Laws Question? Ask here!

Losty Dublin · 26-10-2015 8:51pm

Tim Robbins wrote: »

This is Rugby not Soccer

Sorry.

You soccer player

philstar · 29-10-2015 10:47am

if a long pass from the hand is made backwards but the ball is blown forward by a gust of wind....is that deemed a forward pass???

locum-motion · 29-10-2015 11:40am

philstar wrote: »

if a long pass from the hand is made backwards but the ball is blown forward by a gust of wind....is that deemed a forward pass???

No.

What matters is the momentum imparted upon the ball by the hand; if that is toward your own line, then you're grand.

Funnily enough, that can mean that the ball lands closer to the opposition line and still be backward: if a player is running forward at say 7m/s, and he then throws the ball toward his own line at 5m/s, then the ball will actually continue forward at 2m/s! But it's still a backward pass.

Watch this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=box08lq9ylg

The Lost Sheep · 01-11-2015 8:54pm

Below are what will be trialled in competitions at various levels between now and next April/May. If any trials are looked at again they will be trialled globally starting January 2017(Southern Hem) and August 2017 (North Hemisphere)

http://pulse-static-files.s3.amazonaws.com/test/worldrugby/document/2015/09/05/0b9c59b0-bd64-449d-94be-6d6ef938f7f2/150906_Law_Trials.pdf

phog · 17-12-2015 8:48am

NZ rugby to trial two refs, new laws

AT A GLANCE

Proposed World Rugby law changes:

1 Two on-field referees

2 Removal of the 'gate' entry at the breakdown

3 Tackler and arriving players can enter from midpoint of breakdown as long as they come from an onside position

4 Tackler no longer has 360 degree rights to the ball

4 Offside lines one metre behind hindmost foot at breakdown

pickarooney · 17-12-2015 11:43am

Just when you think you finally understand all the nuances of the breakdown they go and change everything.
This will end up with one law in each half of the pitch.

Quin_Dub · 17-12-2015 12:39pm

Not sure about those..

1 Two on-field referees

Could help , but one has to be in charge so not altogether sure of the advantage of this over the existing assistant referees

2 Removal of the 'gate' entry at the breakdown

3 Tackler and arriving players can enter from midpoint of breakdown as long as they come from an onside position

Not sure about this at all - Essentially allows a side-on clear-out, making it much harder to protect the ball

4 Tackler no longer has 360 degree rights to the ball

Might give undue advantage to the attacking side , but maybe that's the intent.

5 Offside lines one metre behind hindmost foot at breakdown.

This will just encourage teams to "pick & jam" all day long as the pillars will be a metre back guaranteeing that you break the gainline virtually every time with a short pick and drive.. Can't see how this is a step forward for opening up play.

sydthebeat · 17-12-2015 1:01pm

yeah, at what point does a defender, joining the 'breakdown' from the midpoint, become a tackler cos the attack have picked and gone..... automatically they cant be 1 m behind the hindmost foot.

The Lost Sheep · 17-12-2015 1:13pm

phog wrote: »

NZ rugby to trial two refs, new laws
Proposed World Rugby law changes:
1 Two on-field referees
2 Removal of the 'gate' entry at the breakdown
3 Tackler and arriving players can enter from midpoint of breakdown as long as they come from an onside position
4 Tackler no longer has 360 degree rights to the ball
4 Offside lines one metre behind hindmost foot at breakdown

Disagree with a few of these. Creating a new offside line one metre back from the new definition of the ruck is not needed
The tackler having 360 rights to the ball in the specific times they are is better for the game.

Tim Robbins · 17-12-2015 7:48pm

1 Two on-field referees

Pointless. Assistant Refs works well.

2 Removal of the 'gate' entry at the breakdown

Don't like this, The 'gate' helps to keep some shape to the breakdown.

3 Tackler and arriving players can enter from midpoint of breakdown as long as they come from an onside position

see above.

4 Tackler no longer has 360 degree rights to the ball

Not sure what this means.

5 Offside lines one metre behind hindmost foot at breakdown.
That would be a pain to police. Fans will be screaming all day players are offside especially when you have quick ruck ball.

Why not try something like being able to take a mark from anywhere inside your own half and get rid of the crappy box kicking?

The Lost Sheep · 17-12-2015 10:13pm

Tim Robbins wrote: »

4 Tackler no longer has 360 degree rights to the ball

Not sure what this means.

player could make a tackle release the ball carrier and then compete for the ball. This will be different and the tackler will have to roll away and go back the metre and then compete for the ball - I think

Why not try something like being able to take a mark from anywhere inside your own half and get rid of the crappy box kicking?

:rolleyes:
What does either of those changes add and how do you propose putting in a law about box kicking? Well executed box kicks add to the game but too often players make wrong choices or poorly execute them but that doesn't mean they should be banned

CMOTDibbler · 17-12-2015 10:21pm

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

player could make a tackle release the ball carrier and then compete for the ball. This will be different and the tackler will have to roll away and go back the metre and then compete for the ball - I think

I'm not sure if they have to go back the metre. By saying 180 degrees they seem to imply that he can only compete for the ball on his own side. Otherwise they wouldn't use that description.

Quin_Dub · 18-12-2015 12:37am

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

player could make a tackle release the ball carrier and then compete for the ball. This will be different and the tackler will have to roll away and go back the metre and then compete for the ball - I think

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

I'm not sure if they have to go back the metre. By saying 180 degrees they seem to imply that he can only compete for the ball on his own side. Otherwise they wouldn't use that description.

I read it as this - When the tackler gets to their feet they must basically step around the tackled player and only compete for the ball from their own "side". which means that in the majority of cases the ruck will be formed before the tackler can influence possession.

So again heavily favouring the attacker as they now have an extra second or so to reposition before anyone can compete for the ball.

As I think about it the law change around the removal of the gate at the ruck will all depend on interpretation.

If it's taken to mean that a player can enter at any angle as long as the point of contact is behind the mid line of the ruck then it's going to get very messy very quickly (and potentially dangerous too)

However if they interpret it to mean that they can join only parallel to the touch line but up to the mid-point then potentially that could be okay it would allow for a broader clear-out to occur beyond the ball.

pickarooney · 18-12-2015 9:15am

Thinking about this, is the following OK under the current rules:
Ball carrier is tackled and supporting players get over the ball.
Defenders do not engage but instead go around the tackle area and snare the scrum half as he's picking up the ball.
There's no ruck as the defenders have not bound and thus no offside line.

Shelflife · 18-12-2015 10:08am

A tackle has been made so they would have to come through the gate .

So no they cant do that.

LeinsterDub · 18-12-2015 10:39am

pickarooney wrote: »

Thinking about this, is the following OK under the current rules:
Ball carrier is tackled and supporting players get over the ball.
Defenders do not engage but instead go around the tackle area and snare the scrum half as he's picking up the ball.
There's no ruck as the defenders have not bound and thus no offside line.

Like this http://www.the42.ie/analysis-chiefs-super-rugby-tactics-2013507-Mar2015/

CMOTDibbler · 18-12-2015 11:10am

Quin_Dub wrote: »

I read it as this - When the tackler gets to their feet they must basically step around the tackled player and only compete for the ball from their own "side". which means that in the majority of cases the ruck will be formed before the tackler can influence possession.

So again heavily favouring the attacker as they now have an extra second or so to reposition before anyone can compete for the ball.

As I think about it the law change around the removal of the gate at the ruck will all depend on interpretation.

If it's taken to mean that a player can enter at any angle as long as the point of contact is behind the mid line of the ruck then it's going to get very messy very quickly (and potentially dangerous too)

However if they interpret it to mean that they can join only parallel to the touch line but up to the mid-point then potentially that could be okay it would allow for a broader clear-out to occur beyond the ball.

I think so long as the tackler is on his own side or on either side of the tackled player he can compete for the ball. Once he goes past the 'offside line' and is on the attacking teams side he has to get back onside before competing.

The offside line one metre back from the breakdown seems to mean that if you're not involved in the breakdown, you have to be back one metre from it. So I don't think you can come around and scrag the scrumhalf whether you're in the breakdown or not.

I'm in favour of the one metre rule. As it stands, players are constantly ahead of the hindmost foot when the ball is recycled and it's very hard for the ref to police. He'd need eyes on stalks really which is probably why they're talking about a second ref to do that job only.

Shelflife · 18-12-2015 11:21am

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Like this http://www.the42.ie/analysis-chiefs-super-rugby-tactics-2013507-Mar2015/

Sorry I misread the original as play the ball not snare the scrumhalf, thats allowable but i think in the instance shown the ref pinged them for loitering. If you are going to use this tactic you would want to run it past the ref as on the pitch in live play it looks all wrong ,even though its technically legal.

Quin_Dub · 18-12-2015 1:32pm

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

I think so long as the tackler is on his own side or on either side of the tackled player he can compete for the ball. Once he goes past the 'offside line' and is on the attacking teams side he has to get back onside before competing.

Absolutely , but it also means now that as a tackler getting to your feet your 1st action will have to be to check where you are relative to the tackled player rather than just being able to go straight for the ball so it will have the effect of slowing down that initial defensive effort to retrieve the ball..Just think that it potentially shifts the balance too much toward the attack.

Clearly what they are trying to do is prevent what happens today where the tackler stands up on the other side of the breakdown and essentially "gets in the way" of the supporting players attempting to secure the ball , but I think that this change might be too much.

CMOTDibbler wrote: »

The offside line one metre back from the breakdown seems to mean that if you're not involved in the breakdown, you have to be back one metre from it. So I don't think you can come around and scrag the scrumhalf whether you're in the breakdown or not.

I'm in favour of the one metre rule. As it stands, players are constantly ahead of the hindmost foot when the ball is recycled and it's very hard for the ref to police. He'd need eyes on stalks really which is probably why they're talking about a second ref to do that job only.

I get the point you are making but enforcing the 1M means moving the pillar defenders out and away from the break-down , so it would encourage teams to repeatedly pick and go around the edge as they'd be almost guaranteed to break the gain line every time (albeit by a small amount).. Just think that it's potentially counter-productive if the intent is to speed up the game etc.

pickarooney · 19-12-2015 12:11am

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Like this http://www.the42.ie/analysis-chiefs-super-rugby-tactics-2013507-Mar2015/

Exactly that that!

sydthebeat · 22-12-2015 11:59am

http://www.arlb.ie/?p=3095

a good synopsis on the muted law changes

The Lost Sheep · 05-01-2016 11:55pm

Law trials to take place in a limited number of competitions worldwide during 2016

http://www.the42.ie/mitre-10-cup-rugby-law-trials-world-rugby-2531782-Jan2016/

swiwi_ · 10-02-2016 8:23pm

Not sure if similar already posted...

http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/5-key-law-changes-need-know/

Expect a few people to moan at some point when they haven't realised the laws have changed.

Not on this forum of course.

sydthebeat · 10-02-2016 8:42pm

i like this comment

Everyone, except those who speak a language where inanimate objects have a gender.

pickarooney · 10-02-2016 8:51pm

swiwi_ wrote: »

Not sure if similar already posted...

http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/5-key-law-changes-need-know/

Expect a few people to moan at some point when they haven't realised the laws have changed.

Not on this forum of course.

Wow, I like or am mostly indifferent to every one of those. Hope they will actually be implemented rather than the usual application for three weeks and then forgetting about them

Journeyman_1 · 10-02-2016 9:09pm

With regards to the Maul change: if a forward falls off the maul now and rejoins, do they need to take the ball from whoever is currently at the back? Does the ball change hands everytime someone joins a maul?

b.gud · 15-02-2016 12:44pm

Not technically a law question but I reckon this is the best place to ask.

If a player qualifies to play for Ireland through the 3 year residency rule, then gets capped for Ireland. The player then leaves Ireland for, say, an English club after 4 years in Ireland, i.e. before he qualifies as a citizen. Is he still eligible to play for Ireland?

awec · 15-02-2016 12:48pm

b.gud wrote: »

Not technically a law question but I reckon this is the best place to ask.

If a player qualifies to play for Ireland through the 3 year residency rule, then gets capped for Ireland. The player then leaves Ireland for, say, an English club after 4 years in Ireland, i.e. before he qualifies as a citizen. Is he still eligible to play for Ireland?

Yes.

Rugby eligibility is nothing to do with citizenship. Even if they stayed for 3 years, weren't capped and then left in the 4th year they'd still be eligible to be selected (though unlikely).

pickarooney · 15-02-2016 12:53pm

Is there not a taking the piss rule the IRFU would impose in such a situation?

awec · 15-02-2016 12:59pm

pickarooney wrote: »

Is there not a taking the piss rule the IRFU would impose in such a situation?

There are the actual eligibility rules and then there are the IRFU "rules".

Once a player becomes eligible he is eligible forever, unless he plays for another test side instead.

Realistically though I don't think the IRFU would allow for a former project player to be capped any more if he left Ireland, unless the circumstances were truly exceptional. If the player had never been capped while in Ireland I would say his chances of a cap would be pretty much zero.

Laws Question? Ask here!

Comments