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

Laws Question? Ask here!

Options
1…4849515354…115

Comments

  • Options
    #1502
    castie
    Hosted Moderators Posts: 3,807 ✭✭✭castie


    Sundy wrote: »
    Thats illegal and you should be penalised for leaving the lineout before it is over.
    You cant just step out of a lineout.

    Technically not.
    However to combat this...

    The catcher and "ripper" will keep the ball with the catcher so that he is the first person to make contact.

    As soon as opposition engage the then maul the ball is shuffled back.
    After that they must keep the maul up and if they disengage Im not 100% but I would tend to allow play on (offside still possible) and force them to re-engage the maul as is seen at most professional levels.

    Had a mostly local team do this in a league game in Hong Kong that I was playing.
    Ref was completely fine as long as the ball carrier was not being protected from in front.

    Note: As far as I am aware people can leave the line-out all they want once the ball travels over their head. Otherwise some of these looping moves (NZ try in WC) would be considered leaving the line-out before its ended.


  • Options
    #1503
    Sundy
    Registered Users Posts: 1,512 ✭✭✭Sundy


    castie wrote: »
    Technically not.


    Note: As far as I am aware people can leave the line-out all they want once the ball travels over their head. Otherwise some of these looping moves (NZ try in WC) would be considered leaving the line-out before its ended.

    Nope thats covered in the laws by allowing a player to peel away


  • Options
    #1504
    Sundy
    Registered Users Posts: 1,512 ✭✭✭Sundy


    Sundy wrote: »
    Thats illegal and you should be penalised for leaving the lineout before it is over.
    You cant just step out of a lineout.


    Actually its quite a complicated one. All depends on pretty perfect timing. But im pretty sure the ref could ping you alot of the time for not maintaining the 1m gap.


  • Options
    #1505
    castie
    Hosted Moderators Posts: 3,807 ✭✭✭castie


    Sundy wrote: »
    Nope thats covered in the laws by allowing a player to peel away

    can you show where?
    Just to highlight what the laws say is "peel"


  • Options
    #1506
    Downtime
    Registered Users Posts: 1,537 ✭✭✭Downtime


    castie wrote: »
    can you show where?
    Just to highlight what the laws say is "peel"

    Law 19.10 (i) When the ball has been thrown beyond a player in the lineout, that player may move to the space between the touchline and the 5-metre line. If the player moves into that space the player must not move towards that player’s goal line before the lineout ends, except in a peeling off movement.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1507
    Losty Dublin
    Registered Users Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭Losty Dublin


    locum-motion wrote: »
    I was looking at that second clip and thinking "There's nothing wrong with that, his foot is on the ground beside the opposing player; he's not stamping at all."
    Then Black 6 lifted his left foot and stood on a guys head.
    "Ah, there it is!" said I.

    That's what happens when it's dinner time; you get distracted :)


  • Options
    #1508
    castie
    Hosted Moderators Posts: 3,807 ✭✭✭castie


    Downtime wrote: »
    Law 19.10 (i) When the ball has been thrown beyond a player in the lineout, that player may move to the space between the touchline and the 5-metre line. If the player moves into that space the player must not move towards that player’s goal line before the lineout ends, except in a peeling off movement.

    Yes but that does not stop a player moving towards their own goal line.

    It says they cant move towards the opposition line except in a peeling off motion. (which is the ball carrier...)


  • Options
    #1509
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 53,459 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    On Saturday before our first try Gilroy ran down the wing and when he got near the touchline he threw the ball back in field. We lost possession at this point.

    Frankie said something in the commentary that the Welsh player (Jones I think) just threw his hands at the ball with no intention to catch it and that it could have been a penalty to us?

    Is this illegal? Do you have to intend to always catch the ball if you go for it? E.g. You can't swing an arm at the ball to push it into touch to intercept a pass?


  • Options
    #1510
    .ak
    Registered Users Posts: 30,308 Mod ✭✭✭✭.ak


    awec wrote: »
    Is this illegal? Do you have to intend to always catch the ball if you go for it? E.g. You can't swing an arm at the ball to push it into touch to intercept a pass?

    You've answered that yourself really. If you're trying to intercept you must try to intercept! :P If you just smack the ball down in mid-flight it's a penalty, and often a yellow if it looks to be the last pass in scoring a try.


  • Options
    #1511
    who_me
    Registered Users Posts: 3,669 ✭✭✭who_me


    awec wrote: »
    On Saturday before our first try Gilroy ran down the wing and when he got near the touchline he threw the ball back in field. We lost possession at this point.

    Frankie said something in the commentary that the Welsh player (Jones I think) just threw his hands at the ball with no intention to catch it and that it could have been a penalty to us?

    Is this illegal? Do you have to intend to always catch the ball if you go for it? E.g. You can't swing an arm at the ball to push it into touch to intercept a pass?

    A deliberate knock-on is a penalty; though obviously there's a massive grey area over what's a deliberate attempt to catch the ball and what's knocking the ball on deliberately. Generally if you knock the ball downwards you're in trouble, and if you go for it one-handed you're at risk of being pinged.

    Also, in the above case, even deliberately knocking it backwards into touch (so not a knock-on) would be a penalty.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1512
    davidpfitz
    Registered Users Posts: 247 ✭✭davidpfitz


    who_me wrote: »
    A deliberate knock-on is a penalty; though obviously there's a massive grey area over what's a deliberate attempt to catch the ball and what's knocking the ball on deliberately. Generally if you knock the ball downwards you're in trouble, and if you go for it one-handed you're at risk of being pinged.

    Also, in the above case, even deliberately knocking it backwards into touch (so not a knock-on) would be a penalty.

    Tommy Bowe found that one out the hard way against New Zealand. Knocked the ball out backwards near his line - penalty try and yellow card given.


  • Options
    #1513
    daveharnett
    Registered Users Posts: 2,567 ✭✭✭daveharnett


    tolosenc wrote: »
    1. Did he actually play himself off side?
    2. Isn't there something about not being allowed to kick the ball with you heel unless you're the hooker at a scrum?

    1. No. I can see a couple of lines of reasoning that might lead one to wonder about it, but no.

    2. Kicking with the heel isn't strictly a 'kick' in law (it won't work for restarts/free kicks/kicks at goal/penalties, all of which have to be 'proper' kicks) but in open play the distinction doesn't matter.


  • Options
    #1514
    daveharnett
    Registered Users Posts: 2,567 ✭✭✭daveharnett


    Treadhead wrote: »
    Can someone clarify the rules on stamping for me? Fair enough on the ref not seeing Sexton getting a boot in the face, but I'm sure I saw a lot of kicks and stamps going into players on the floor in front of him.
    A certain amount of "collateral damage" is accepted in a genuine attempt to free the ball, but stamping or raking a player with the boot is illegal, deliberate or otherwise.

    Poite's approach on Saturday was more permissive than most international refs, which to my mind allowed the game to heat up unnecessarily. To my mind a penalty on the first instance could have prevented a whole lot of niggle and bad temper throughout the rest of the game.


  • Options
    #1515
    pickarooney
    Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 35,196 Mod ✭✭✭✭pickarooney


    What exactly is the procedure for deciding who wears what colours when there's a clash? I can't make any sense of Italy's change to blue shorts today against Scotland.


  • Options
    #1516
    castie
    Hosted Moderators Posts: 3,807 ✭✭✭castie


    pickarooney wrote: »
    What exactly is the procedure for deciding who wears what colours when there's a clash? I can't make any sense of Italy's change to blue shorts today against Scotland.

    Home team has priority


  • Options
    #1517
    locum-motion
    Registered Users Posts: 5,143 ✭✭✭locum-motion


    castie wrote: »
    Home team has priority

    Actually, in international rugby, it's usually the exact opposite; usually the home team changes if there's a clash. Hence Ireland have recently worn both white and black jerseys when playing South Africa (green) in Lansdowne Road.


  • Options
    #1518
    castie
    Hosted Moderators Posts: 3,807 ✭✭✭castie


    locum-motion wrote: »
    Actually, in international rugby, it's usually the exact opposite; usually the home team changes if there's a clash. Hence Ireland have recently worn both white and black jerseys when playing South Africa (green) in Lansdowne Road.

    I thought the white against SA was a special event of some sort?

    Italy wear white when they play away to Scot or Fra though?


  • Options
    #1519
    pickarooney
    Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 35,196 Mod ✭✭✭✭pickarooney


    castie wrote: »

    I thought the white against SA was a special event of some sort?

    Italy wear white when they play away to Scot or Fra though?
    So did Italy decide to wear blue shorts and tell Scotland to do the same? It seems a very amateur approach to something so basically important


  • Options
    #1520
    castie
    Hosted Moderators Posts: 3,807 ✭✭✭castie


    pickarooney wrote: »
    So did Italy decide to wear blue shorts and tell Scotland to do the same? It seems a very amateur approach to something so basically important

    Id like to check 2 years ago and see what was worn.
    Could be a simple problem of their white kit has blue shorts now and ref didnt like it.

    Would not think it was done on purpose.


  • Options
    #1521
    castie
    Hosted Moderators Posts: 3,807 ✭✭✭castie


    castie wrote: »
    Italy wear white when they play away to Scot or Fra though?

    Googled some match clips.
    I'm 100% wrong here.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1522
    pickarooney
    Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 35,196 Mod ✭✭✭✭pickarooney


    castie wrote: »

    Id like to check 2 years ago and see what was worn.
    ould be a simple problem of their white kit has blue shorts now and ref didnt like it.

    Would not think it was done on purpose.
    I don't it was myself but it's amazing to think there's no simple ruling out basic communication given that a clash off some kind us inevitable between these teams each year.


  • Options
    #1523
    castie
    Hosted Moderators Posts: 3,807 ✭✭✭castie


    pickarooney wrote: »
    I don't it was myself but it's amazing to think there's no simple ruling out basic communication given that a clash off some kind us inevitable between these teams each year.

    Have a look at the youtube clips from 2011 and see if theres a difference between that and the kits they tried to start with.

    Might just have been the ref!
    I havent seen any of this years game.


  • Options
    #1524
    locum-motion
    Registered Users Posts: 5,143 ✭✭✭locum-motion


    castie wrote: »
    I thought the white against SA was a special event of some sort?...

    Actually no. If I remember correctly, when it was a special occasion (the first match in the new Lansdowne Road stadium), Ireland wore green. Because it was a historic occasion, the usual etiquette wasn't observed.


  • Options
    #1525
    tolosenc
    Registered Users Posts: 6,889 ✭✭✭tolosenc


    Bit of a contrived scenario, but anyway:

    If a kicker was taking a conversion from right out by the touch line, and at the moment of striking the ball, his plant foot was in contact with the touch line, would the conversion count (presuming it went between the posts and above the bar)?


  • Options
    #1526
    .ak
    Registered Users Posts: 30,308 Mod ✭✭✭✭.ak


    tolosenc wrote: »
    Bit of a contrived scenario, but anyway:

    If a kicker was taking a conversion from right out by the touch line, and at the moment of striking the ball, his plant foot was in contact with the touch line, would the conversion count (presuming it went between the posts and above the bar)?

    Don't a lot of kickers take their kicks from outside the touch line? I don't think the touchline comes into it when taking conversions. Could be wrong, but I thought Halfpenny took one outside the touchline on Saturday?


  • Options
    #1527
    Theta
    Registered Users Posts: 1,760 ✭✭✭Theta


    tolosenc wrote: »
    Bit of a contrived scenario, but anyway:

    If a kicker was taking a conversion from right out by the touch line, and at the moment of striking the ball, his plant foot was in contact with the touch line, would the conversion count (presuming it went between the posts and above the bar)?

    The ball isn't in play when a conversion is been taken so it doesn't count. The ball remains in play from a penalty but not conversions.


  • Options
    #1528
    locum-motion
    Registered Users Posts: 5,143 ✭✭✭locum-motion


    .ak wrote: »
    Don't a lot of kickers take their kicks from outside the touch line? I don't think the touchline comes into it when taking conversions. Could be wrong, but I thought Halfpenny took one outside the touchline on Saturday?

    Why would any kicker take a kick from outside the touchline? A conversion can't be, because it has to be taken in line with where the try was scored and a try can't be scored outside the touch-in-goal line. Also, a penalty can't be awarded off the pitch either.


  • Options
    #1529
    .ak
    Registered Users Posts: 30,308 Mod ✭✭✭✭.ak


    locum-motion wrote: »
    Why would any kicker take a kick from outside the touchline? A conversion can't be, because it has to be taken in line with where the try was scored and a try can't be scored outside the touch-in-goal line. Also, a penalty can't be awarded off the pitch either.

    I'm talking about where the kicker stands, not the ball. The OP asked if a player could step out of touch when taking a conversion; and they regularly do, that's the point I was making.


  • Options
    #1530
    Losty Dublin
    Registered Users Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭Losty Dublin


    locum-motion wrote: »
    Why would any kicker take a kick from outside the touchline? A conversion can't be, because it has to be taken in line with where the try was scored and a try can't be scored outside the touch-in-goal line. Also, a penalty can't be awarded off the pitch either.

    The law regarding touch and being out of play applies only to players who are carrying the ball. A player may have a foot in touch and is entitled to kick (or hit) a ball in the field of play so the result of the scenario mentioned by tolosenc is to play on as normal.

    A penalty may be awarded outside of the pitch. Remember, substitutes are under the referees control, as is anybody within the playing enclosure so the referee is entitled to apply game law to them if required.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1531
    .ak
    Registered Users Posts: 30,308 Mod ✭✭✭✭.ak


    Losty Dublin wrote: »

    A penalty may be awarded outside of the pitch. Remember, substitutes are under the referees control, as is anybody within the playing enclosure so the referee is entitled to apply game law to them if required.

    That's interesting one. Last time I remember somebody getting penalized off the pitch was in a HEC game last season, a player in the sin bin chucked the ball out of play and Rolland issued a red card and sent him off.

    Where was the penalty for that awarded?


Advertisement