locum-motion wrote: » So I was right. 22.13 does NOT apply!
Shelflife wrote: » Well if I'm the ref my "understanding of the law" is the only thing that matters. 6 A 4 a The referee is the sole judge of fact and of law during a match. To back up my earlier "understanding" 12.1.(c) Knock-on or throw forward into the in-goal. If an attacking player knocks-on or throws-forward in the field of play and the ball goes into the opponents’ in-goal and it is made dead there, a scrum is awarded where the knock-on or throw forward happened.
Shelflife wrote: » 12.1.(c) Knock-on or throw forward into the in-goal. If an attacking player knocks-on or throws-forward in the field of play and the ball goes into the opponents’ in-goal and it is made dead there, a scrum is awarded where the knock-on or throw forward happened.
redmca2 wrote: » I am going to refine my original query: Previously:"an attacker knocked the ball on close to the try line, the ball crossed the line and was touched down by a defender. The ref awarded a 5 metre scrum to the defending team, but why did he not award a 22 drop out?" New question: An attacker knocked the ball on close to the try line, the ball crossed the line and then went dead. What is the ref's ruling now?? Same as if an attacker kicked the ball dead? 22 drop out?
LeinsterDub wrote: » Posted this in the Munster v Scarlets thread but no one commented. Maybe will have more luck here Nigel gave a penalty against a Munster player for diving on the ball on the ground as it was "coming out of the ruck, you can't do that". Now my understanding of the situation is that the ball was either in the ruck in which case it wasn't playable or it had left the ruck in which case it was playable. I've never heard of a third state of the ball 'coming out'
.ak wrote: » Didn't see it myself, but AFAIK once the ball pops out of the controlled area of the ruck you can do whatever you want with it.
19543261 wrote: » But when the ref says ball playable after rucking, I've never seen a player dive on it. Then he would just be forming another ruck. No matter where the ball is, it must be still part of the rucking phase.
Losty Dublin wrote: » If you can give the time of when this happened then we can have a look at it. A a general point you cannot play the ball on the ground and you cannot stop a ball from leaving a ruck; maybe this is what Owens the Ref saw happen.
LeinsterDub wrote: » "A ruck is formed when at least one player from each side bind onto each other with the ball on the ground between them" So there is no ruck
LeinsterDub wrote: » Kicked missed at 31 according to the ultimate rugby app. If you're on TG4.ie it's part 3 at 36 minutes , 28 minutes according to the on screen clock
chupacabra wrote: » haha no, but the prospect of such a thing is quite hilarious :pac:
Ardillaun wrote: » Two things about the lineout: 1. Why don't non-hookers do the odd throw? You could have a flanker etc. with a brilliant throw. 2. The linesman or other official should carry a tape to show where the two teams have to stand and where the hooker has to stand. Ideally, it could be linked to TV technology to ensure correct spacing and throwing. Sometimes, I see a hooker throwing straight, but over his own team because he has lined up almost with them.
awec wrote: » #1 is just a process of elimination. Hooker is the only one left. Too small usually to jump. The least useful of the forwards to be on the pitch during a lineout. For #2 - the gap always closes a bit whenever the players start to move.
Shelflife wrote: » 16.4.e A player must not fall on or over the ball as it is coming out of a ruck . Sanction pen kick Its to stop constant pile ups at the ruck area.
crisco10 wrote: » Clancy pinged Tom Denton for this in the Connacht game and I was very confused. Thanks for clearing it up!
sydthebeat wrote: » The big difference though between Clancy and Owens was Owens did not call ball out, Clancy did. And owens specifically referred to the law above when he gave the penalty. Clancy just pinged for diving in.
.ak wrote: » True, but the call was still technically correct, even if he didn't explain it properly. One of those 50/50 ones you won't lose sleep over. It's a tough one though as players won't be overly familiar with it. Once you hear the ref say out you generally just fall on the ball.
Ardillaun wrote: » That makes sense alright but what options does a team have when a hooker's throws go off completely? We've seen this with Ireland. Imagine if one of the forwards was a good basketball player and had a real flair for it? It's more the positioning of the thrower that occasionally annoys me. Shouldn't they be equidistant between the lines, and at least 0.5 m from their own?
Captain_Hindsight wrote: » this doesn't necessarily fit this thread but not sure if worthy of its own. The "Yes nine" call is being ditched immediately in favour of a pre agreed signal.http://www.planetrugby.com/story/0,25883,16024_9104571,00.html
who_me wrote: » Interesting! What's the reason behind that? Is it to stop front-rows treating the "Yes nine!" call as a starter's pistol to start shoving? Presumably if you're in the front row you won't be able to see the signal.
