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…969799101102…115

Comments

  • Options
    #2942
    Losty Dublin
    Registered Users Posts: 13,010 ✭✭✭✭Losty Dublin


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    there is another alternative... most the posts back to the dead ball line

    Once upon a time the goal line was the limit of the playing area, there being no defined "In Goal" at either end. Do you really think that is wise?


  • Options
    #2943
    randomname2005
    Registered Users Posts: 1,932 ✭✭✭randomname2005


    pickarooney wrote: »
    I'm missing something here...
    What's the issue with a y shaped post whose base is a metre back in the in goal area and whose crossbar is parallel with the try line?

    There's no more base of the post malarkey, the size of in goal is irrelevant and for kicking there's no change.

    More potential interference with the ball coming down from a kick?


  • Options
    #2944
    The Lost Sheep
    Registered Users Posts: 14,967 ✭✭✭✭The Lost Sheep


    World Rugby have introduced a new law with immediate effect:

    9.19
    In open play, any player may lift or support a player from the same team. Players must lower the player to the ground safely as soon as the ball is won by a player of either team.

    Sanction: FK


  • Options
    #2945
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,105 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    The Lost Sheep wrote: »
    World Rugby have introduced a new law with immediate effect:

    9.19
    In open play, any player may lift or support a player from the same team. Players must lower the player to the ground safely as soon as the ball is won by a player of either team.

    Sanction: FK

    Sanction for what , dropping your own player on their head?

    Have you not always been able to do this or was it limited to kick-offs and lineouts?


  • Options
    #2946
    The Lost Sheep
    Registered Users Posts: 14,967 ✭✭✭✭The Lost Sheep


    Quin_Dub wrote: »
    Sanction for what , dropping your own player on their head?

    Have you not always been able to do this or was it limited to kick-offs and lineouts?
    Its essentially that teams who lift their own player must return the lifted player straight away and cant leave the player in the air in order to ‘create’ a potential collision with any on coming players


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2947
    randomname2005
    Registered Users Posts: 1,932 ✭✭✭randomname2005


    Didn't see anything related to the tmo trial in November.
    Try decision is an on field decision but all 4 can contribute.

    I wonder if this is to get around the question that the ref asks being important.

    No on the run chats with the tmo, now ref will have to ask.

    Hopefully the three on the fields are paying attention.
    Taken from the42, through Google news so no link, sorry.


  • Options
    #2948
    MaybeMaybe
    Registered Users Posts: 1,297 ✭✭✭MaybeMaybe


    http://www.the42.ie/world-rugby-tmo-reivision-closed-trial-november-tests-4266965-Oct2018/


  • Options
    #2949
    armchaircoach
    Registered Users Posts: 479 ✭✭armchaircoach


    The ‘on the run’ chat between the match officials and TMO for foul play will be removed

    This part in particular is massively at odds with player welfare. As long as the ref is faceing the other way you can have a cheap shot at a player.

    Expect to see plenty of late charges on Johnny during the November tests


  • Options
    #2950
    The Lost Sheep
    Registered Users Posts: 14,967 ✭✭✭✭The Lost Sheep


    armchaircoach wrote: »
    The ‘on the run’ chat between the match officials and TMO for foul play will be removed

    This part in particular is massively at odds with player welfare. As long as the ref is faceing the other way you can have a cheap shot at a player.

    Expect to see plenty of late charges on Johnny during the November tests
    No it doesnt. It doesnt mean you can have a cheap shot as assistant refs can still make calls to the ref and flag potential red and yellow cards/penalties


  • Options
    #2951
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,118 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    Surely the captain can still request a review as well?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2952
    randomname2005
    Registered Users Posts: 1,932 ✭✭✭randomname2005


    Read something interesting regarding the harlequins try, the ref was checking to see if the ball had crossed the line. I didn't think that mattered. Learn something new everyday


  • Options
    #2953
    MaybeMaybe
    Registered Users Posts: 1,297 ✭✭✭MaybeMaybe


    randomname2005 wrote: »
    Read something interesting regarding the harlequins try, the ref was checking to see if the ball had crossed the line. I didn't think that mattered. Learn something new everyday

    didn't matter in 2011 during the Leinster v Toulouse when the ball bounced in the in goal area. what's the law that says it matters now?


  • Options
    #2954
    randomname2005
    Registered Users Posts: 1,932 ✭✭✭randomname2005


    MaybeMaybe wrote: »
    didn't matter in 2011 during the Leinster v Toulouse when the ball bounced in the in goal area. what's the law that says it matters now?

    The ref says something along the lines of "the ball hasn't crossed the line but I want to make sure they were all onside". Maybe he means over the bar rather than anywhere along the try line. (Originally read it on https://www.rte.ie/sport/rugby/2018/1007/1001498-quins-joe-marchant-scores-remarkable-try-in-defeat/ )


  • Options
    #2955
    Losty Dublin
    Registered Users Posts: 13,010 ✭✭✭✭Losty Dublin


    randomname2005 wrote: »
    The ref says something along the lines of "the ball hasn't crossed the line but I want to make sure they were all onside". Maybe he means over the bar rather than anywhere along the try line. (Originally read it on https://www.rte.ie/sport/rugby/2018/1007/1001498-quins-joe-marchant-scores-remarkable-try-in-defeat/ )

    By Law you can't choose to place kick and not not have a genuine go for goal. However there's no set offence for not having a go. Offside is an easy one to catch chasers out with if you want something. Fair play to the referee here; he knew it was an unusual one to make a call on but he got it spot on with a correct use of technology.
    MaybeMaybe wrote:
    didn't matter in 2011 during the Leinster v Toulouse when the ball bounced in the in goal area. what's the law that says it matters now?

    No offside law to worry about In Goal.


  • Options
    #2956
    randomname2005
    Registered Users Posts: 1,932 ✭✭✭randomname2005


    Losty Dublin wrote: »
    By Law you can't choose to place kick and not not have a genuine go for goal. However there's no set offence for not having a go. Offside is an easy one to catch chasers out with if you want something. Fair play to the referee here; he knew it was an unusual one to make a call on but he got it spot on with a correct use of technology.



    No offside law to worry about In Goal.

    I don't think that there was any question of it not being a genuine attempt, as the ref says something along the lines of it being held up by the wind, but then goes on to talk about it crossing the line (from my memory at least).


  • Options
    #2957
    pickarooney
    Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 35,194 Mod ✭✭✭✭pickarooney


    Reffed my first training game today and there was one incident where I awarded a try despite some protestations. Player was tackled short of the line and touched the ball down just short of the line. He then pushed/rolled the ball into the line without moving his body or losing control of the ball.

    Is this a legitimate repositioning of the ball, a double movement, a knock on or something else?


  • Options
    #2958
    prawnsambo
    Registered Users Posts: 13,267 ✭✭✭✭prawnsambo


    pickarooney wrote: »
    Reffed my first training game today and there was one incident where I awarded a try despite some protestations. Player was tackled short of the line and touched the ball down just short of the line. He then pushed/rolled the ball into the line without moving his body or losing control of the ball.

    Is this a legitimate repositioning of the ball, a double movement, a knock on or something else?
    That's fine. Double movement isn't actually a rugby union law. The actual law is releasing the ball in the tackle. Since there's always time allowed for a tackled player to place the ball, a try scored in the way you describe is fine.


  • Options
    #2959
    Losty Dublin
    Registered Users Posts: 13,010 ✭✭✭✭Losty Dublin


    prawnsambo wrote: »
    That's fine. Double movement isn't actually a rugby union law. The actual law is releasing the ball in the tackle. Since there's always time allowed for a tackled player to place the ball, a try scored in the way you describe is fine.

    Law 8 actually allows for both momentum and a reach out and ground if you are short of the line, but it only defines grounding the ball and thus offers no sanction. After that tackle/ruck laws comes into play as appropriate and offer us sanction :)
    pickarooney wrote:
    Reffed my first training game today.

    I knew you'd come good some day, son :)


  • Options
    #2960
    Shelflife
    Registered Users Posts: 3,073 ✭✭✭Shelflife


    Welcome to the dark side pickarooney !


  • Options
    #2961
    The Lost Sheep
    Registered Users Posts: 14,967 ✭✭✭✭The Lost Sheep


    pickarooney wrote: »
    Reffed my first training game today and there was one incident where I awarded a try despite some protestations. Player was tackled short of the line and touched the ball down just short of the line. He then pushed/rolled the ball into the line without moving his body or losing control of the ball.

    Is this a legitimate repositioning of the ball, a double movement, a knock on or something else?
    Thats fine. Completely legal. Not a knock on as no loss of control of ball and not double movement.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2962
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,118 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    Theres been lots of querying and questioning over the last few weeks as to what the directive is regarding the high tackle... especially in the wake of all the red cards we've seen lately....

    so heres a recap:
    Statement from World Rugby

    World Rugby has further strengthened its commitment to injury prevention by announcing details of a zero-tolerance approach to reckless and accidental head contact in the sport. While injuries in the game are not on the rise, the federation continues to be proactive in furthering evidence-based strategies to reduce injury risk for all players.

    In a change to law, World Rugby has redefined illegal (high) tackle categories and increased sanctions to deter high tackles via a law application guideline. This will apply at all levels of the game from 3 January 2017 introducing minimum on-field sanctions for reckless and accidental contact with the head, effectively lowering the acceptable height of the tackle. The guideline will be supported with a global education programme.

    The approach, approved by the World Rugby Council after extensive expert, independent and union evaluation, combines with new disciplinary sanctions and a re-focus of match officials on dangerous play. It will provide a package of measures that aims to change culture in the sport to ensure that the head is a no-go area.

    From 3 January, two new categories of dangerous tackles will carry penalty offences to deter and eradicate high tackles:

    Reckless tackle
    A player is deemed to have made reckless contact during a tackle or attempted tackle or during other phases of the game if in making contact, the player knew or should have known that there was a risk of making contact with the head of an opponent, but did so anyway. This sanction applies even if the tackle starts below the line of the shoulders. This type of contact also applies to grabbing and rolling or twisting around the head/neck area even if the contact starts below the line of the shoulders.
    Minimum sanction: Yellow card
    Maximum sanction: Red card

    Accidental tackle
    When making contact with another player during a tackle or attempted tackle or during other phases of the game, if a player makes accidental contact with an opponent’s head, either directly or where the contact starts below the line of the shoulders, the player may still be sanctioned. This includes situations where the ball-carrier slips into the tackle.
    Minimum sanction: Penalty

    Please note Disciplinary Panels have been alerted to the revised World Rugby Regulation 17 sanctions (PDF attached to this email). Specific changes to Law 10.4(e) Dangerous tackling of an opponent has been highlighted below.

    10.4(e) Dangerous tackling of an Opponent including: (i) a tackle or attempted tackle above the line of the shoulders even if the tackle starts below the line of the shoulders; (ii) grabbing and rolling/twisting around the head/neck area even if the contact starts below the line of the shoulders. LE – 2 weeks
    MR – 6 weeks
    TE – 10+ weeks
    (A dangerous tackle which results in a strike to the head shall result in at least a mid-end entry point sanction 52 weeks)

    Link to educational video from World Rugby: http://www.worldrugby.org/video/213346


  • Options
    #2963
    errlloyd
    Registered Users Posts: 12,601 ✭✭✭✭errlloyd


    Does world rugby have site anywhere that has a list of changes to laws and interpretations they've brought in through the professional era?

    Watching Podcasts like Squides and the Molecast it is interesting to hear how entire teams have their gameplans become obsolete because of small law changes, so I wanted to go further into it.


  • Options
    #2964
    Losty Dublin
    Registered Users Posts: 13,010 ✭✭✭✭Losty Dublin


    errlloyd wrote: »
    Does world rugby have site anywhere that has a list of changes to laws and interpretations they've brought in through the professional era?

    Watching Podcasts like Squides and the Molecast it is interesting to hear how entire teams have their gameplans become obsolete because of small law changes, so I wanted to go further into it.

    For interpretations you can have a look here.

    https://laws.worldrugby.org/?domain=9

    Or here

    https://laws.worldrugby.org/?domain=10

    No idea about getting hold of older laws or lists of amendments per se, though you could probably look up old press releases if you have a day to google same.


  • Options
    #2965
    The Lost Sheep
    Registered Users Posts: 14,967 ✭✭✭✭The Lost Sheep


    Match official focus areas as agreed and calibrated in advance of the upcoming tests following a meeting between coaches and refs this week.

    Scrum: The match officials are looking for infringements including pre-engagement, pushing early, crooked feeds, non-hooking and wheeling
    Lineout: The match officials are looking for infringements including closing, stepping or running into the gap before the ball is thrown in
    Space: Match officials are looking for infringements that close space, including from kick-offs and kicks and at the tackle/ruck and maul
    Penalty tries: A penalty try will be awarded if an act of foul play prevents a probable try
    Foul play: Match officials will be vigilant for ball carriers who lead into contact with the elbow or forearm to the neck or head, no arms tackles (Law 9.16), high tackles (Law 9.13), neck rolls and ruck-charging


  • Options
    #2966
    KBurke85
    Registered Users Posts: 1,100 ✭✭✭KBurke85


    The Lost Sheep wrote: »
    Match official focus areas as agreed and calibrated in advance of the upcoming tests following a meeting between coaches and refs this week.

    Scrum: The match officials are looking for infringements including pre-engagement, pushing early, crooked feeds, non-hooking and wheeling
    Lineout: The match officials are looking for infringements including closing, stepping or running into the gap before the ball is thrown in
    Space: Match officials are looking for infringements that close space, including from kick-offs and kicks and at the tackle/ruck and maul
    Penalty tries: A penalty try will be awarded if an act of foul play prevents a probable try
    Foul play: Match officials will be vigilant for ball carriers who lead into contact with the elbow or forearm to the neck or head, no arms tackles (Law 9.16), high tackles (Law 9.13), neck rolls and ruck-charging

    So what you're saying is refs are going to apply the laws of the game


  • Options
    #2967
    Steve
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 22,584 CMod ✭✭✭✭Steve


    For the benefit of Jump_In_Jack and others:

    When you post something and then instantly delete it, the mods can still see it, forum rules still apply and it is still actionable.

    Happy new year all :)


  • Options
    #2968
    Bazzo
    Registered Users Posts: 7,047 ✭✭✭Bazzo


    Is it just me or has the reffing around the attacking team flying in off their feet at the breakdown and also entering from the side become quite lax?


  • Options
    #2969
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,118 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    Bazzo wrote: »
    Is it just me or has the reffing around the attacking team flying in off their feet at the breakdown and also entering from the side become quite lax?

    "in off their feet" is never illegal, once your rucking someone......

    Sealing off is illegal as it prevents the contest... Which s doesn't happen that often and is called pretty quickly by referees as its obvious.


  • Options
    #2970
    Bazzo
    Registered Users Posts: 7,047 ✭✭✭Bazzo


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    "in off their feet" is never illegal, once your rucking someone......

    Sealing off is illegal as it prevents the contest... Which s doesn't happen that often and is called pretty quickly by referees as its obvious.

    15.5 An arriving player must be on their feet and join from behind their offside line.

    I'm talking about players flying at a ruck and diving into it to prevent someone contesting the ball, I could be wrong but I'm fairly sure it's completely illegal, and I've seen it happening loads over the weekend and more and more over the past while.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2971
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,118 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    Bazzo wrote: »
    15.5 An arriving player must be on their feet and join from behind their offside line.

    I'm talking about players flying at a ruck and diving into it to prevent someone contesting the ball, I could be wrong but I'm fairly sure it's completely illegal, and I've seen it happening loads over the weekend and more and more over the past while.

    They have to be on their feet to arrive at the ruck.... They then ruck defenders and more often than not both players end up on the ground.

    If they dive in and prevent a contest by sealing it off then it's a penalty, but as I said I don't think it's a major issue, and is called when it's obvious


Advertisement