Laws Question? Ask here!

daveharnett

kensutz wrote: »

Correct, it's a myth that you must allow the player to get to their feet.

Just a +1 from me. Probably the most persistent law myth in the game. The player on his feet is not allowed to fall on top of his opponent, which is usually what gets penalized.

BigHeel

daveharnett wrote: »

Just a +1 from me. Probably the most persistent law myth in the game. The player on his feet is not allowed to fall on top of his opponent, which is usually what gets penalized.

Thanks folks. Though I was going mad. I have even seen experienced refs doing this.

Reloc8

It's practically endemic. Had a sideline up in arms with me a couple of weeks ago where retreating defender goes down on a kicked ball and chasers whilst on feet attempt to take the ball from him.

I have penalty for holding on against the defender and the world went briefly bat**** crazy 'HE HAS TO LET HIM UP REF'.

Wexfordboy89

just wondering have they brought in the the rule about being able to replace the whole front row.remember watching the u20 rugby world cup were teams could bring on two props just wondering is it a part of senior rugby yet?

kensutz

Wexfordboy89 wrote: »

just wondering have they brought in the the rule

LAWS, LAWS, LAWS!!!!

Wexfordboy89

kensutz wrote: »

LAWS, LAWS, LAWS!!!!

my bad sorry

Snickers Man

Shelflife wrote: »

Sledging.

Do you allow it ? if so how far do you let it go ?

Just renewed my Associate Referee status (now called Affiliate) a couple of weeks ago and sledging was very clearly highlighted as one of the things that is not to be tolerated. Especially the sort of sneaky "thank you" or pat on the head to a player who has just conceded a penalty. Immediate reversal of penalty in these occasions. And that's straight from the Leinster Branch horse's mouth.

Actually, I think refs could have been helped greatly in stamping out this sort of thing if Wayne Barnes had had any cojones in the Ireland Wales game this year (2012) in the Aviva.

Stephen Ferris was yellow carded and penalised for a very marginal "tip tackle" in front of the posts in the last minute with Ireland leading by a point. A Welsh player went straight up to him and patted him on the head.

I don't know whether I would have given the penalty against Ferris--it was marginal--but I do know that even if I had I would have certainly reversed it for the sledge. I hate that sort of thing, all bias aside.

And imagine if Barnes had done just that! He would have stamped this out of the game at international level anyway for years. "You cost us that game, Big Mouth" would have stuck and no coach would tolerate a player who did it.

Missed opportunity.

Taco Corp

Wexfordboy89 wrote: »

just wondering have they brought in the the rule about being able to replace the whole front row.remember watching the u20 rugby world cup were teams could bring on two props just wondering is it a part of senior rugby yet?

I assume you mean internationals, then it's being trialled for the up coming Autumn internationals.

KERSPLAT!

OK hopefully someone can enlighten me here. Saw a ref abandon a match today for, as far as I know, outside (touchline) interference. The home team were winning 13-10 and there was approx 2 mins left in the game.

Started when away team didnt agree with TJ decision, one away player walked over and pushed the TJ nad there was a scuffle, no fists or anything just a bit of pushing.

30 secs later a scrum, another scuffle, a lad thrown on the ground beside the touchline, one or 2 supporters tried to break it up as ref and game had moved on, ref turns around, blows the whistle and calls the game. Up to this point the game was pretty clean but anyway it was abandoned

My Q is, what happens now? Is it a home win, a replay, draw game??

Cheers in advance

rje66

IPAM wrote: »

OK hopefully someone can enlighten me here. Saw a ref abandon a match today for, as far as I know, outside (touchline) interference. The home team were winning 13-10 and there was approx 2 mins left in the game.

Started when away team didnt agree with TJ decision, one away player walked over and pushed the TJ nad there was a scuffle, no fists or anything just a bit of pushing.

30 secs later a scrum, another scuffle, a lad thrown on the ground beside the touchline, one or 2 supporters tried to break it up as ref and game had moved on, ref turns around, blows the whistle and calls the game. Up to this point the game was pretty clean but anyway it was abandoned

My Q is, what happens now? Is it a home win, a replay, draw game??

Cheers in advance

as far as I know after 60 mins score stands.
players will always disagree with decisions against them, its how its handled that causes problems.

CatFromHue

Yesterday in the Ireland game we were given a penalty where Sexton indicated to kick at goal. When he was preparing himself for the kick the SA team went into a huddle and so weren't paying attention.

Could Sexton then have kicked the ball say 5m and then picked it up to run in unopposed to score a try?

kensutz

No, it will have to be a genuine attempt at goal. Anything else would be a penalty against him for unsportsman like behaviour.

Losty Dublin

IPAM wrote: »

OK hopefully someone can enlighten me here. Saw a ref abandon a match today for, as far as I know, outside (touchline) interference. The home team were winning 13-10 and there was approx 2 mins left in the game.

Started when away team didnt agree with TJ decision, one away player walked over and pushed the TJ nad there was a scuffle, no fists or anything just a bit of pushing.

30 secs later a scrum, another scuffle, a lad thrown on the ground beside the touchline, one or 2 supporters tried to break it up as ref and game had moved on, ref turns around, blows the whistle and calls the game. Up to this point the game was pretty clean but anyway it was abandoned

My Q is, what happens now? Is it a home win, a replay, draw game??

Cheers in advance

I'd be surprised that the referee abandoned a game after 78 minutes of play TBH. Any ref with an ounce would have called time at the first chance and left it at that.

Latterly, I hope the player who shoved the TJ was noted by the referee. There is absolutely no excuse for that and if reported he won't see a field again for a long long time.

Shelflife

kensutz wrote: »

No, it will have to be a genuine attempt at goal. Anything else would be a penalty against him for unsportsman like behaviour.

Its a scrum I believe, but I wouldnt quibble over a pen either.

daveharnett

IPAM wrote: »

OK hopefully someone can enlighten me here. Saw a ref abandon a match today for, as far as I know, outside (touchline) interference. The home team were winning 13-10 and there was approx 2 mins left in the game....
My Q is, what happens now? Is it a home win, a replay, draw game??

The score (and result) would stand, barring any extraordinary sanctions being imposed on the home team. As rje said, the scoreline can stand once 60 minutes have been played. The ref could also fudge the timekeeping, rather than officially abandon the match. I imagine this would depend on whether the incidents warranted further investigation or sanction.

KERSPLAT!

Losty Dublin wrote: »

I'd be surprised that the referee abandoned a game after 78 minutes of play TBH. Any ref with an ounce would have called time at the first chance and left it at that.

Latterly, I hope the player who shoved the TJ was noted by the referee. There is absolutely no excuse for that and if reported he won't see a field again for a long long time.

When he blew the whistle that's what we thought had happened, game over but it wasn't. Called match abandoned and spoke to the 2 captains for a while.

As for the TJ, I'm not sure if he saw the incident but the home captain and TJ did say it to him

pickarooney

Does an appearance as a blood sub count as a cap?

JustinDee

pickarooney wrote: »

Does an appearance as a blood sub count as a cap?

Yes.

accidentprone1

In the Ireland v. South Africa last Saturday, Heaslip was given a yellow card for trying to illegally stop the S.A. maul close to our line. Barnes called out for a number of infringements during that maul, and as far as I know Heaslip was given the yellow as he was the last in the line of those infringements.

My question is, what is to stop the ref giving a yellow card to all of thoses players who infringed in front of the line in that passage of play? (Assuming he knows who all of them are.)

Losty Dublin

accidentprone1 wrote: »

My question is, what is to stop the ref giving a yellow card to all of thoses players who infringed in front of the line in that passage of play? (Assuming he knows who all of them are.)

Aside from common sense, it will relate to the offence commited; the intent will have a massive bearing as well. The yellow card is a tool available to the referee if required; little good comes from handing them out willy nilly as it waters down it's severity towards teams.

daveharnett

accidentprone1 wrote: »

In the Ireland v. South Africa last Saturday, Heaslip was given a yellow card for trying to illegally stop the S.A. maul close to our line. Barnes called out for a number of infringements during that maul, and as far as I know Heaslip was given the yellow as he was the last in the line of those infringements.

My question is, what is to stop the ref giving a yellow card to all of thoses players who infringed in front of the line in that passage of play? (Assuming he knows who all of them are.)

Nothing. The fact that none of the previous offences had a material impact on play (ie they didn't stop the maul) is one justification for not handing out multiple cards. The real reason is that nobody benefits from 3/4 players going to the bin and the game becoming a walkover.

That being said, it did strike me at the time that it should have been a penalty try. Ireland obviously thought the maul was probably going to end in a try - they were more than happy to eat a YC to stop it.

CIARAN_BOYLE

accidentprone1 wrote: »

In the Ireland v. South Africa last Saturday, Heaslip was given a yellow card for trying to illegally stop the S.A. maul close to our line. Barnes called out for a number of infringements during that maul, and as far as I know Heaslip was given the yellow as he was the last in the line of those infringements.

My question is, what is to stop the ref giving a yellow card to all of thoses players who infringed in front of the line in that passage of play? (Assuming he knows who all of them are.)

One offence wouldn't have been enough for a yellow card. Heaslip got it as a sort of team yellow for repeated infringements at the maul.

The fact all those infringements happened during a period of play is imaterial

ThirdMan

When a player is tackled he has to release the ball or pass it to another teammate. Correct?

Also, the opposition cannot just take the ball at this stage. The tackled player has to be allowed the opportunity to release or pass the ball. Correct?

Presuming I've got that much right, why do players from both teams get into a brawl of sorts? What are each team trying to do if they're next move already seems pre-determined?

My apologies for what is obviously a newbie question. I've no doubt I'm entirely wrong, or entirely stupid.

.ak

ThirdMan wrote: »

When a player is tackled he has to release the ball or pass it to another teammate. Correct?

Also, the opposition cannot just take the ball at this stage. The tackled player has to be allowed the opportunity to release or pass the ball. Correct?

Presuming I've got that much right, why do players from both teams get into a brawl of sorts? What are each team trying to do if they're next move already seems pre-determined?

My apologies for what is obviously a newbie question. I've no doubt I'm entirely wrong, or entirely stupid.

The first tackler may not attempt to steal the ball - unless they stand, noticably release the player and then on their feet may attempt a steal (IIRC).

Generally what happens is the first tackler makes the tackle, brings the attacker to ground, whilst simultaneously another defender will try to get over the ball. Timing is key here, if the attacker's support arrives and gets into a better body position over the ball then a ruck is formed. Once a ruck is formed a defender may not use his hands to steal the ball, regardless of body position.

So, to answer your question, they get into a 'brawl' (ruck) to contest for the ball, either by a) timing, getting over the ball before the opposition does, or b) by counter-rucking i.e; if your support is greater than the opposition you can counter-ruck through the middle of the ruck and literally push the opposition off the ball, once your feet and body are over the ball you've then secured a turn over.

JustinDee

ThirdMan wrote: »

When a player is tackled he has to release the ball or pass it to another teammate. Correct?

Also, the opposition cannot just take the ball at this stage. The tackled player has to be allowed the opportunity to release or pass the ball. Correct?

A non-tackler entering the ruck or contact area on their feet and from an onside position may challenge for the ball.
IRB Laws 15 and 16 are where to look. Pretty sure there are video examples with each section.

sydthebeat

ThirdMan wrote: »

When a player is tackled he has to release the ball or pass it to another teammate. Correct?

see here for correct descriptions

sydthebeat

Just as an aside to my post above i see that law 15.5 (b) states that
"A tackled player must immediately pass the ball or release it. That player must also get up or move away from it at once."

On the bit thats bolded i must admit ive never seen a player penalised for being tackled and not rolling away after presenting. Its always the tackler thats called for this.

Is this something that is an anolomy and simply doesnt happen in a game.
A tackled player will ALWAYS present, and first principles will tell him to protect himself after.

JustinDee

sydthebeat wrote: »

On the bit thats bolded i must admit ive never seen a player penalised for being tackled and not rolling away after presenting

You've never seen a tackled player pinged for clinging on? (see here: http://www.irblaws.com/EN/signals/?language=EN&sec=9)

Getting away from ball while on ground and as you say, after presenting, is all that is required to constitute releasing the ball.

sydthebeat

JustinDee wrote: »

You've never seen a tackled player pinged for clinging on? (see here: http://www.irblaws.com/EN/signals/?language=EN&sec=9)

Getting away from ball while on ground and as you say, after presenting, is all that is required to constitute releasing the ball.

ive seen plenty penalised for holding onto the ball after being tackled.

ive never seen a tackled player penalised for not rolling away after a tackle.

the issue isnt in the releasing, its in the requirement for the "tackled" player to move away or get up.

JustinDee

sydthebeat wrote: »

ive seen plenty penalised for holding onto the ball after being tackled.

ive never seen a tackled player penalised for not rolling away after a tackle.

the issue isnt in the releasing, its in the requirement for the "tackled" player to move away or get up.

Watch the Scotland v NZ game for an example or . . . few.
It was an endless game for spoilers and foilers.
You will have seen the signal below a number of times.
http://www.irblaws.com/EN/signals/?language=EN&sec=9