Laws Question? Ask here!

Shelflife · 16-12-2013 12:14AM

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.

locum-motion · 16-12-2013 12:43AM

So I was right. 22.13 does NOT apply!

Shelflife · 16-12-2013 12:50AM

locum-motion wrote: »

So I was right. 22.13 does NOT apply!

Yes go you !!!

Maybe next time you could actually help answer the question rather than snottily pick holes in the answers of those that are trying to help.

locum-motion · 16-12-2013 08:32AM

Maybe next time you could cite the right law!

Losty Dublin · 16-12-2013 12:10PM

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.

In normal play, grounding the ball "in goal" renders the ball dead. Making a ball dead isn't advantage, as you have said; it needs to be alive for advantage to exist

redmca2 · 17-12-2013 05:08PM

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.

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?

Losty Dublin · 17-12-2013 05:51PM

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?

Law 12 covers the knock on eventuality and 22.7 the kick eventuality.

http://www.irblaws.com/index.php?law=12.1

The IRB's definition here is crucial so let us consider what they say that makes a ball "Dead".

http://www.irblaws.com/index.php?domain=2#let8

The ball is out of play. This happens when the ball has gone outside the playing area and remained there, or when the referee has blown the whistle to indicate a stoppage in play, or when a conversion kick has been taken.

LeinsterDub · 23-12-2013 10:25AM

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 · 23-12-2013 10:38AM

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'

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.

23-12-2013 11:10AM

.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.

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 · 23-12-2013 11:23AM

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'

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 · 23-12-2013 11:30AM

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.

"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 · 23-12-2013 11:41AM

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.

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

Shelflife · 23-12-2013 12:05PM

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.

23-12-2013 12:16PM

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

Sorry, by forming another ruck I meant it will become one, not it's one itself.

Losty Dublin · 23-12-2013 12:26PM

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

Just watched it on the player and it's just as Owens called it; the Munster player was pinged for being on the ground and playing the ball.

Ardillaun · 06-01-2014 12:33AM

chupacabra wrote: »

haha no, but the prospect of such a thing is quite hilarious :pac:

So what would happen next by the rules if you did? Should we try this next time we have a lead against the All Blacks?

Ardillaun · 06-01-2014 12:45AM

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.

Losty Dublin · 06-01-2014 12:59AM

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.

1) They occasionally do but these days it's a given duty for a hooker to throw into the line out. In aulden days, the wingers threw the ball in.

2) It's the referees job to ensure that the line out takes places correctly on or behind the line of touch. Generally a mark is made to show there touch is but it's not always the case that this happens. At a line out, a gap of 1 metre is the minimum required; unless you are close up then it may look like less has been given by each team.

awec · 06-01-2014 01:07AM

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.

#1 is just a process of elimination.

At times you want to move quickly off your lineout so you don't want to have a back throwing the ball in as they will need to run the ball.

Second row are generally tall so they'll jump.

Props will lift as they are too heavy to be lifted, plus they're strong enough to lift.

Back row will lift too, sometimes they may jump but they'll be there to provide support around the area of the lineout.

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.

Ardillaun · 06-01-2014 03:22AM

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.

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?

sydthebeat · 06-01-2014 09:26AM

Sean o Brien has thrown for Ireland

crisco10 · 06-01-2014 10:47AM

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.

Clancy pinged Tom Denton for this in the Connacht game and I was very confused. Thanks for clearing it up!

sydthebeat · 06-01-2014 11:39AM

crisco10 wrote: »

Clancy pinged Tom Denton for this in the Connacht game and I was very confused. Thanks for clearing it up!

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 · 06-01-2014 11:41AM

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.

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.

sydthebeat · 06-01-2014 11:48AM

.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.

Agreed,

I suppose that shows the difference between a good ref and a great one.

If the communication is concise like Owens then we don't have the exasperation like we had on match thread.

awec · 06-01-2014 11:57AM

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?

There's no law to prevent anyone else doing it, though I would say throwing a dart in rugby is different to any basketball throw.

Also think about it in terms of the players available. You will always have 1 hooker on the pitch and 1 hooker on the bench. If you were training other players to throw you are going to have to ensure that your bench has at least 1 person who can throw a dart.

Like what happens if your throwers are your hooker and your replacement flanker? When your hooker goes off you will be forced to bring that flanker on at the same time.

Taco Corp · 06-01-2014 07:53PM

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 · 06-01-2014 07:57PM

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

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.

Taco Corp · 06-01-2014 08:04PM

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.

I'd imagine that's it. but more so it removes the advantage from the defending scrum who know that the ball is on the way in and can take advantage of the balling having to be hooked (although not all side bother with that)

Laws Question? Ask here!

Comments