Laws Question? Ask here!

daveharnett

rje66 wrote: »

dont think they are off side as the actions of the player catching the attempted kick has put them on side, but should a ruck form then they are.

11.3 BEING PUT ONSIDE BY OPPONENTS

In general play, there are three ways by which an offside player can be put onside by an action of the opposing team. These three ways do not apply to a player who is offside under the 10-Metre Law.
(a) Runs 5 metres with ball. When an opponent carrying the ball runs 5 metres, the offside player is put onside.

(b) Kicks or passes. When an opponent kicks or passes the ball, the offside player is put onside.

(c) Intentionally touches ball. When an opponent intentionally touches the ball but does not catch it, the offside player is put onside.

That being said, 10 meter law is pretty much certain to apply.

Shelflife

Gears " hand off " on Earls.

For me it was a red card, extremely dangerous.

Am I over reacting?

rje66

castie wrote: »

Then how is anyone ever offside from a kick.
Person catches and plays the ball you are claiming this puts them onside.

Disagree completely

im starting to see your logic here.:mad:

so in my mind they are technically offside, but as the catcher(he caught his own charge down) is heading in the opposite direction to the offside players , im not thinking they are going to have any effect on the match , play on i say:D:D

locum-motion

Shelflife wrote: »

Gears " hand off " on Earls.

For me it was a red card, extremely dangerous.

Am I over reacting?

It definitely warrants a citing.

I_smell_fear

When a team is awarded a penalty but they still have the ball (advantage being played), what is the point in attempting a drop goal? You already have the penalty opportunity awaiting you, so why not try a box kick/any kick in behind the defence and go for a try. If the kick doesn't work out, you then come back for the penalty.

Or is there some rule outlawing this?

locum-motion

I_smell_fear wrote: »

When a team is awarded a penalty but they still have the ball (advantage being played), what is the point in attempting a drop goal? You already have the penalty opportunity awaiting you, so why not try a box kick/any kick in behind the defence and go for a try. If the kick doesn't work out, you then come back for the penalty.

Or is there some rule outlawing this?

No law forbidding it, but you might as well ask why go for a drop goal over a kick behind the defence, ever?

A player may attempt a drop goal at any time the ball is in play. At any point in time, the player may decide that the potential benefits of a drop goal (3points) times the likelihood of success outweighs the potential benefits of a try (5or 7 points) times the likelihood of success. Going for a try, the benefits are greater, but the likelihood of success is lower.

Having a penalty advantage in a kickable position does not substantially alter the equation, with the exception that it adds the following to both sides of that equation: if you fail, you'll get another chance.
The 'another chance' is not a certain 3 points either, coz you might miss. Also, when taking the 'another chance', you still have a choice to make; you might decide to go for the corner and go for a lineout drive for 5/7 points.

The 'equation' I mentioned above has two elements on each side; potential benefit and likelihood of success.
The potential benefit is always greater on the 'try' side of the equation, but there are times when other factors make a DG 'worth more'. Not in terms of absolute numbers of points, of course, but the DG assumes greater importance in the following situations;
Opening minutes of the match
Closing minutes of the match
The score is currently a draw
You are losing by 1,2 or 3 points
You are winning by 5,6 or 7 points
The likelihood of success is the part of the equation that fluctuates most throughout the match, and there are a million and one different factors that feed into that likelihood; weather, skill, opposition, field position etc. However, when all those factors are favourable (such as a scrum, ruck or maul 15m from the opposition's line + skilful kicker in position + following breeze etc) then the likelihood of success is going to be close to 1.0 (ie a virtual certainty). The likelihood of scoring a try, even in the same field position, is never going to be anywhere near that.

Most of what I've written above applies equally to situations where you do or do not have a penalty advantage. As I typed, I thought of a situation where a penalty advantage changes things (which, after all, was what you actually asked).
The advantage law allows for play to proceed to see if the team obtains a "territorial or tactical advantage". If O'Gara (for example) hits a little grubber through, and O'Driscoll runs on to it and catches it, two metres closer to the opposition's line than where the penalty would have been, then the ref might interpret that as being a "territorial advantage". He drops his hand, says "advantage over", and then some big flanker tackles BOD, who loses the ball forward in the tackle. In this situation, not only is the 'second chance' gone, but it's now scrum down, opposition put-in. One would look pretty silly for not having attempted the DG then!

That being said, many moons ago when I was toying with the idea of becoming a ref, I was present when André Watson (prob the world's greatest ref at the time) told a referees' seminar in Dublin that for him, a penalty advantage in a kickable position means "points on the board". ie in the situation I outlined above, Watson wouldn't have called "advantage over" and would have brought it back for the penalty.

daveharnett

Shelflife wrote: »

Gears " hand off " on Earls.

For me it was a red card, extremely dangerous.

Am I over reacting?

I can't get past the fact that Earls' [absence of] technique contributes massively to this incident. Given how rarely dangerous handoffs are penalized, I'd have been surprised to see anything come of it.

Not saying that's right, but I don't think we can expect anything to change here without some kind of guidance in law on what is and isn't allowed in the handoff. Making it clear that a 'handoff' involves the hand rather than the elbow or forearm would be a good start.

pickarooney

Club game at the weekend: Blue fly-half hoofs a long kick out of defence, close to the opposition 22. Blue winger and lock chase after it. Yellow full-back, all on his own, misses the catch and gathers at the second attempt. Blue winger snaffles him up, puts him down while staying on his feet and goes to claim the ball. Yellow 15 is still on his own and doesn't release and when the blue lock and winger try to rip it from him he lies on it.

Grounds for a penalty try and/or yellow card?

To put it into perspective, it was +30 degrees, blue 4 and 14 were fresh subs and nobody was able/bothered to leg it after them in time to assist the yellow full back.

daveharnett

pickarooney wrote: »

Club game at the weekend: Blue fly-half hoofs a long kick out of defence, close to the opposition 22. Blue winger and lock chase after it. Yellow full-back, all on his own, misses the catch and gathers at the second attempt. Blue winger snaffles him up, puts him down while staying on his feet and goes to claim the ball. Yellow 15 is still on his own and doesn't release and when the blue lock and winger try to rip it from him he lies on it.

Grounds for a penalty try and/or yellow card?

To put it into perspective, it was +30 degrees, blue 4 and 14 were fresh subs and nobody was able/bothered to leg it after them in time to assist the yellow full back.

From your description, it sounds like it would have been a nailed on certain try if blue winger releases immediately. Sounds like a penalty try to me.
If the outcome was more doubtful I'd look at a yellow card instead, but I wouldn't do both unless the winger had already received a personal warning (or team warning for not releasing). I'd generally reserve PT+YC for dangerous play preventing a try.

castie

pickarooney wrote: »

Club game at the weekend: Blue fly-half hoofs a long kick out of defence, close to the opposition 22. Blue winger and lock chase after it. Yellow full-back, all on his own, misses the catch and gathers at the second attempt. Blue winger snaffles him up, puts him down while staying on his feet and goes to claim the ball. Yellow 15 is still on his own and doesn't release and when the blue lock and winger try to rip it from him he lies on it.

Grounds for a penalty try and/or yellow card?

To put it into perspective, it was +30 degrees, blue 4 and 14 were fresh subs and nobody was able/bothered to leg it after them in time to assist the yellow full back.

Bolded above makes me belive he didnt actually release the man?

Assuming he did release the man. Penalty try can only be awarded when it is likely a try would of been scored. So no I wouldnt think you can give that otherwise a high tackle on a breakaway can be a penalty try.

As for the yellow it would be very harsh as a ref needs to be consistent and theres no difference between what youve described and someone not releasing in any other scenario.

pickarooney

Blue winger did the old 'Mexican Wave' release before going for the ball. Ref acknowledged it when the yellow 15 protested.

Shelflife

I'd give a PT given what we've been told. Good logic behind the YC and PT only for dangerous play.

Castie id have no problem giving a PT for a breakaway being nailed with a high tackle even on the half way line.

castie

Shelflife wrote: »

I'd give a PT given what we've been told. Good logic behind the YC and PT only for dangerous play.

Castie id have no problem giving a PT for a breakaway being nailed with a high tackle even on the half way line.

Cant give a PT when they were never in possession of the ball really.
Player on the deck could get up and tackle the player thats just ripped it or he could of knocked it on and so on...

daveharnett

castie wrote: »

Cant give a PT when they were never in possession of the ball really.
Player on the deck could get up and tackle the player thats just ripped it or he could of knocked it on and so on...

Sure, but a meteor could strike the attacker as he crossed the line too. You can never be certain of a "what if" scenario. The standard in law is "probable" which means a probability of greater than 50% that the try would have been scored.

To look at it from another perspective: the offending player seemed to think that the chances of preventing the try legally were less than the chances of the ref awarding the PT (any lesser sanction is a net win for his team). In that situation, I think the onus is on the ref to prove him wrong, and (implicitly) encourage him to take his chances playing within the law next time.

locum-motion

pickarooney wrote: »

Blue winger did the old 'Mexican Wave' release before going for the ball. Ref acknowledged it when the yellow 15 protested.

Given that addendum to the original query, it becomes a 2 on 1, where the 1 is on the ground and out of the game.
As long as no other yellows were in a position to prevent a try (and from what you said, they weren't), then the probablility that a try would have been scored is very high, and so, yes, IMO, a PT would have been warranted.

Swiwi

Shelflife wrote: »

Gears " hand off " on Earls.

For me it was a red card, extremely dangerous.

Am I over reacting?

Yes you are. There was no malice in it. I doubt Earls will try and tackle like that again.

Podge_irl

Lads, I've been meaning to ask Justin but haven't seen him over the last week or so. I'm interested in taking up reffing but have absolutely no idea how to go about it. I know Justin has mentioned a course that the LB do but do any of you know the best way to get involved? I'm not a member of any club or anything at the moment, is that an issue?

Shelflife

Swiwi wrote: »

Shelflife wrote: »

Gears " hand off " on Earls.

For me it was a red card, extremely dangerous.

Am I over reacting?

Yes you are. There was no malice in it. I doubt Earls will try and tackle like that again.

How can you say there was no malice in it when he intentionally threw a forearm/ elbow into his face?

Just because it's a poor tackling technique doesn't give you the right to smash his face in.

locum-motion

Podge_irl wrote: »

Lads, I've been meaning to ask Justin but haven't seen him over the last week or so. I'm interested in taking up reffing but have absolutely no idea how to go about it. I know Justin has mentioned a course that the LB do but do any of you know the best way to get involved? I'm not a member of any club or anything at the moment, is that an issue?

Have a look at this page.

castie

Podge_irl wrote: »

Lads, I've been meaning to ask Justin but haven't seen him over the last week or so. I'm interested in taking up reffing but have absolutely no idea how to go about it. I know Justin has mentioned a course that the LB do but do any of you know the best way to get involved? I'm not a member of any club or anything at the moment, is that an issue?

Do the foundation course and you can get setup to get started from that meeting if I remember correctly.

Downtime

Podge_irl wrote: »

Lads, I've been meaning to ask Justin but haven't seen him over the last week or so. I'm interested in taking up reffing but have absolutely no idea how to go about it. I know Justin has mentioned a course that the LB do but do any of you know the best way to get involved? I'm not a member of any club or anything at the moment, is that an issue?

Everything you need to know is here - http://www.arlb.ie/?page_id=32 The foundation course is on August 19th in St Mary's College RFC. On the page above find your local rep and he can put you in contact with the relevant person to get you on the list for the course.

daveharnett

Did I miss a discussion on these?
http://www.irblaws.com/2012/

The headline is that the 'pause' is gone. The sequence will now be "Touch, Pause, Set" where "Set" will immediately become a one-syllable replacement for "Engage". "Ready, Steady, Go" would probably be more honest.

The other significant change has been aired here already: 5 second use-it-or-lose-it when the ball becomes available at the back of a ruck.

Most of the rest are pretty minor: the quick throw in can be taken in front of where the ball entered touch, no timewasting during conversions (by delaying the arrival of the tee), GPS trackers are allowed, tights are allowed for ladies, an illegal addidas boot is now legal (:rolleyes:).

ScareGilly

Shelflife wrote: »

How can you say there was no malice in it when he intentionally threw a forearm/ elbow into his face?

Just because it's a poor tackling technique doesn't give you the right to smash his face in.

Just wondering how long into the match does this happen?

Shelflife

ScareGilly wrote: »

Shelflife wrote: »

How can you say there was no malice in it when he intentionally threw a forearm/ elbow into his face?

Just because it's a poor tackling technique doesn't give you the right to smash his face in.

Just wondering how long into the match does this happen?

Round about the 60min mark I think . In real time it looks as if earls made a balls of the tackle , but but another angle you can see gear nail him with a firearm/ elbow. Earls had to leave the field to get patched up.

rje66

Podge_irl wrote: »

Lads, I've been meaning to ask Justin but haven't seen him over the last week or so. I'm interested in taking up reffing but have absolutely no idea how to go about it. I know Justin has mentioned a course that the LB do but do any of you know the best way to get involved? I'm not a member of any club or anything at the moment, is that an issue?

where in ireland are you based? just asking, as if outside leinster the ARLB info is leinster specific. if in leinster what area you in? may b able to point you in right direction.

Trippie

QQ, playing a tournament here in Colombia over the weekend, we had a monster clearance kick, myself and another guy chased it up, bounced awkwardly for the full back and by the time he secured the ball close to the touch line we were bearing down on him, he went to kick the ball clear as my mate tackled him, the ball spilled forward in the air over the touchline without touching the ground. I picked it up in touch right away and took a quick lineout to the 3rd guy who was chasing with us, he ran it in under the posts but was called back, the touch judge said it was knocked forward and ref awarded a scrum? correct decision or not?

rje66

correct decision
,knock on(first offense) then ball went dead. no advantage once ball s dead.
back to first offense.

think this is changing next season though

daveharnett

rje66 wrote: »

correct decision
,knock on(first offense) then ball went dead. no advantage once ball s dead.
back to first offense.

think this is changing next season though

Yep. From September (northern hemisphere) or January (southern hemisphere), you will be able to elect to take the lineout (quick or conventional) rather than the scrum in this situation. Until then, the decision you received remains the correct one.

ScareGilly

ScareGilly wrote: »

Just wondering how long into the match does this happen?

Shelflife wrote: »

Round about the 60min mark I think . In real time it looks as if earls made a balls of the tackle , but but another angle you can see gear nail him with a firearm/ elbow. Earls had to leave the field to get patched up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBk6PjwsILA

Still unsure what the problem is with this. Thought it was just physicality, Earls put himself in a terrible position coming in to tackle, trying to cover the ball too, and as a result, he was really high.

ScareGilly

I don't see the problem with it... Gear just 'bounced' him..