you describe above where the player either catches the ball from the field of play or jumps,catches and lands back in the field of play?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #427
    shoutman
    Registered Users Posts: 6,924 ✭✭✭shoutman


    The ball is not in touch or touch-in-goal if:
    The ball reaches the plane of touch but is caught, knocked or kicked by a player who is in the playing area.

    A player jumps, from within or outside the playing area, and catches the ball, and then lands in the playing area, regardless of whether the ball reached the plane of touch.

    A player jumps from the playing area and knocks (or catches and releases) the ball back into the playing area, before landing in touch or touch-in-goal, regardless of whether the ball reached the plane of touch.

    A player, who is in touch, kicks or knocks the ball, but does not hold it, provided it has not reached the plane of touch.


  • Options
    #428
    Synode
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,967 ✭✭✭Synode


    Fardy almost scored a try in the Leinster game but a Dragons player managed to kick the ball from Fardy's hands back over his own dead ball line. What are the rules around kicking a ball from a player's hands? Not sure if the ball was still on the ground at the moment he made contact with the ball (if that makes a difference) as only seen it live


  • Options
    #429
    Losty Dublin
    Registered Users Posts: 12,962 ✭✭✭✭Losty Dublin


    Synode wrote: »
    Fardy almost scored a try in the Leinster game but a Dragons player managed to kick the ball from Fardy's hands back over his own dead ball line. What are the rules around kicking a ball from a player's hands? Not sure if the ball was still on the ground at the moment he made contact with the ball (if that makes a difference) as only seen it live


    image_16353_1_195315_1_38903_1_48_1_559080.jpg

    ;)

    Kicking a ball out of the hands is illegal and has been covered today in the Law Thread :)


  • Options
    #430
    The Lost Sheep
    Registered Users Posts: 14,967 ✭✭✭✭The Lost Sheep


    Quin_Dub wrote: »
    I thought the change meant that this was no longer the case, that once the ball crosses the plane of touch it is out - the exception being as you describe above where the player either catches the ball from the field of play or jumps,catches and lands back in the field of play?
    No its allowed. This was done to increase ball in play time and make law easier to manage.
    Synode wrote: »
    Fardy almost scored a try in the Leinster game but a Dragons player managed to kick the ball from Fardy's hands back over his own dead ball line. What are the rules around kicking a ball from a player's hands? Not sure if the ball was still on the ground at the moment he made contact with the ball (if that makes a difference) as only seen it live
    Law says you cant kick ball from players hands.


  • Options
    #431
    Synode
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,967 ✭✭✭Synode


    Losty Dublin wrote: »
    image_16353_1_195315_1_38903_1_48_1_559080.jpg

    ;)

    Kicking a ball out of the hands is illegal and has been covered today in the Law Thread :)

    There's a laws thread! Apologies, I thought this was it


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #432
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users Posts: 38,247 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    Losty Dublin wrote: »
    ;)

    Kicking a ball out of the hands is illegal

    Except if the hands are you own (and youre not a front row ) :)


  • Options
    #433
    Losty Dublin
    Registered Users Posts: 12,962 ✭✭✭✭Losty Dublin


    Guy:Incognito wrote: »
    Except if the hands are you own (and youre not a front row ) :)

    Eric Miller got a Red for kicking the ball out of Axel's hands once in an Inter Pro. Unfortunately Foley was using his hands to scratch it at the time :)


  • Options
    #434
    The Rape of Lucretia
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,440 ✭✭✭The Rape of Lucretia


    Standard situation :
    Player with the ball is tackled, goes to ground, ruck forms quickly. Opposition has no chance of poaching the ball. Tackled player, on the ground, is still holding the ball off the ground however, until the scrumhalf takes it from his hands, and plays on.

    Q:
    Should that not be a penalty for not placing the ball on the ground when tackled ?


  • Options
    #435
    Losty Dublin
    Registered Users Posts: 12,962 ✭✭✭✭Losty Dublin


    The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »
    Standard situation :
    Player with the ball is tackled, goes to ground, ruck forms quickly. Opposition has no chance of poaching the ball. Tackled player, on the ground, is still holding the ball off the ground however, until the scrumhalf takes it from his hands, and plays on.

    Q:
    Should that not be a penalty for not placing the ball on the ground when tackled ?

    Ask yourself this question; is the man on the ground denying the opposing team of possession of the ball?

    If the answer is yes then should we call a penalty? And not why not?

    If the answer is no, can you think of a reason why we should or should not award a penalty against the player placing?


  • Options
    #436
    The Rape of Lucretia
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,440 ✭✭✭The Rape of Lucretia


    Losty Dublin wrote: »
    Ask yourself this question; is the man on the ground denying the opposing team of possession of the ball?

    If the answer is yes then should we call a penalty? And not why not?

    If the answer is no, can you think of a reason why we should or should not award a penalty against the player placing?

    Potentially, yes. He is also minimising the chance of a fumble, and, lifting the ball to the scrummie who doesnt have to fetch as low, and can play a quicker pass.

    Yes, I thought so. Thats the point of my question. If he has it in his hands to hadn to the sh, then he clearly hasnt placed and released, when tackled. But maybe I have the rule wrong.

    I dont really understand your 3rd question.


  • Options
    #437
    Losty Dublin
    Registered Users Posts: 12,962 ✭✭✭✭Losty Dublin


    The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »
    Potentially, yes. He is also minimising the chance of a fumble, and, lifting the ball to the scrummie who doesnt have to fetch as low, and can play a quicker pass.

    Yes, I thought so. Thats the point of my question. If he has it in his hands to hadn to the sh, then he clearly hasnt placed and released, when tackled. But maybe I have the rule wrong.

    I dont really understand your 3rd question.

    Let's break this down a little.

    If the tackled players team have rucked over and protected the tackled player then can they opposition reasonably expect to play the ball?

    Is he really stopping the opposition from playing the ball?

    The last question I asked may make a little more sense now.


  • Options
    #438
    locum-motion
    Registered Users Posts: 5,143 ✭✭✭locum-motion


    Losty Dublin wrote: »
    Let's break this down a little.

    If the tackled players team have rucked over and protected the tackled player then can they opposition reasonably expect to play the ball?

    Is he really stopping the opposition from playing the ball?

    The last question I asked may make a little more sense now.

    Since when does the opposition's "reasonable expectations" have anything to do with it?

    The law says
    Tackled players must immediately:

    Make the ball available so that play can continue by releasing, passing or pushing the ball in any direction except forward. They may place the ball in any direction.

    It doesn't say:
    Tackled players must immediately:

    Make the ball available so that play can continue by releasing, passing or pushing the ball in any direction except forward, unless the opposition have no reasonable expectation of being able to play the ball.


  • Options
    #439
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 40,981 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    locum-motion wrote: »
    Since when does the opposition's "reasonable expectations" have anything to do with it?

    The law says



    It doesn't say:

    it comes down to the interpretation of immediately.....
    if theres a jackle then immediately means instantly
    if theres no jackle or attempt on the ball or to counter ruck.. then the immediacy of the action is less important, and the player in the ground can pop to a trail runner etc

    another example of this 'immediately' is when a ref calls "use it" on a stationary scrum..... after the call the ball is supposed to be played immediately but in reality the refs allows a few seconds before its played.

    its good for game continuity that these interpretations are held.

    If theres no challange for the ball, then let the play continue... as longs as its not taking the piss


  • Options
    #440
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 14,983 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    Generally speaking when refereeing I'd have no problem with the player on the ground keeping a hand on the ball to steady it as long as those actions didn't impede a fair contest for the ball.

    I'm not talking about keeping it clutched to their chest or anything , but certainly placing the ball on the ground and then leaving a hand on top I'd be fine with , but as soon as an opposing player makes a play for the ball , if the hand stays there and stops them getting a clean attempt at the ball I'd penalise right away.


  • Options
    #441
    Losty Dublin
    Registered Users Posts: 12,962 ✭✭✭✭Losty Dublin


    locum-motion wrote: »
    Since when does the opposition's "reasonable expectations" have anything to do with it?

    On the contrary it makes every bit of difference. What the law book expects here is that the tackled player is not preventing the oncoming player from getting the ball. Unless you are actually stopping an opposing player from getting the ball at tackle time, being it hugging the ball or sitting on it or whatever, no sane ref will should ping you for merely steadying what is clean ball for your dummy half. Nobody here is condoning that.

    Syd also rightly points out that how immediate is an immediate release depends on on who and what and where. The Law Book doesn't express a timeframe, simply because it can and will vary from situation to situation, be it 0.5 seconds or 2-3 seconds.

    Ask you this. Do you think that players should absolutely not be allowed to touch the ball on the ground at all after the tackle? And if so, what beneficial good comes from applying the law in this way


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #442
    The Rape of Lucretia
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,440 ✭✭✭The Rape of Lucretia


    Losty Dublin wrote: »
    The last question I asked may make a little more sense now.

    It still doesnt.

    I dont think "And not why not" is even a sentence, is it ?


  • Options
    #443
    locum-motion
    Registered Users Posts: 5,143 ✭✭✭locum-motion


    Losty Dublin wrote: »
    ...

    Ask you this. Do you think that players should absolutely not be allowed to touch the ball on the ground at all after the tackle? And if so, what beneficial good comes from applying the law in this way

    Don't put words in my mouth I didn't say.

    I didn't suggest any such thing (that players shouldn't be allowed touch the ball on the ground).

    A tackled player may do one of four things: release, pass, push or place the ball.

    Placing the ball on the ground between your body and where you expect your 9 to be is fine, even if you leave a hand on it to steady it.

    Holding the ball, off the ground, between your body and your 9*, is not.





    *: I believe that this is the situation that 'The Rape of Lucretia' was asking about.


  • Options
    #444
    aloooof
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 10,214 Mod ✭✭✭✭aloooof


    locum-motion wrote: »
    Don't put words in my mouth I didn't say.

    I didn't suggest any such thing (that players shouldn't be allowed touch the ball on the ground).

    Bit of an over-reaction here, Losty never suggested you did, he was merely asking you a question in return.

    With regards the "reasonable expectation" thing, I know that exact phrase does appear elsewhere in the laws, specifically in relation to knock-in / potential interceptions (tho admittedly not in relation to placing the ball post-tackle).

    I would argue the reason it's phrased like that is to allow the ref some leeway to interpret things, which seems sensible to me. If refs were to go strictly by the laws, I'm sure you could find an infringement at almost every breakdown in international rugby; the game would become unplayable, unwatchable and un-referee-able.


  • Options
    #445
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 40,981 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    locum-motion wrote: »
    Holding the ball, off the ground, between your body and your 9*, is not.

    why not?


  • Options
    #446
    locum-motion
    Registered Users Posts: 5,143 ✭✭✭locum-motion


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    why not?

    Because the law* says you can do any one of four things; release, pass, push or place. That's not one of the four. Therefore it's not OK.




    *
    Tackled players must immediately:

    Make the ball available so that play can continue by releasing, passing or pushing the ball in any direction except forward. They may place the ball in any direction.


  • Options
    #447
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 40,981 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    locum-motion wrote: »
    Because the law* says you can do any one of four things; release, pass, push or place. That's not one of the four. Therefore it's not OK.




    *

    and why do you think the law says that?

    could it be interpreted as a pass? or as a push... or even as the tackled player placing it?

    is the tackled player preventing anyone else from playing the ball?

    is there a ruck?

    how long does the tackled player have on the ground before they can pop a pass (which is allowed).....? 1 second? 4 seconds? 6 seconds? 8 seconds?
    what, or more importantly who, determines what is acceptable?


  • Options
    #448
    locum-motion
    Registered Users Posts: 5,143 ✭✭✭locum-motion


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    and why do you think the law says that?

    ...

    I just f%&king quoted it to you!


  • Options
    #449
    locum-motion
    Registered Users Posts: 5,143 ✭✭✭locum-motion


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    ...
    could it be interpreted as a pass? or as a push... or even as the tackled player placing it?

    ...

    No, it couldn't. If it's still in his hands, it hasn't been passed or pushed. It's being held.


  • Options
    #450
    locum-motion
    Registered Users Posts: 5,143 ✭✭✭locum-motion


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    ...
    is there a ruck?
    ...

    No, there isn't. We're talking about the law on tackles. A ruck happens after, and is covered by a different law. Mind you, it is part of the definition of a ruck that the ball is on the ground.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #451
    locum-motion
    Registered Users Posts: 5,143 ✭✭✭locum-motion


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    ...
    how long does the tackled player have on the ground before they can pop a pass (which is allowed).....? 1 second? 4 seconds? 6 seconds? 8 seconds?
    what, or more importantly who, determines what is acceptable?

    In practice, they seem to be given about 2 seconds or so.
    And the ref determines that


Advertisement