Losty Dublin wrote: » I wonder if you were watching the same game that I was yesterday as the referee penalised a few time for the offence of Squeezeball. Certainly it’s a phrase that I’ve not heard used in maybe a decade now. The word cropped up in and around 1998. New Zealand teams used to coach players to go to ground face first or even to position themselves that way after a tackle and crounch over the ball to defend at a ruck. Once there you could lay on the ball and either kill a turnover from defenders who couldn’t get at it legally, or you could push the ball out down your torso and under your legs, hence it being called a squeeze ball.
sydthebeat wrote: » its my understanding all levels below J1 use these (below) u19s rules ie no squeeze ball, 1 m push on scrums etc. so its possible the captain was playing at a level below J1https://rugbyready.worldrugby.org/?section=74&tab=tab-4
Quin_Dub wrote: » You might be right - Definitely a penalty offence at underage , not sure though it carries through to Junior grades at Adult though..
prawnsambo wrote: » Well it's also a good turnover opportunity for the opposition. If you get over the player and grab them around the arms or arm, you prevent the ball going back and are also very difficult to shift. You see it happen quite regularly, so it's not an ideal method of recycling the ball any more.
Captain_Crash wrote: » Thanks for the answers, as an aging back this is my first season playing below J1 (J3) so that must be it. Although still haven't seen it pinged this season. I did hear someone after the game saying he was being assessed so maybe being more "by the book" than normal.
sydthebeat wrote: » to be honest, its good practise to discourage squeeze ball at lower amateur levels on safety grounds.
Captain_Crash wrote: » Played a game yesterday and the ref was giving penalties every time a tackled player placed the ball back between their legs (squeezing he called it), I've never in my life seen anyone pinged for it either professional or amateur. Was he making up his own laws with this?
NUTLEY BOY wrote: » Does a referee's jurisdiction extend beyond the immediate boundaries of the marked playing area ? I am thinking of the situation where spectators keep encroaching on the playing area or are even attempting to engage in conduct that might interfere with or impede players on the pitch. Can a referee direct non players to leave the immediate precincts outside of the marked playing area for any reason ?
pickarooney wrote: » Like laying an egg? This is penalisable for player safety in the veterans' matches I (used to) play in in France. Big danger of neck damage, apparently.
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?
NUTLEY BOY wrote: » Does a referee's jurisdiction extend beyond the immediate boundaries of the marked playing area? I am thinking of the situation where spectators keep encroaching on the playing area or are even attempting to engage in conduct that might interfere with or impede players on the pitch. Can a referee direct non players to leave the immediate precincts outside of the marked playing area for any reason ?
ArmchairQB wrote: » Yeah he can stop the game until spectators coaches etc are back away from touch line
who_me wrote: » Wonder what people make of the decision in the Racing Toulon game at the weekend? (Neutral here, not a Scarlets fan whining!) Sorry, I don't have the player names, just saw the incident once. Racing player has the ball, tackled by Scarlets. A maul/tackle evolves (where it looks like the tackler is holding up the ball-carrier). Referee shouts "release" and the Scarlets players do so. The Racing player regains his balance without going to ground and runs on, resulting in a try to Racing. This - to me - is surely a mistake by the referee. If the player is deemed to be on the ground - by virtue of his knee etc. being in contact with the ground - then the tackle is complete, and he must release the ball. Even if - in this case - he never at any stage is lying on the ground. It seems to be a recurring problem - if the tackler releases quickly, the tackled player gets away with getting back up; if they don't they're penalised for holding on too long.
The Lost Sheep wrote: » would need to see clip. so it was a choke tackle and ref called release as ball carrier got a knee/knees to ground and therefore not maul? If he wasnt held on ground and ref deemed it fine then play on? Dont necessarily see this as a problem but do you have a clip or at least idea of time in game it happened?
who_me wrote: » Video contained here (might want to turn sound down before watching, music is loud). Edit - I should add this is in the phase before the try is scored; but it is the crucial line-break that sets it up.
Iompair wrote: » I see what he's saying the 6 has his knees on the ground and isn't held. He then rolls/spins away and gets back to his feet. Couldn't hear if the ref called release indicating a complete tackle.
who_me wrote: » Someone suggests above that the ref might just have used the wrong word; but I'm not sure that's the case. As defences try the choke tackle more, refs seem to be quicker to call release if the player is only being held up off the ground by the tackler. Once the call is made, surely the tackled player has to release the ball too. It's not Schroedinger's tackle... it's complete or it isn't! :P
