Laws Question? Ask here!

f1dan · 28-12-2014 01:07AM

Max Headroom wrote: »

Humour me....:o....

Rugby match...Team A and team B
A player from A kicks the ball into team B half/sideline.. two players A and B run after the ball...
It bounces infield and goes over the line into touch.......Lineout to B..

Player B runs to collect the ball, picks it up and runs back to where the ball went dead..at this stage player A has run past the spot but is still infield..
Question...If player B throws the ball to player A and he catches (maybe a natural reaction) the ball...is he entitled to run and score a try if possible....or...is he off-side and as such gives away a penalty to the B team....

If i have read this correctly then it a try would be awarded. There is no offside line at a quick lineout.

Nathan White scored a try like this for Connacht against Zebre in Galway at the very start of last season.

f1dan · 28-12-2014 01:10AM

f1dan wrote: »

If i have read this correctly then it a try would be awarded. There is no offside line at a quick lineout.

Nathan White scored a try like this for Connacht against Zebre in Galway at the very start of last season.

See 37 seconds in

Max Headroom · 28-12-2014 10:57AM

f1dan wrote: »

If i have read this correctly then it a try would be awarded. There is no offside line at a quick lineout.

Nathan White scored a try like this for Connacht against Zebre in Galway at the very start of last season.

Sorted...tanx for clearing that up....:)

locum-motion · 28-12-2014 02:25PM

finatron wrote: »

It's rugby law's not rules

Actually, it's Laws, not law's or rules.

locum-motion · 28-12-2014 02:31PM

Are Player A and Player B both on the same team?
Or is one of them on Team A and one on Team B?
The OP's question is confusingly worded in this respect.

Note that in the Connacht/Zebre example shown, the Connacht player intercepted a quick throw in by Zebre. He didn't catch a quick throw in from his own side.

Quint2010 · 28-12-2014 02:33PM

My first reading is that yes the try should be awarded. Guess the clip posted there proves it.

LeinsterDub · 28-12-2014 02:42PM

Is player A outside the 5?

Max Headroom · 29-12-2014 01:40PM

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Is player A outside the 5?

Yes....but i dont get why the A player isnt ajudged offside.......thems the rules i guess..

sydthebeat · 29-12-2014 02:09PM

Max Headroom wrote: »

Yes....but i dont get why the A player isnt ajudged offside.......thems the rules i guess..

From my reading of law 19.2
There is no offside line from a quick throw in, but there is from a set line out.

LeinsterDub · 29-12-2014 02:55PM

sydthebeat wrote: »

From my reading of law 19.2
There is no offside line from a quick throw in, but there is from a set line out.

My understanding is the opposition player must be outside the 5 even if it's a quick line out. I know you must be outside the 5 to mark the line out.

sydthebeat · 29-12-2014 03:12PM

LeinsterDub wrote: »

My understanding is the opposition player must be outside the 5 even if it's a quick line out. I know you must be outside the 5 to mark the line out.

Ah yes, but that's not offside.

That's to stop a player blocking the thrower.

rje66 · 29-12-2014 10:16PM

[quote="LeinsterDub;93606265" to mark the line out.[/quote]

I'm curious about this piece, what does it mean or better still give an example.
Ta

LeinsterDub · 07-01-2015 02:20PM

rje66 wrote: »

I'm curious about this piece, what does it mean or better still give an example.
Ta

When the ball goes out a player will chase it up and run pass the mark where the line is to happen to prevent a quick line out . After the mark happens a line out proper must be formed

Shelflife · 07-01-2015 02:35PM

LeinsterDub wrote: »

When the ball goes out a player will chase it up and run pass the mark where the line is to happen to prevent a quick line out . After the mark happens a line out proper must be formed

That wont legally stop a quick lineout, nothing stopping a player taking a QTI even if there is a player there.

dub_skav · 07-01-2015 04:52PM

Shelflife wrote: »

That wont legally stop a quick lineout, nothing stopping a player taking a QTI even if there is a player there.

That is true. A lineout has to be "formed" to prevent a quick throw. I believe this used to be taken as 2(?) players from each side at the mark of the lineout, but has always been open to interpretation from the ref and differs wildly from ref to ref and situation to situation

The Lost Sheep · 07-01-2015 05:03PM

dub_skav wrote: »

That is true. A lineout has to be "formed" to prevent a quick throw. I believe this used to be taken as 2(?) players from each side at the mark of the lineout, but has always been open to interpretation from the ref and differs wildly from ref to ref and situation to situation

You need at least two from each team to form a lineout. You are correct on how it is interpretation from the referee and how it differs from ref to ref and situation to situation

14-02-2015 07:02PM

Are the project player laws changing? I missed the opening of the rte commentary today and a friend of mine said George Hook (not the greatest source of information I know) that they were changing next year.

Losty Dublin · 14-02-2015 07:03PM

connemara man wrote: »

Are the project player laws changing? I missed the opening of the rte commentary today and a friend of mine said George Hook (not the greatest source of information I know) that they were changing next year.

They aren't in the Law book, man. Maybe ask on the forum in another thread?

sydthebeat · 14-02-2015 08:15PM

To the refs

Please explain the vunipola try and the various different outcomes that could have been considered.

14-02-2015 08:56PM

sydthebeat wrote: »

To the refs

Please explain the vunipola try and the various different outcomes that could have been considered.

Great question. I have seen it too many times and still think that 9/10 referees don't give a try there.

The Lost Sheep · 14-02-2015 10:16PM

sydthebeat wrote: »

To the refs

Please explain the vunipola try and the various different outcomes that could have been considered.

Will do so tomorrow. Could you put up a link in this thread as havent seen the try.

jwwb · 15-02-2015 10:58AM

Watching a Pro12 match a few weeks ago the 10 went of for a blood injury (could have been a concussion assessment) and was replaced from the bench. An opportunity came up to take the kick and the ref would not allow the temp sub to take the kick until the substitution was final. Ref said "that's the rules". Commentary was that this was as a consequence of bloodgate. Think the full back ended up taking the kick.

Yesterday Madigan was on while Sexton was repaired and took and scored a penalty and then went off again. No mention of the above.

Have I completely mis-remembered?

jwwb · 15-02-2015 10:58AM

Watching a Pro12 match a few weeks ago the 10 went of for a blood injury (could have been a concussion assessment) and was replaced from the bench. An opportunity came up to take a kick and the ref would not allow the temp sub to take the kick until the substitution was final. Ref said "that's the rules". Commentary was that this was as a consequence of bloodgate. Think the full back ended up taking the kick.

Yesterday Madigan was on while Sexton was repaired and took and scored a penalty and then went off again. No mention of the above.

Have I completely mis-remembered?

DDC1990 · 15-02-2015 11:09AM

jwwb wrote: »

Watching a Pro12 match a few weeks ago the 10 went of for a blood injury (could have been a concussion assessment) and was replaced from the bench. An opportunity came up to take a kick and the ref would not allow the temp sub to take the kick until the substitution was final. Ref said "that's the rules". Commentary was that this was as a consequence of bloodgate. Think the full back ended up taking the kick.

Yesterday Madigan was on while Sexton was repaired and took and scored a penalty and then went off again. No mention of the above.

Have I completely mis-remembered?

Yup it was a Connacht game. Carthy came on for Nikora or possibly the other way around after getting kneed in the face in the act of scoring and had to go off for a concussion assessment. Leader ended up taking and slotting the kick.

Hagz mentioned yesterday that perhaps the difference was that Sexton in was off for a blood sub, and the other one was a concussion test. Much easier to prove a blood injury then a head injury.

I tweeted Nigel Owens about it but he hasn't tweeted me back :P

Edit: It was Munster Connacht and it was Ronaldson at 10. Dived over and got a belt to the face.

Losty Dublin · 15-02-2015 01:31PM

DDC1990 wrote: »

Yup it was a Connacht game. Carthy came on for Nikora or possibly the other way around after getting kneed in the face in the act of scoring and had to go off for a concussion assessment. Leader ended up taking and slotting the kick.

Hagz mentioned yesterday that perhaps the difference was that Sexton in was off for a blood sub, and the other one was a concussion test. Much easier to prove a blood injury then a head injury.

I tweeted Nigel Owens about it but he hasn't tweeted me back :P

Edit: It was Munster Connacht and it was Ronaldson at 10. Dived over and got a belt to the face.

This is correct. Law 3:10 covers blood replacements. A player covering a blood injury is allowed to kick for goal. There is a current Law Amendment trial in place regarding possible concussions whereby a player can be removed and replaced during a game. A replacement player coming on in the event of a head injury may not kick penalties or conversions. I gather that this limitation is to help prevent teams from trying to tactically exploit potential injuries in the game a la Bloodgate.

Edit; just to add something here. A blood sub only arises when a player is cut and needs the bleeding to be stopped.

mfceiling · 18-02-2015 11:08PM

This is something that we were talking about today....

A player is penalised for not rolling away at a ruck...ref takes out card, getting ready to show yellow for persistent offence.

When the ruck is cleared, it transpires that the player had been knocked out cold and therefore would have been unable to move. Player leaves on buggy.

What happens?

Scrum - attack ball.

Surely the penalty can't stand?

phog · 18-02-2015 11:11PM

mfceiling wrote: »

This is something that we were talking about today....

A player is penalised for not rolling away at a ruck...ref takes out card, getting ready to show yellow for persistent offence.

When the ruck is cleared, it transpires that the player had been knocked out cold and therefore would have been unable to move. Player leaves on buggy.

What happens?

Scrum - attack ball.

Surely the penalty can't stand?

Nigel Owens changed the penalty to a scrum for Munster when he realised Dom Ryan had been knocked out and couldn't roll away from the ruck. He explained his decision to both captains

The Lost Sheep · 18-02-2015 11:13PM

mfceiling wrote: »

This is something that we were talking about today....

A player is penalised for not rolling away at a ruck...ref takes out card, getting ready to show yellow for persistent offence.

When the ruck is cleared, it transpires that the player had been knocked out cold and therefore would have been unable to move. Player leaves on buggy.

What happens?

Scrum - attack ball.

Surely the penalty can't stand?

The penalty could stand but it would be harsh enough to keep it as a penalty and penalise player. Just blow up and call on a stretcher and call a scrum awarding to team last in possession/team going forward

18-02-2015 11:14PM

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Will do so tomorrow. Could you put up a link in this thread as havent seen the try.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTFhQsxjdwU

Anyone?

jacothelad · 18-02-2015 11:15PM

mfceiling wrote: »

This is something that we were talking about today....

A player is penalised for not rolling away at a ruck...ref takes out card, getting ready to show yellow for persistent offence.

When the ruck is cleared, it transpires that the player had been knocked out cold and therefore would have been unable to move. Player leaves on buggy.

What happens?

Scrum - attack ball.

Surely the penalty can't stand?

Barnes, Poite, Phillips, Lacey and Clancy turn the card from yellow to red for not rolling away and then time wasting and real referees restart the game with a scrum to the team last in possession.

Laws Question? Ask here!

Comments