nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Laws Question? Ask here!

System

This discussion was created from comments split from: Ireland Team Talk XII: Farrell's First Fifteen.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

davidpfitz

RuggieBear wrote: »

Is that retreat 10m from the player towards your own line or could you move 10m laterally away from the player (but not moving towards your own line)? players appear to do and amalgamation of the two..

Towards your own line - so if you ran diagonally, you would need to cover more than 10 metres. Players try to bend the rules here by going a bit sideways and not quite 10m back.

karlitob

IPAM wrote: »

Thanks

I thought better to ask here than start a whole new thread for a simple
question that I would only expect 2-3 replies if even that

Its not better. Forums are for asking simple questions. Laws questions only please.

karlitob

defadman wrote: »

im confused with one rule! it is how come a ref will give a penalty when a team is pushing the other team back in the scrum or maul?

Do they give a penalty?

Scrum: if team A are being shoved off the ball, as the other poster rightly says, its usually an infringement. Popping up, breaking binds.

Maul: usually, this is because when team A are being pushed back, the maul collapses, the ball becomes unplayable and hasn't hit the deck. The team going forward when the ball has become unplayable gets the put in to the scrum.

Generally, advantage is given to the team going forward

castie

karlitob wrote: »

Do they give a penalty?

Scrum: if team A are being shoved off the ball, as the other poster rightly says, its usually an infringement. Popping up, breaking binds.

Maul: usually, this is because when team A are being pushed back, the maul collapses, the ball becomes unplayable and hasn't hit the deck. The team going forward when the ball has become unplayable gets the put in to the scrum.

Generally, advantage is given to the team going forward

For Mauls thats not true.
If its deemed a maul and it becomes unplayable.
Its a scrum to the defending side.

karlitob

castie wrote: »

For Mauls thats not true.
If its deemed a maul and it becomes unplayable.
Its a scrum to the defending side.

No, if Team A goes into a maul and it doesn't go to ground and therefore unplayable - it goes to Team B - Scrum.
Law 17.6 b and c.

If neither team is moving was moving forward, the attacking team puts in the ball. Therefore, advantage to the team moving forward.

daveharnett

remwhite wrote: »

Was playing a match the other week and one of our players was trying to catch a loose pass. The ball was dropping at his feet and he just managed to get a hand to it and flick it up. He gave it a fairly substantial flick and it went about 2 meters forward an over head height but he caught it. He was away and the ref blew it up and said "ya can't do that". Never touched anything but his hands, no opposition and not the turf. Didn't matter a whole lot but am I right in saying the ref was incorrect.

Law 12(e) Intentional knock or throw forward: A player must not intentionally knock the ball forward with hand or arm, nor throw forward.
Sanction: Penalty kick.

'Juggling' the ball forward in an attempt to regain control is against the letter of the law.

While most refs will be sympathetic and let it go, if you end up gaining a significant advantage (sounds like your man beat a player by 'flicking' the ball forward?), you no longer get the benefit of the doubt that you were 'just' trying to regain control.

Edit: As a matter of interest, was the outcome a scrum or pk?

daveharnett

RuggieBear wrote: »

posted it here
I understand officials make mistakes but this was such a simple one it is mind blowing how Peter Allan got it so wrong.

Absolutely amazing. Between the flag going up and the lineout forming, the AR has ONE duty - watching the 'live' ball to determine when the quick throw is/not on.

No blame for the ref here - he is coached to backpedal to the mark so he can watch for afters on the pitch, while the AR watches the ball. After the event, I don't think the TMO was an option - there was no question about what happened in-goal.

I'd be disgusted if I did this at an U16 match. The worst officiating error I've seen in professional rugby by some bargain.

Brian P

Explain this to me please. Why have we successfully won scrums in our last two games by holding up a player with the ball even though everybody seems to hit the deck eventually with our lads still holding on to the opposition player. Why were we continuously penalised in our earlier games for not releasing after the tackle in very similar situations (at least to my eyes).What am I missing?:)

castie

Brian P wrote: »

Explain this to me please. Why have we successfully won scrums in our last two games by holding up a player with the ball even though everybody seems to hit the deck eventually with our lads still holding on to the opposition player. Why were we continuously penalised in our earlier games for not releasing after the tackle in very similar situations (at least to my eyes).What am I missing?:)

The Ref has determined a maul has been formed and then the ball has become unplayable.

In this case its a scrum to the defending team.

Downtime

castie wrote: »

The Ref has determined a maul has been formed and then the ball has become unplayable.

In this case its a scrum to the defending team.

Not necessarily. The defending team may have brought it into the maul. it is a scrum to the team not it possession when the maul began.

castie

Downtime wrote: »

Not necessarily. The defending team may have brought it into the maul. it is a scrum to the team not it possession when the maul began.

Sorry should have clarified I meant the team defending the maul. (i.e not in possession)

Brian P

castie wrote: »

The Ref has determined a maul has been formed and then the ball has become unplayable.

In this case its a scrum to the defending team.

Thanks castie and Downtime.In your opinion were we fairly penalised for not releasing the player after the tackle in the earlier games?

castie

Brian P wrote: »

Thanks castie and Downtime.In your opinion were we fairly penalised for not releasing the player after the tackle in the earlier games?

The Maul situation doesnt actually have a tackler so I suppose it could only be hands on the deck but its usually the ball is buried and no one can get at it.

Previous games I think yes. You have to release the man before you play the ball with the new rules and at some points people looked shocked at the decision. I remember SOB doing it blatantly one game and seemed surprised he was penalised.

Hersheys

During a conversion if the kicker of team a takes too long, can team b come and pick up the ball and run? Or if they block it down what happens?

JustinDee

Hersheys wrote: »

During a conversion if the kicker of team a takes too long, can team b come and pick up the ball and run? Or if they block it down what happens?

They can only block it.

castie

JustinDee wrote: »

They can only block it.

I dont think thats quite right for the question he asked.

It doesnt matter how long they take you can only begin your run to block when the kicker starts his progression towards the ball.

If he takes longer than the regulation time then it just counts as a failed conversion.

JustinDee

castie wrote: »

I dont think thats quite right for the question he asked.

It doesnt matter how long they take you can only begin your run to block when the kicker starts his progression towards the ball.

If he takes longer than the regulation time then it just counts as a failed conversion.

If it has taken too long, the ref will have blown it up as so therefore the defenders will be running to block. If it has been pinged, ball is dead so its unlikely they'll be charging.

castie

JustinDee wrote: »

If it has taken too long, the ref will have blown it up as so therefore the defenders will be running to block. If it has been pinged, ball is dead so its unlikely they'll be charging.

Aye Ref would have blown it which was the original question.

Khan77

Referee pinged me twice last week for hands on the ball in a ruck situation. Opposing player had taken the ball into contact and been tackled by one of our team without going to ground and I had contested the ball and got my hands on it. Other players had then joined and a maul had then (IMO) formed although the ref never called it as such. Opposing player then tried to go to ground but I still had my hands on the ball approx 3 ft off the ground. Was the ref right?

castie

Khan77 wrote: »

Referee pinged me twice last week for hands on the ball in a ruck situation. Opposing player had taken the ball into contact and been tackled by one of our team without going to ground and I had contested the ball and got my hands on it. Other players had then joined and a maul had then (IMO) formed although the ref never called it as such. Opposing player then tried to go to ground but I still had my hands on the ball approx 3 ft off the ground. Was the ref right?

Did he get to ground?
If he gets to ground youve got to release him, hands on the ball or not.

karlitob

castie wrote: »

Did he get to ground?
If he gets to ground youve got to release him, hands on the ball or not.

It doesn't matter if the player gets to ground. It where the ball is that matters
A maul is when the ball is off the ground with two players from one team and one player from another team around it. The ref should have called this.
A ruck is when the ball hits the deck. When the player goes to ground (which can mean even his knees on the ground or his knees on a player on the ground deems the player on the ground) he should release the ball and roll away (as is incumbent on every player to do). At that stage, you would be left holding the ball.

Penalty against the player on the ground for not releasing.

karlitob

newby.204 wrote: »

I'll ask for some patience with this question.

now i understand the basics of the offside rules of rugby however i have a question about the offside rule from kicks.

When a player kicks the ball he has to chase to get everyone else onside? but sometimes say ROG kicks and someone else chases? both kicks are from play but two different chasers

if anything needs to be clarified about my question feel free to tear the post apart and ill happily answer

First rule of rugby - there are only laws!.

Not only the kicker but whoever is behind him can put everyone else onside by running forward. However, everyone ahead of the kicker must also make an effort to get themselves onside and not simply wait to be put onside.

karlitob

Hersheys wrote: »

During a conversion if the kicker of team a takes too long, can team b come and pick up the ball and run? Or if they block it down what happens?

A kicker can only take a minute. I would see it as important to remind the referee of this. So I would charge out after the minute and kick the ball away and if the ref asks, explain the one minute law and shrug our shoulders and say sorry. You'll keep the ref honest and get to put the kicker off too. The worst that will happen is that the kick will be taken again.

You can't do anything else but block down a conversion - play resumes in a kick off always.

karlitob

castie wrote: »

Aye Ref would have blown it which was the original question.

It may have been the first question, but there were two other questions/comments. The poster was obviously of the opinion that you could play on after a conversion - he was corrected.

Anthonyk2010

Question about the laws if the ruck. In tonights match between munster v Leinster boss reached in the middle of the ruck and pulled the ball out.

Munster had the ball going into contact the red called ruck, then boss pull it out.

Is it illegal to do this or not?

CIARAN_BOYLE

Anthonyk2010 wrote: »

Question about the laws if the ruck. In tonights match between munster v Leinster boss reached in the middle of the ruck and pulled the ball out.

Munster had the ball going into contact the red called ruck, then boss pull it out.

Is it illegal to do this or not?

dis he go through the gate?

Anthonyk2010

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

dis he go through the gate?

Ya he did. But I still think he can't go in to the middle of the ruck like that, he should shoe the ball out some part of the way. May be I'm wrong.

karlitob

Anthonyk2010 wrote: »

Question about the laws if the ruck. In tonights match between munster v Leinster boss reached in the middle of the ruck and pulled the ball out.

Munster had the ball going into contact the red called ruck, then boss pull it out.

Is it illegal to do this or not?

Players in the ruck can't put their hands on the ball. A ruck is when two players from opposing teams are over the ball which is on the ground. In the Isaac Boss case, the players had all fallen away from the ruck and where lying on the ground - they are out of the game, they may as well be imaginary in the eyes of the law. Boss, on his feet, onside and since no ruck was formed as no players were over the ball, he was able to reach in and pick up the ball. Open play - the ball may as well have spilled out of the ruck in that instance.

Anthonyk2010

karlitob wrote: »

Players in the ruck can't put their hands on the ball. A ruck is when two players from opposing teams are over the ball which is on the ground. In the Isaac Boss case, the players had all fallen away from the ruck and where lying on the ground - they are out of the game, they may as well be imaginary in the eyes of the law. Boss, on his feet, onside and since no ruck was formed as no players were over the ball, he was able to reach in and pick up the ball. Open play - the ball may as well have spilled out of the ruck in that instance.

You can clearly hear the ref say "ruck release it red", my point is can he reach that far in to the ruck and pick the ball out. Should he shoe it first to bring It out more, did the ref give boss the advantage because they turned it over in contact ?

The more I look at it I believe it was a good turn over for Leinster, but I'm just wondering about that law.

karlitob

Anthonyk2010 wrote: »

You can clearly hear the ref say "ruck release it red", my point is can he reach that far in to the ruck and pick the ball out. Should he shoe it first to bring It out more, did the ref give boss the advantage because they turned it over in contact ?

The more I look at it I believe it was a good turn over for Leinster, but I'm just wondering about that law.

I know what your point was - He also told Donnacha O Callaghan after that play that the ruck was over and ball was playable. If theres no ruck, then open play then go in and fetch it out. And since he did reach in, then obviously he can reach in. Players in the ruck cannot put hands on the ruck but players outside the ruck can reach in and get the ball if its availabke. Boss was not part of the ruck before it did not become a ruck because all the ruck players fell on the ground.

They didnt turn it over in contact, the players fell onto the ground - ruck over. Ball in open play.

Also, you cant just 'shoe' in a ruck,. You have to drive/ruck over the ball. If scrum halves do stick their foot in its because they dont want to knock it on and want to pull it out into a better position to grab it..