Laws Question? Ask here!

castie · 16-10-2012 04:11AM

Players have a right to try to get under the ball.

Note there is no rule preventing someone stopping the grounding by getting a foot under the ball.
So if the attacking player goes to ground it and hits defender foot with ball popping free. All legal.

The other thing to think of here is what happens if the player dives head first instead of sliding?
Isn't this equally if not more dangerous?

Steve Perchance · 16-10-2012 09:03AM

castie wrote: »

Players have a right to try to get under the ball.

Note there is no rule preventing someone stopping the grounding by getting a foot under the ball.
So if the attacking player goes to ground it and hits defender foot with ball popping free. All legal.

The other thing to think of here is what happens if the player dives head first instead of sliding?
Isn't this equally if not more dangerous?

Theres not a rule against preventing the grounding by getting a foot under the ball, but as had been said, there is one against kicking the ball out of the players hands. To not get pinged for kicking the ball away, the defender's foot would need to be stationary - defeats the purpose of the lunge in that zebo does.

By sliding in headfirst, at least a player is looking to play the ball/player with their hands. But theres no excuse for reckless play that can cause serious injury, whether thats through a studs up sliding tackle that'd get you sent off in soccer, or a late flop on a player a la courtney lawes.

jacothelad · 16-10-2012 09:57AM

Steve Perchance wrote: »

Theres not a rule against preventing the grounding by getting a foot under the ball, but as had been said, there is one against kicking the ball out of the players hands. To not get pinged for kicking the ball away, the defender's foot would need to be stationary - defeats the purpose of the lunge in that zebo does.

By sliding in headfirst, at least a player is looking to play the ball/player with their hands. But theres no excuse for reckless play that can cause serious injury, whether thats through a studs up sliding tackle that'd get you sent off in soccer, or a late flop on a player a la courtney lawes.

Nick De Luca has been doing it for years and his intent is clearly not about stopping a try being scored. His 'hits' are well after the touchdown. Mind you playing for Embra he gets lots of practice.

Gamayun · 17-10-2012 04:17PM

Quick Question.

Can a prop switch to hooker during a game? (and vice versa)

So, say a team has a ridiculously dominant scrum, however both the starting and replacement hooker get injured. They do not want to go to uncontested scrums as they have such an advantage, can they bring on a replacement prop to fill in at hooker and contest the scrum?

They should all be registered as front row players, does the actual position count?

jacothelad · 17-10-2012 04:38PM

Gamayun wrote: »

Quick Question.

Can a prop switch to hooker during a game? (and vice versa)

So, say a team has a ridiculously dominant scrum, however both the starting and replacement hooker get injured. They do not want to go to uncontested scrums as they have such an advantage, can they bring on a replacement prop to fill in at hooker and contest the scrum?

They should all be registered as front row players, does the actual position count?

Yes.

17-10-2012 04:46PM

evidence: South Africa's Pocahantos hunter

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Smit

CIARAN_BOYLE · 17-10-2012 06:38PM

jacothelad wrote: »

Yes.

assuming that the referee is satisfied that the player has sufficiently high level experience in order to play at that position safely

LH/TH issue but same difference

Last year when Leinster played Ospreys and White and Hagan were both injured the referee asked if McGrath (the LH sub) has experience at TH before allowing him to come on and stop the game going to uncontested

Shelflife · 17-10-2012 09:29PM

Its not up to the ref to determine whether they are capable of performing safely in the front row.

The replacement props and hookers must be nominated on the team sheet, a player can be nominated as both a replacement prop and hooker if the coach deems him capable of providing cover.

If they are not listed as cover the ref should not allow contested scrums.

*only exception would be where the ref feels that a front row player is a danger to himself or others and can call for uncontested scrums on grounds of safety.

daveharnett · 18-10-2012 12:49AM

Gamayun wrote: »

They should all be registered as front row players, does the actual position count?

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

LH/TH issue but same difference

Last year when Leinster played Ospreys and White and Hagan were both injured the referee asked if McGrath (the LH sub) has experience at TH before allowing him to come on and stop the game going to uncontested

Generally the specialists will be marked on the teamsheet as (P) or (H). It's very rare to see a prop specifically marked as (LH)/(TH). Because of this, if the first two options in a specialist position have been injured, it makes sense to confirm that the replacement is suitably trained and experienced in the vacant position.

As to allowing a prop to play hooker, the default answer would have to be no. Common sense should prevail in all things, but the worst case scenario doesn't bear thinking about.

locum-motion · 18-10-2012 09:09AM

jacothelad wrote: »

Yes.

Is that a 'Yes' to "Can a player switch?" or to "Does the actual position count?"

Steve Perchance · 18-10-2012 10:18AM

locum-motion wrote: »

Is that a 'Yes' to "Can a player switch?" or to "Does the actual position count?"

Pretty sure its a yes if the player actually knows how to play both positions, no if they don't. If the referee at any time decides a player is not competent, they can order uncontested scrums, but hopefully players/teams have more sense than to let it get to that stage

locum-motion · 18-10-2012 11:40AM

Steve Perchance wrote: »

Pretty sure its a yes if the player actually knows how to play both positions, no if they don't. If the referee at any time decides a player is not competent, they can order uncontested scrums, but hopefully players/teams have more sense than to let it get to that stage

Thanks, but...

What I was getting at was this:

The post that was being answered (and which was quoted in the answer) contained 2 questions, which were essentially the opposite of each other. If Q1 is Yes, then Q2 is No, and vice versa.

The answerer left a single word answer "Yes".

I want that person to clarify what they meant.

Edit: Here's the post. I've highlighted the two questions in it.

Gamayun wrote: »

Quick Question.

Can a prop switch to hooker during a game? (and vice versa)

So, say a team has a ridiculously dominant scrum, however both the starting and replacement hooker get injured. They do not want to go to uncontested scrums as they have such an advantage, can they bring on a replacement prop to fill in at hooker and contest the scrum?

They should all be registered as front row players, does the actual position count?

Shelflife · 18-10-2012 11:48AM

If a player has been marked on the team sheet that they can provide cover as prop or hooker then they are allowed to play there.

So a starting prop can replace a hooker as long as he has been marked as a replacement hooker on the team sheet.

In the same way a backrow or winger can also be a replacement in the front row as long as they are clearly marked on the sheet prior to kick off.

Shelflife · 18-10-2012 12:53PM

Interesting senario.

Team A kick through, full back of team B collects but is immediatley under pressure from 3 of team A, he is on the 5m line.

Full back throws/passes the ball to/at the ref with the intention of hitting him.

Decision?

kensutz · 18-10-2012 01:21PM

If I spotted that it was intentional to get him out of trouble, penalty against him for unsportsman like conduct.

.ak · 18-10-2012 02:27PM

Yeh I've seen ref's pinging scrumhalves for doing it....

.ak · 18-10-2012 02:27PM

.... but if the ref didn't cop it, then it would be a 5m scrum, team B's ball.

Deano7788 · 18-10-2012 02:31PM

Would it not be similar to deliberately knocking/passing it into touch? I'd go for a penalty against.

Shelflife · 18-10-2012 02:39PM

Saw a clip in a SH match where the full back did it, he got away with it.

id be going pen and even a possible yellow card for deliberately killing the ball to deny a scoring opportunity if i thought he was pulling a fast one.

jacothelad · 18-10-2012 03:08PM

If he was free enough to make a pass he'd be free enough to kick the ball dead, out of play or................ :Dfull tilt into the ref:D. Knock him out, get a scrum and a breather for the team

daveharnett · 18-10-2012 04:25PM

Shelflife wrote: »

Interesting senario.

Team A kick through, full back of team B collects but is immediatley under pressure from 3 of team A, he is on the 5m line.

Full back throws/passes the ball to/at the ref with the intention of hitting him.

Decision?

A: The ref is fitter than all the players and needs promotion.
B: If the ball hits the ref;

consider penalty try
penalty advantage team A
consider a card once play stops

C: If the ball misses/ref avoids, play on and give a scolding at next stoppage.

As to chapter and verse, I reckon that "Acts contrary to good sportsmanship" would be the best fit?

Note that the law says that when the ball hits the ref and either team gain advantage, play must stop. If a player deliberately causes contact, I'd be inclined to allow advantage to the non-offending team. (No, that doesn't mean the ref should fire a pass out the wing

)
http://www.irblaws.com/EN/laws/2/6/57/before-the-match/match-officials/the-ball-touching-the-referee/

jacothelad wrote: »

If he was free enough to make a pass he'd be free enough to kick the ball dead, out of play or...

Happens more than you'd think that the fullback doesn't realise how much trouble he's in until he's being hauled down and a kick is off the cards. For more details, contact Conor Murray.

rje66 · 18-10-2012 06:02PM

"if a player deliberately causes contact, I'd be inclined to allow advantage to the non-offending team. "

Not good practice. If it says in the lotg that no advantage is to be played then thats what it means. We cant make it up as we go along.
Either pk or scrum. Fast whistle for both.

castie · 19-10-2012 01:22AM

Some people might think its harsh but i would put intentionally hitting the ref with the ball as the same as a push.

You push me you get Red.
If I am 100% you have nailed me on purpose with the ball you are getting an early shower...

tolosenc · 19-10-2012 09:35AM

castie wrote: »

Some people might think its harsh but i would put intentionally hitting the ref with the ball as the same as a push.

You push me you get Red.
If I am 100% you have nailed me on purpose with the ball you are getting an early shower...

Harsh? Yes.

Unfair? No.

Deano7788 · 21-10-2012 04:21PM

Does anyone know what set of laws will be used for the Autumn internationals? The Southern Hemisphere don't adopt the new trial laws until the new year and their new season so will it be the old or the new laws?

Shelflife · 22-10-2012 09:54AM

Sledging.

Do you allow it ? if so how far do you let it go ?

JustinDee · 22-10-2012 10:25AM

Deano7788 wrote: »

Does anyone know what set of laws will be used for the Autumn internationals? The Southern Hemisphere don't adopt the new trial laws until the new year and their new season so will it be the old or the new laws?

Just asked for you. Apparently is the new laws.

rje66 · 22-10-2012 12:47PM

Shelflife wrote: »

Sledging.

Do you allow it ? if so how far do you let it go ?

Usually happens in schools/youths.
Depends on content. Usually a word at first instance cuts it out but on second PK. Head patting a player who just gave away a pen comes under this too.
Dont like seeing it creep into the game.

f1dan · 22-10-2012 11:32PM

Shelflife wrote: »

Sledging.

Do you allow it ? if so how far do you let it go ?

Falls under unsportsmanlike conduct. Really a judgement call for the referee to make.

Jawgap · 25-10-2012 09:06AM

Shelflife wrote: »

Sledging.

Do you allow it ? if so how far do you let it go ?

No - if it's sledging, imo he player should be pulled on it because it's the type of thing that can escalate very quickly.

However, there's a fine line between banter, slagging and sledging - I'd say if a player is trying to get a laugh out of everyone (including me) it's banter - if he's trying to belittle someone, wind up an already wound up player etc, it's sledging - a reversed penalty or 10m can sort it out quite quickly!

Laws Question? Ask here!

Comments