Laws Question? Ask here!

AbusesToilets · 27-09-2015 05:54PM

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

It will vary on the situation and its hard to define exactly when it is sealing off

It does seem very open to the refs interpretation alright.

wp_rathead · 01-10-2015 10:28PM

wp_rathead wrote: »

Rather silly question but just to satisfy my own curiosity, is there anything to stop a player from opposing team going over and easedropping on forwards huddle when they deciding what to do at a lineout

Guessing it comes under:
Law 10.4
(m) Acts contrary to good sportsmanship.
A player must not do anything that is against the spirit of good sportsmanship in the playing enclosure.
Sanction: Penalty kick
Or
(n) Misconduct while the ball is out of play.
A player, must not, while the ball is out of play, commit any misconduct, or obstruct or in any way interfere with an opponent.
Sanction: Penalty kick

Cudmore tried this today vs France

sydthebeat · 03-10-2015 05:27PM

I think its been mentioned a few places already, but has the law against "jumping the tackle" gone or become too lax.
i knows theres no specific mention of it in the laws, but it was always considered an act of dangerous or unfair play when i grew up.

is it against law 10.2 (a) ??

a japanese player today was knocked out by a samoan who jumped into his attempted tackle.
Now the japanese player had his head on the wrong side, and that to blame for the outcome, but i was surprised the ref didnt at least warn the samoan. We've all seen jonny mays hurdling attempts recently, and i remember shane williams was prone to the odd ballet act too.... so im wondering

has the act become an allowable act?

The Lost Sheep · 03-10-2015 05:56PM

sydthebeat wrote: »

I think its been mentioned a few places already, but has the law against "jumping the tackle" gone or become too lax.
i knows theres no specific mention of it in the laws, but it was always considered an act of dangerous or unfair play when i grew up.

is it against law 10.2 (a) ??

a japanese player today was knocked out by a samoan who jumped into his attempted tackle.
Now the japanese player had his head on the wrong side, and that to blame for the outcome, but i was surprised the ref didnt at least warn the samoan. We've all seen jonny mays hurdling attempts recently, and i remember shane williams was prone to the odd ballet act too.... so im wondering

has the act become an allowable act?

Perhaps its gone a bit lax but at same time I penalised 2 players for doing it in my game this morning.... Dangerous play/intentional offending

daveharnett · 05-10-2015 11:11AM

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Question in relation to rucks. At what point does a clear out become sealing off? Many times you see an attacking drive through with a good clear out and end up with players on the deck, essentially sealing, which isn't called. Yet at other rucks you'll see a player clear out past the ball and fall on the deck to be called up for sealing. Is there any law that states the difference or is it simply ref discretion?

Off-feet (usually) only gets penalised when it prevents a fair contest for the ball.

If the "clearing out" player drives his opponents so far back that he decisively "wins" the contest of the ruck, then he'll be forgiven for losing his feet as his opponents fall away.

All that being said, standards have clearly slipped (or consciously been lowered) over the last week.

Losty Dublin · 20-10-2015 10:10PM

An interesting take on the controversial penalty last Sunday.

http://www.sareferees.com/News/law-discussion-the-final-scottish-nail/2830520/

pickarooney · 23-10-2015 10:16PM

The clock runs out just before a restart is taken and the kicker boots it straight into touch. Game over or scrum to the opposition?

At a match tonight and the kicker sent it down field for the opposition to run back between the posts. Fourteen points conceded from 79.40 on the clock.

sydthebeat · 23-10-2015 10:20PM

13.8 Ball goes directly into touch

The ball must land in the field of play. If it is kicked directly into touch the opposing team has three choices:

To have the ball kicked off again, or
To have a scrum at the centre and they have the throw-in, or
To accept the kick.

If they accept the kick, the lineout is on the half way line. If the ball is blown behind the half way line and goes directly into touch, the lineout is at the place where it went into touch.

irishbucsfan · 23-10-2015 10:25PM

It depends on whether or not the ref thinks it was intentional I would imagine, a bit like a kick at goal landing in play.

Tim Robbins · 24-10-2015 10:03PM

pickarooney wrote: »

The clock runs out just before a restart is taken and the kicker boots it straight into touch. Game over or scrum to the opposition?

At a match tonight and the kicker sent it down field for the opposition to run back between the posts. Fourteen points conceded from 79.40 on the clock.

I presume you mean a kick off after a score? You can't kick it out on the full.

http://laws.worldrugby.org/?domain=10&clarlaw=5&clarification=2

Losty Dublin · 24-10-2015 11:36PM

Tim Robbins wrote: »

I presume you mean a kick off after a score? You can't kick it out on the full.

http://laws.worldrugby.org/?domain=10&clarlaw=5&clarification=2

If time is up before the conversion is taken then the half is over and the kick should not have been taken in the first place

pickarooney · 25-10-2015 07:49AM

Losty Dublin wrote: »

If time is up before the conversion is taken then the half is over and the kick should not have been taken in the first place

They drop kicked the conversion instantly after the score. They didn't wait for the defense to get behind the line. Not sure if that's allowed or not.

Losty Dublin · 25-10-2015 12:26PM

pickarooney wrote: »

They drop kicked the conversion instantly after the score. They didn't wait for the defense to get behind the line. Not sure if that's allowed or not.

As I said, if playing time expires before the kick is taken then that's that. You can take the conversion as speedily as you like. To be fair it's something that rarely ever crops up as an issue.

Mantis Toboggan · 25-10-2015 12:34PM

Lads, any rule against wearing gloves? I would have thought they are beneficial in the wet but don't think I've seen anyone wearing them!

Yeah_Right · 25-10-2015 12:38PM

Dennis Reynolds wrote: »

Lads, any rule against wearing gloves? I would have thought they are beneficial in the wet but don't think I've seen anyone wearing them!

Full gloves aren't allowed. Fingerless ones are though. There was a bit of fad in the late 90s early 2000s where a lot of players wore them. Seem to have gone out of fashion now though.

duckysauce · 26-10-2015 04:07AM

Yeah_Right wrote: »

Full gloves aren't allowed. Fingerless ones are though. There was a bit of fad in the late 90s early 2000s where a lot of players wore them. Seem to have gone out of fashion now though.

duckysauce · 26-10-2015 04:11AM

Fatty Goode was a glove freak too

pickarooney · 26-10-2015 07:06AM

Goromaru wears some weird gloves.

MRTULES · 26-10-2015 09:50AM

I can't remember the exact minute or player but in last nights match there was a Argentina penalty that they kick to touch. Oz winger (maybe Adam Ashley) jumped to catch and throw the ball back into play all be it across the line. What is the rule in relation to this?

Losty Dublin · 26-10-2015 11:18AM

MRTULES wrote: »

I can't remember the exact minute or player but in last nights match there was a Argentina penalty that they kick to touch. Oz winger (maybe Adam Ashley) jumped to catch and throw the ball back into play all be it across the line. What is the rule law in relation to this?

Four different scenarios come into play here. The ball is out of play once it's touched something or somebody that's out of play.

If a player is outside of the playing area, he may knock or kick the ball back into the playing area provided that the ball hasn't crossed the plain of touch when he does so (That means a vertical line above the touch line).
If a player is inside the field of play and catches the ball cleanly before it goes into touch then it's play on.
If a player is inside the field of play, catches and then steps onto the touchline or outside then it's a line out, he having taken it into touch.
If a player is in touch and catches the ball then it is out of play, the player himself making the ball dead.

Tim Robbins · 26-10-2015 11:40AM

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Four different scenarios come into play here. The ball is out of play once it's touched something or somebody that's out of play.
If a player is outside of the playing area, he may knock or kick the ball back into the playing area provided that the ball hasn't crossed the plain of touch when he does so (That means a vertical line above the touch line).

If a player is inside the field of play and catches the ball cleanly before it goes into touch then it's play on.

If a player is inside the field of play, catches and then steps onto the touchline or outside then it's a line out, he having taken it into touch.

If a player is in touch and catches the ball then it is out of play, the player himself making the ball dead.

Tricky part of the law there. But his body and the ball were both above the plane of touch therefore it was in touch. Irrespective of where the ball ends up and where he lands.

Decent enough video here of various scenarios.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZSZd6uXDwI

See scenario 14 after 16 mins.

Losty Dublin · 26-10-2015 01:26PM

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Tricky part of the law there. But his body and the ball were both above the plane of touch therefore it was in touch. Irrespective of where the ball ends up and where he lands.

Decent enough video here of various scenarios.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZSZd6uXDwI

See scenario 14 after 16 mins.

I didn't see the game yet so I can't comment on the specific incident. With that in mind it should fall under the four scenarios that I listed above. You have only gone and given us a fifth.

You bastard

Tim Robbins · 26-10-2015 06:43PM

Losty Dublin wrote: »

You bastard

This is Rugby not Soccer

Losty Dublin · 26-10-2015 08:51PM

Tim Robbins wrote: »

This is Rugby not Soccer

Sorry.

You soccer player

philstar · 29-10-2015 10:47AM

if a long pass from the hand is made backwards but the ball is blown forward by a gust of wind....is that deemed a forward pass???

locum-motion · 29-10-2015 11:40AM

philstar wrote: »

if a long pass from the hand is made backwards but the ball is blown forward by a gust of wind....is that deemed a forward pass???

No.

What matters is the momentum imparted upon the ball by the hand; if that is toward your own line, then you're grand.

Funnily enough, that can mean that the ball lands closer to the opposition line and still be backward: if a player is running forward at say 7m/s, and he then throws the ball toward his own line at 5m/s, then the ball will actually continue forward at 2m/s! But it's still a backward pass.

Watch this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=box08lq9ylg

The Lost Sheep · 01-11-2015 08:54PM

Below are what will be trialled in competitions at various levels between now and next April/May. If any trials are looked at again they will be trialled globally starting January 2017(Southern Hem) and August 2017 (North Hemisphere)

http://pulse-static-files.s3.amazonaws.com/test/worldrugby/document/2015/09/05/0b9c59b0-bd64-449d-94be-6d6ef938f7f2/150906_Law_Trials.pdf

phog · 17-12-2015 08:48AM

NZ rugby to trial two refs, new laws

AT A GLANCE

Proposed World Rugby law changes:

1 Two on-field referees

2 Removal of the 'gate' entry at the breakdown

3 Tackler and arriving players can enter from midpoint of breakdown as long as they come from an onside position

4 Tackler no longer has 360 degree rights to the ball

4 Offside lines one metre behind hindmost foot at breakdown

pickarooney · 17-12-2015 11:43AM

Just when you think you finally understand all the nuances of the breakdown they go and change everything.
This will end up with one law in each half of the pitch.

Quin_Dub · 17-12-2015 12:39PM

Not sure about those..

1 Two on-field referees

Could help , but one has to be in charge so not altogether sure of the advantage of this over the existing assistant referees

2 Removal of the 'gate' entry at the breakdown

3 Tackler and arriving players can enter from midpoint of breakdown as long as they come from an onside position

Not sure about this at all - Essentially allows a side-on clear-out, making it much harder to protect the ball

4 Tackler no longer has 360 degree rights to the ball

Might give undue advantage to the attacking side , but maybe that's the intent.

5 Offside lines one metre behind hindmost foot at breakdown.

This will just encourage teams to "pick & jam" all day long as the pillars will be a metre back guaranteeing that you break the gainline virtually every time with a short pick and drive.. Can't see how this is a step forward for opening up play.

Laws Question? Ask here!

Comments