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
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

Sunday Times Player Ratings

2»

Comments

  • #32
    subfreq
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 634 ✭✭✭subfreq


    Serenity Now! wrote: »
    The maul law variation was not implemented on safety grounds. If it was you'd have a point. As it happens, it wasn't and you don't.
    Serenity Now! wrote: »
    I agree that the pulling down of a maul should never be allowed. However this is a safety concern.

    :confused:

    I'll try and dig up a league quote via a google search.


  • #33
    Serenity Now!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,326 ✭✭✭Serenity Now!


    subfreq wrote: »
    :confused:
    Whats confusing about that?
    The IRB amended the maul law not out of a safety concern but to encourage the ball to be passed out.
    The maul law is a law I wouldn't have changed because to me, the safety aspect should be paramount.


Advertisement