Laws Question? Ask here!

Tigerandahalf

irishbucsfan wrote: »

No, what you're describing is actually illegal already, they just get away with it.

It's nothing to do with that. It's to make it easier for referees and players to tell where the offside line is.

What is illegal about it? I am trying to figure it out.

A player is tackled and goes to ground. Warburton comes in to snaffle the ball and has hands on it but not possession of it. A support player arrives and tries to clear out Warburton. A ruck has formed. If Warburton hasn't got possession the ref has to call either 'holding on' or 'hands in the ruck'.

I am trying to understand it fully myself. Once the tackled player goes to ground how long is he allowed to hold/touch the ball as often you will see the tackled player feed the ball back through the ruck to present it better.

MJohnston

I presume this is legal somehow?

https://twitter.com/Hurricanesrugby/status/888339063748546561?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.the42.ie%2Fbarrett-try-v-brumbies-3507675-Jul2017%2F

connemara man

It's not a knock on if it comes of a players head. He didn't intentionally head the ball

Quintis

MJohnston wrote: »

I presume this is legal somehow?

https://twitter.com/Hurricanesrugby/status/888339063748546561?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.the42.ie%2Fbarrett-try-v-brumbies-3507675-Jul2017%2F

Not illegal is probably a fairer way of saying it, a knock-on is hands or arms only...

Clearlier

Another player tackled in the air scenario:

I went along to watch my local club play at the weekend.  They're in national league 1 so not that high a level but decent enough.  There was a break made by a player from my local club - they got tackled near the line, a ruck was formed and the ball quickly moved out the blind side.  There was a clear gap to score a try after the first pass but the winger was a touch late starting his run and there was no way he was getting in so he did a Chris Ashton type swallow dive.  The covering defender kept going and tackled him into touch on or around the try line while his feet were off the ground.  

The referee yellow carded the tackler and gave a penalty for tackling the man in the air.  If he was going to give a penalty it should have been a penalty try but it felt like a pretty harsh card.  I'm not sure that you could accuse the attacker of jumping through a tackle as when he dived there was no one in front of him but I don't see what the defender could realistically have done to prevent the try.

Was the referee correct to penalise the defender and if so is there anything realistic that the defender could legally have done to prevent the try?

irishbucsfan

Clearlier wrote: »

Another player tackled in the air scenario:

I went along to watch my local club play at the weekend.  They're in national league 1 so not that high a level but decent enough.  There was a break made by a player from my local club - they got tackled near the line, a ruck was formed and the ball quickly moved out the blind side.  There was a clear gap to score a try after the first pass but the winger was a touch late starting his run and there was no way he was getting in so he did a Chris Ashton type swallow dive.  The covering defender kept going and tackled him into touch on or around the try line while his feet were off the ground.  

The referee yellow carded the tackler and gave a penalty for tackling the man in the air.  If he was going to give a penalty it should have been a penalty try but it felt like a pretty harsh card.  I'm not sure that you could accuse the attacker of jumping through a tackle as when he dived there was no one in front of him but I don't see what the defender could realistically have done to prevent the try.

Was the referee correct to penalise the defender and if so is there anything realistic that the defender could legally have done to prevent the try?

Nope. The law only protects players jumping for the ball. So it protects players receiving kicks/passes and also players receiving lineouts. If you are diving or any other situation where you're in control of the ball before leaving the ground it doesn't apply.

Quintis

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Nope. The law only protects players jumping for the ball. So it protects players receiving kicks/passes and also players receiving lineouts. If you are diving or any other situation where you're in control of the ball before leaving the ground it doesn't apply.

The attacking player could in theory have been penalized for jumping into a tackle?

Losty Dublin

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Nope. The law only protects players jumping for the ball. So it protects players receiving kicks/passes and also players receiving lineouts. If you are diving or any other situation where you're in control of the ball before leaving the ground it doesn't apply.

Respectfully but I must disagree with you here. Tackling a player who's feet are not on a ground is specifically covered under Law 10, which governs foul play. This includes all tackles and not just the super high ones that TV makes an example of. As regards the sanction, well it may have to be one of those "You had to be there" moments.

irishbucsfan

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Respectfully but I must disagree with you here. Tackling a player who's feet are not on a ground is specifically covered under Law 10, which governs foul play. This includes all tackles and not just the super high ones that TV makes an example of. As regards the sanction, well it may have to be one of those "You had to be there" moments.

Which law?

Interested Observer

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Respectfully but I must disagree with you here. Tackling a player who's feet are not on a ground is specifically covered under Law 10, which governs foul play. This includes all tackles and not just the super high ones that TV makes an example of. As regards the sanction, well it may have to be one of those "You had to be there" moments.

10.4i specifies players jumping for the ball.

Losty Dublin

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Which law?

10.4.E covers dangerous tackles and specifically mentions that tackling a player in possession of the ball and who's feet are off the ground incurs a penalty. Part I covers players who are jumping for line outs, receiving kicks or where the ball is in the air; it doesn't cover ball carriers so it isn't relevant in this case.

Shelflife

Losty Dublin wrote: »

10.4.E covers dangerous tackles and specifically mentions that tackling a player in possession of the ball and who's feet are off the ground incurs a penalty. Part I covers players who are jumping for line outs, receiving kicks or where the ball is in the air; it doesn't cover ball carriers so it isn't relevant in this case.

By that definition Losty any player who dives for the try line and gets any minute amount of airtime is unplayable without giving away a pen and YC .

Losty Dublin

Shelflife wrote: »

By that definition Losty any player who dives for the try line and gets any minute amount of airtime is unplayable without giving away a pen and YC .

What it says is what it says; don't tackle a man who is off the ground. If he is in the air then yes, he is unplayable. Let us remember that the tackleR has a duty to endure the tackleD player gets to the deck safely. It's hard to ensure a safe landing in such a circumstance so it needs to be covered and not left to chance.

There is no mention of a yellow card in the Lawbook here for such an offence but as it is foul play you can't expect no repercussions on the day..

irishbucsfan

Losty Dublin wrote: »

What it says is what it says; don't tackle a man who is off the ground. If he is in the air then yes, he is unplayable. Let us remember that the tackleR has a duty to endure the tackleD player gets to the deck safely. There is no mention of a yellow card in the Lawbook here for such an offence but as it is foul play you can't expect no repercussions on the day..

I'm sure you'd agree that in practice most refs aren't penalised teams for tackling a player who is diving for the try line.

Theres a bit of a grey area here.

Losty Dublin

See above edited post which crossed your post.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

I'm sure you'd agree that in practice most refs aren't penalised teams for tackling a player who is diving for the try line.

Theres a bit of a grey area here.

irishbucsfan

Losty Dublin wrote: »

See above edited post which crossed your post.

You do end up with a problem where players will just dive any time they are close to the line, at which point refs will have to ping them for that. Might be worth a clarification.

Shelflife

By definition then the ball carrier has jumped into the tackle or to avoid a tackle which is in itself a pen.

If a player swan dives ala Ashton and is tackled then its play on in my book, unless its clear and obvious then you are making life very difficult for yourself.

I really cant see a situation where I penalise a player for making a safe tackle on a player diving for the line.

Quin_Dub

Shelflife wrote: »

By definition then the ball carrier has jumped into the tackle or to avoid a tackle which is in itself a pen.

If a player swan dives ala Ashton and is tackled then its play on in my book, unless its clear and obvious then you are making life very difficult for yourself.

I really cant see a situation where I penalise a player for making a safe tackle on a player diving for the line.

I'd agree - Surely the only thing that comes into play here is that the tackled player is brought to ground safely..

If by tackling them in the air they go head over heels and come down on their head then that's probably a sanction but if they are just tackled and come to ground in a relatively normal/safe fashion then it's play on in my view.

Interested Observer

Shelflife wrote: »

By definition then the ball carrier has jumped into the tackle or to avoid a tackle which is in itself a pen.

I'm open to correction but I don't think this is written anywhere in the laws, it falls under a more general dangerous play/gamesmanship law.

It is a bit of a grey area. I think penalising someone for tackling a player diving for the line is crazy though.

Losty Dublin

irishbucsfan wrote: »

You do end up with a problem where players will just dive any time they are close to the line, at which point refs will have to ping them for that. Might be worth a clarification.

No need for any clarification as there isn't any wholesale confusion or law bending here and such a situation in a game is quite rare. Players are entitled to dive for the line to try and ground the ball. Players are not entitled to tackle a man who's off the ground.

Next thing you'll be claiming that the law is bias against backs

Jump_In_Jack

Apologies if this has already been asked and answered,
But,
If a foreign player is signed to a club, clears VISA requirements etc, and enters the country on 31st Dec 2017,
Will they be eligible to qualify for the country on 1st Jan 2021?

OR

Will the 5 year rule kick in and supersede the fact a player was just about qualified by the old rules.

Basically my question is, if a player is here for at least 3 years up to 31st Dec, are they qualified?

Is there a difference if a player is capped or not?

The Lost Sheep

Jump_In_Jack wrote: »

Apologies if this has already been asked and answered,
But,
If a foreign player is signed to a club, clears VISA requirements etc, and enters the country on 31st Dec 2017,
Will they be eligible to qualify for the country on 1st Jan 2021?

OR

Will the 5 year rule kick in and supersede the fact a player was just about qualified by the old rules.

Basically my question is, if a player is here for at least 3 years up to 31st Dec, are they qualified?

Is there a difference if a player is capped or not?

This isnt a laws question but its fairly clear The 36-month residency requirement is increased to 60 months with effect from 31 December, 2020 so if not qualified by that date you will have to have 60 months residency

Bazzo

Jump_In_Jack wrote: »

Apologies if this has already been asked and answered,
But,
If a foreign player is signed to a club, clears VISA requirements etc, and enters the country on 31st Dec 2017,
Will they be eligible to qualify for the country on 1st Jan 2021?

OR

Will the 5 year rule kick in and supersede the fact a player was just about qualified by the old rules.

Basically my question is, if a player is here for at least 3 years up to 31st Dec, are they qualified?

Is there a difference if a player is capped or not?

Any player who arrives in a country on or before 31 December will be qualified through residency in 3 years and will remain so regardless of whether they are capped as far as I know.

Jump_In_Jack

Bazzo wrote: »

Any player who arrives in a country on or before 31 December will be qualified through residency in 3 years and will remain so regardless of whether they are capped as far as I know.

Thank you, that's the part to which I was referring.

LeinsterDub

During the first half of the game today (Leinster v Ulster) when a short lineout was called a Leinster player stood in an odd position that looked neither in or out of the lineout. Why wasn't he offside? Within 2 metres in my working theory.

The Lost Sheep

LeinsterDub wrote: »

During the first half of the game today (Leinster v Ulster) when a short lineout was called a Leinster player stood in an odd position that looked neither in or out of the lineout. Why wasn't he offside? Within 2 metres in my working theory.

Pic? Time in game?

LeinsterDub

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Pic? Time in game?

I was at the game so I've nothing to work with. Maybe it wasn't noticeable on the tele. I'll check out the highlights and see if it can be seen.

sydthebeat

LeinsterDub wrote: »

During the first half of the game today (Leinster v Ulster) when a short lineout was called a Leinster player stood in an odd position that looked neither in or out of the lineout. Why wasn't he offside? Within 2 metres in my working theory.

On own ball it could have been a player in the scrum half position.

It doesn't always have to be the scrum half.

Losty Dublin

sydthebeat wrote: »

On own ball it could have been a player in the scrum half position.

It doesn't always have to be the scrum half.

Not having seen the game live (I was working and driving and radio dependent.) but it could also be players in the line out moving position, which obviously necessitates them leaving the line out for a moment or two.

That said, we had better wait for a report back from OP when he knows better of the time that it happened. Until then it's a mere surmise of non fact, a horror for the law book to define

AbusesToilets

Owens gets far too much love, he is shockingly bad at reffing the breakdown. Absolute free for alls are a typical facet of games he is in charge of. The fact he hasn't a word of French in his head is pretty damning too imo, as an elite ref he should be required to have a basic ability to communicate with the players.