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!

Alan_007_

Just wondering.If the ball is on the ground and you kick it over do you get the 3 points or is it play on?

Find more posts tagged with

rugby

conversion

charge

kick

chargedown

Quick Links

Comments

castie

tolosenc wrote: »

So, not obliged to stay on my feet, as if diving on a loose ball, but just have to come through the gate?

As soon as you make contact with them its a ruck so if the ball is loose on the ground you can dive.

If theres someone between you and it so youll have to go through him then youll form a ruck in the process.

rje66

castie wrote: »

As soon as you make contact with them its a ruck so if the ball is loose on the ground you can dive.

.

be careful there as Law 16.4 e states , players must not fall on or over the ball as it is coming out of a ruck.

I know its a greyish area. Is coming out of a ruck , it rolled 3inches past foot OR it squirted out at speed and stopped rolling 1 metre away.

Laws want players in close proximity to rucks to stay on their feet.

pigeonbutler

Came across this one flicking through laws.

(j) When a tackled player reaches out to ground the ball on or over the goal line to score a try, an opponent may pull the ball from the player’s possession, but must not kick or attempt to kick the ball.

Sanction: Penalty Kick

In what circumstances could this NOT be a penalty try?

Surely in nearly all cases it's going to be a deliberate infringement, hence foul play and surely prevents a probably try, hence penalty try?

Podge_irl

pigeonbutler wrote: »

Surely in nearly all cases it's going to be a deliberate infringement, hence foul play and surely prevents a probably try, hence penalty try?

Probably, but they're not going to make the sanction a penalty try in the laws, they'll leave it up to the ref.

Its also a law that gets broken repeatedly yet goes unsanctioned.

locum-motion

Podge_irl wrote: »

...Its also a law that gets broken repeatedly yet goes unsanctioned.

Really? I don't think I've ever seen someone attempt to kick the ball out of the hands of a tackled player who is trying to place it over the line. I've seen players trying to dive in or slide in knees first to try to prevent the grounding, but not a kick or attempted kick.

Podge_irl

locum-motion wrote: »

Really? I don't think I've ever seen someone attempt to kick the ball out of the hands of a tackled player who is trying to place it over the line. I've seen players trying to dive in or slide in knees first to try to prevent the grounding, but not a kick or attempted kick.

I've definitely seen sweepers running across the kicking the ball as someone else grounds it. At least I think I have....maybe I'm just losing my mind.

locum-motion

Podge_irl wrote: »

I've definitely seen sweepers running across the kicking the ball as someone else grounds it. At least I think I have....maybe I'm just losing my mind.

Ah, but the law in question specifically refers to a tackled player trying to place the ball across the line, not any other form of grounding.
As I said, I don't think I've ever seen anyone attempting to kick the ball in that situation.

castie

rje66 wrote: »

be careful there as Law 16.4 e states , players must not fall on or over the ball as it is coming out of a ruck.

I know its a greyish area. Is coming out of a ruck , it rolled 3inches past foot OR it squirted out at speed and stopped rolling 1 metre away.

Laws want players in close proximity to rucks to stay on their feet.

It wasnt a ruck yet though until he is in physical contact with them.

Raises a funny point though.

If your standing just in front of the ball and a player of smaller height can reach in under your legs to get the ball without touching you it seems legal.

daveharnett

tolosenc wrote: »

So, [after a tackle] not obliged to stay on my feet, as if diving on a loose ball, but just have to come through the gate?

Nice idea, but no

15.6 OTHER PLAYERS
(a) After a tackle, all other players must be on their feet when they play the ball. Players are on their feet if no other part of their body is supported by the ground or players on the ground.
Sanction: Penalty kick

(e) Any player who gains possession of the ball at the tackle must play the ball immediately by moving away or passing or kicking the ball.
Sanction: Penalty kick

(f) Any player who first gains possession of the ball must not go to the ground at the tackle or near to it unless tackled by an opposition player.
Sanction: Penalty kick

Even if you didn't try to play the ball, I don't think a ref would take kindly to you sealing it off. As you can see from the extracts above, the motivation of the law is to keep players on their feet and give the ball every chance of getting away.

link

daveharnett

pigeonbutler wrote: »

Came across this one flicking through laws.

(j) When a tackled player reaches out to ground the ball on or over the goal line to score a try, an opponent may pull the ball from the player’s possession, but must not kick or attempt to kick the ball.

Sanction: Penalty Kick

In what circumstances could this NOT be a penalty try?

Surely in nearly all cases it's going to be a deliberate infringement, hence foul play and surely prevents a probably try, hence penalty try?

I've had it happen once. In the event, I gave a yellow card (it was dangerous) but not a PT.
The attacker had been grounded, and was just starting to stretch (so the ball was maybe 1.5-2 feet from the line. There were 3/4 tacklers hanging off him, climbing over him, dragging on his arms and so on, to the point where you couldn't say that a try was probable but for the foul play.

I could also imagine a scenario where a non-offending defender has planted himself on the line to prevent grounding, and a second defender kicks at the ball looking to prevent the subsequent 5m scrum. Again, no PT.

daveharnett

castie wrote: »

If your standing just in front of the ball and a player of smaller height can reach in under your legs to get the ball without touching you it seems legal.

Seems legit. Since there's no ruck, I suppose the smaller player isn't obliged to bind when he arrives at the gate, and is entitled to play the ball. I imagine the bigger player might have other ideas mind!

castie

If in a game I tell a SH or someone else to use the ball. (Whether it is a scrum/ruck)
If he does not use it its a scrum to the opposite team in my book.
Its not something I have a law quote to back up though.

Have seen Poite do the opposite this evening.

Thoughts?

Shelflife

castie wrote: »

If in a game I tell a SH or someone else to use the ball. (Whether it is a scrum/ruck)
If he does not use it its a scrum to the opposite team in my book.
Its not something I have a law quote to back up though.

Have seen Poite do the opposite this evening.

Thoughts?

There's no obligation on a team to play the ball at a scrum or a ruck.
The ref telling them to use it is wrong!

castie

Shelflife wrote: »

There's no obligation on a team to play the ball at a scrum or a ruck.
The ref telling them to use it is wrong!

Every International ref does it...

Shelflife

castie wrote: »

Shelflife wrote: »

There's no obligation on a team to play the ball at a scrum or a ruck.
The ref telling them to use it is wrong!

Every International ref does it...

I know, it does my head in .

It's just their way of trying to get the ball moving and out if the scrum esp if the scrums are messy.
If the ball is not played its either a reset or the ref should penalise one of the teams.

At ruck time the ball is live and if a team wanted they could leave the ball there as long as they want.

CIARAN_BOYLE

Is it legal to pull on an opposition players scrum cap so that it comes down and covers their eyes during a ruck?

I saw it a couple of times in Ulster Edinburgh yesterday and complained to a friend sitting next to me but he said that it wasn't at all illegal. I reckoned that there was no law about it but I thought it would be covered by poor sportsmanship.

castie

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

Is it legal to pull on an opposition players scrum cap so that it comes down and covers their eyes during a ruck?

I saw it a couple of times in Ulster Edinburgh yesterday and complained to a friend sitting next to me but he said that it wasn't at all illegal. I reckoned that there was no law about it but I thought it would be covered by poor sportsmanship.

Pulling at a scrum cap I would put at the same level as pulling someones hair.
Tackling someone by the hair is illegal and so will be by the scrum cap.

daveharnett

castie wrote: »

If in a game I tell a SH or someone else to use the ball. (Whether it is a scrum/ruck)
If he does not use it its a scrum to the opposite team in my book.
Its not something I have a law quote to back up though.

Have seen Poite do the opposite this evening.

Thoughts?

Since the ref has no mandate to dictate when the ball should emerge from a scrum/ruck/maul (unless we're talking about extreme time-wasting), the only time he should advise a team to "use it" is when it is good advice - he is about to award against them unless the ball moves. This could apply when a maul has stopped progressing, or a scrum is rotating toward 90 degrees.

It certainly shouldn't be happening when the front of a scrum has gone down (or up) and he ought to be stopping for safety.

I was surprised at the unenforced 'use it' from Poite yesterday. He is, for all his limitations, better than most at the scrum, and attempting to bluff a scrumhalf is never a good idea.

daveharnett

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

I saw it a couple of times in Ulster Edinburgh yesterday and complained to a friend sitting next to me but he said that it wasn't at all illegal. I reckoned that there was no law about it but I thought it would be covered by poor sportsmanship.

Definitely. It's the kind of niggle that got overlooked in both semis over the weekend.

Shelflife

I would look at interference with the scrum cap as foul play, and any player pulling a scrum cap off i would be looking at a min of a yellow.

Imo rippling a scrum cap off is very dangerous, tipping it down over his eyes is just acting the boll ix and i would penalise it as well.

Another thing that bugs me is this clapping an opponent on the back when they give away a pen, all it does is antagonise people. Id be having a word and then reversing a pen if it continued.

castie

Shelflife wrote: »

I would look at interference with the scrum cap as foul play, and any player pulling a scrum cap off i would be looking at a min of a yellow.

Imo rippling a scrum cap off is very dangerous, tipping it down over his eyes is just acting the boll ix and i would penalise it as well.

Another thing that bugs me is this clapping an opponent on the back when they give away a pen, all it does is antagonise people. Id be having a word and then reversing a pen if it continued.

To be fair alot of times you see people ending up in head locks when being tackled. (BOD gave one)

Its just as easy to rip the scrumcap off by the player trying to get out of a tight position than the tackler trying to rip it off on purpose.

Agree if someone gets tackled by the scrumcap then its a penalty and should be treated exactly like pulling on someones hair.

Captain_Generic

Was playing football yesterday and to my surprise calling for the ball when the opposition has it is a bookable offence. Is it the same in rugby? Pretty sure I do it all the time when tracking back

castie

Captain_Generic wrote: »

Was playing football yesterday and to my surprise calling for the ball when the opposition has it is a bookable offence. Is it the same in rugby? Pretty sure I do it all the time when tracking back

Unsportsman like conduct I believe would cover this.

daniels.ducks

Captain_Generic wrote: »

Was playing football yesterday and to my surprise calling for the ball when the opposition has it is a bookable offence. Is it the same in rugby? Pretty sure I do it all the time when tracking back

Football as in GAA or football as in soccer?

awec

daniels.ducks wrote: »

Football as in GAA or football as in soccer?

It's against the rules in soccer.

daveharnett

Captain_Generic wrote: »

Was playing football yesterday and to my surprise calling for the ball when the opposition has it is a bookable offence. Is it the same in rugby?

It's not mentioned in law, which is not to say that a ref couldn't penalize it if he didn't like it, as per castie.

castie wrote: »

Unsportsman like conduct I believe would cover this.

sydthebeat

i cant find any minimum dimension anywhere... i have read the official law here which is fine but does anyone know of (unwritten or otherwise) minimum dimensions of a pitch??

surely its not allowed that the 22 can also be the 10 meter line

im trying to design in an extra pitch onto a clubs ground... im playing with a 60 x 90 pitch currently

rje66

pitch 60m wide no prob.

pitch 90m long = 45m from half way to try line, 10m+22m= 32m accounted for,
so space between 10m and 22m is 13m, no problem there.
BUT.......

if your 90m has to include dead ball area then allow appox 3m for it, thus area between 22m and 10m is 10m no prob

also rem. you will need a strip along both touch lines of at least 3m for subs/spectators.

cym's pitch in terenure is tight for space and there dosent seem to be any probs. there

sydthebeat

thanks rje66

i hadnt included a dead ball area in that 90 m, i actually had allowed 10 m but looking at that now it may be too generous.... possibly 5 is ok?

the spectators areas work ok...

whats the breaking point?
is less than 10 m between the 10 and the 22 not acceptable?

locum-motion

sydthebeat wrote: »

i cant find any minimum dimension anywhere... i have read the official law here which is fine but does anyone know of (unwritten or otherwise) minimum dimensions of a pitch??

surely its not allowed that the 22 can also be the 10 meter line

im trying to design in an extra pitch onto a clubs ground... im playing with a 60 x 90 pitch currently

1.2 REQUIRED DIMENSIONS FOR THE PLAYING
ENCLOSURE
(a) Dimensions. The field of play does not exceed 100 metres in
length and 70 metres in width. Each in-goal does not exceed 22
metres in length and 70 metres in width.
(b) The length and breadth of the playing area are to be as near as
possible to the dimensions indicated. All the areas are rectangular.
(c) The distance from the goal line to the dead ball line should be not
less than 10 metres where practicable.

(The emphasis in the above quote from the Laws is mine)

I would suggest that 5m would be the smallest 'practicable' depth of the in-goal area. What level of rugby is to be played on this pitch? While you might get away with 90x60m for juvenile rugby, as an adult I wouldn't have liked to play on such a small pitch.

Some years ago, England were putting together a proposal to host the RWC (the 2007 one, I think), and they were planning a 16-team main competition with a second parallel competition for 2nd/3rd tier nations*. Their plan was to use soccer grounds to host this competition. One of the reasons the bid failed, IIRC, was that the playing enclosures in most English soccer grounds are only ~100m long, and it was deemed that this was too short.

* I think the idea for this stemmed from the Rugby League World Cup in 1995, which had both a main World Cup and also what they called the 'Emerging Nations World Cup' (Ireland were beaten in the final of this competition by the Cook Islands, if anyone's interested)