Rugby 101 - Know your rucks from your mauls!

sydthebeat · 21-11-2018 3:44pm

locum-motion wrote: »

I just f%&king quoted it to you!

i asked you why you think the law states that.

The reason why we are saying that its allowed is quite simple and quite clear, if it doesnt prevent a contest for the ball, and the referee doesnt consider it playing the ball on the ground, then holding the ball up for the scrum half is ok....

its all about 'continuity'... if it helps play develop faster all the better

locum-motion · 21-11-2018 3:52pm

sydthebeat wrote: »

i asked you why you think the law states that...

I think the law says that, because I read it, and that's what it says!

Is that a difficult concept?

sydthebeat · 21-11-2018 3:56pm

let strip this back to the very basics and begin with what the law actually says:

Tackled players must immediately:

Make the ball available so that play can continue by releasing, passing or pushing the ball in any direction except forward. They may place the ball in any direction.

Move away from the ball or get up.

Ensure that they do not lie on, over or near the ball to prevent opposition players from gaining possession of it.

does it say they must place it on the ground.... the placement of the ball for the scrum half is there to ensure play can continue.

whats the definition of "immediately" when it comes to moving away or getting up?

the spirit is there in the last line in that they must ensure they dont prevent the opposition from gaining possession.... and bringing it all back to TROLs original question, where he specifically says

Opposition has no chance of poaching the ball

.... why would it be a penalty

locum-motion · 21-11-2018 4:05pm

sydthebeat wrote: »

let strip this back to the very basics and begin with what the law actually says:

does it say they must place it on the ground.... the placement of the ball for the scrum half is there to ensure play can continue.

whats the definition of "immediately" when it comes to moving away or getting up?

the spirit is there in the last line in that they must ensure they dont prevent the opposition from gaining possession.... and bringing it all back to TROLs original question, where he specifically says .... why would it be a penalty

Stop being obtuse.
"Place" it means place it on the ground.
If not on the ground, where are you going to place it?
There isn't a f$%king table handy for you to place it on, is there?
You can't place something anywhere by holding it up in the air in your hands, now, can you?

locum-motion · 21-11-2018 4:13pm

And if you're going to quote the law, it's better to either quote it accurately or to use an ellipsis to show where you've truncated the quote (as I believe is customary). I've bolded the bits you omitted.

Tackled players must immediately:

a. Make the ball available so that play can continue by releasing, passing or pushing the ball in any direction except forward. They may place the ball in any direction.

b. Move away from the ball or get up.

c. Ensure that they do not lie on, over or near the ball to prevent opposition players from gaining possession of it.

The player's obligations under part a. are separate from and in addition to their obligations under parts b. and c.
You cannot use a piece of part c. to excuse failure to abide by the conditions of part a.

MJohnston · 21-11-2018 4:15pm

locum-motion wrote: »

Stop being obtuse.
"Place" it means place it on the ground.
If not on the ground, where are you going to place it?
There isn't a f$%king table handy for you to place it on, is there?
You can't place something anywhere by holding it up in the air in your hands, now, can you?

But, as you yourself said, and quoted, 'placing' is just one option. You can also release, pass, or push.

If someone is on the ground, handing the ball to their scrum-half, that is a pass. Therefore, to TRoL's original question:

Q:
Should that not be a penalty for not placing the ball on the ground when tackled ?

The answer is (a) the law does not say that the ball must beplaced on the ground and (b) the law permits passing as long as it makes the ball available.

sydthebeat · 21-11-2018 4:21pm

locum-motion wrote: »

Stop being obtuse.
"Place" it means place it on the ground.
If not on the ground, where are you going to place it?
There isn't a f$%king table handy for you to place it on, is there?
You can't place something anywhere by holding it up in the air in your hands, now, can you?

youre getting very angry over something very simple.

im not being obtuse or truncating anything, i quoted the law in full... if anything youve added words to it.

at the end of the day, if its not preventing a contest, then play on.

very very simple.

MJohnston · 21-11-2018 4:27pm

locum-motion wrote: »

And if you're going to quote the law, it's better to either quote it accurately or to use an ellipsis to show where you've truncated the quote (as I believe is customary). I've bolded the bits you omitted.

The player's obligations under part a. are separate from and in addition to their obligations under parts b. and c.
You cannot use a piece of part c. to excuse failure to abide by the conditions of part a.

Conversely, what about this part of the laws:

World Rugby wrote:

Tacklers must:
Immediately release the ball and the ball-carrier after both players go to ground.

Immediately move away from the tackled player and from the ball or get up.

Be on their feet before attempting to play the ball.

Allow the tackled player to release or play the ball.

Allow the tackled player to move away from the ball.

Would you not agree that the active interpretation of these laws pretty frequently ignores some of them in order to keep play going?

locum-motion · 22-11-2018 2:08pm

sydthebeat wrote: »

youre getting very angry over something very simple.

im not being obtuse or truncating anything, i quoted the law in full... if anything youve added words to it.

at the end of the day, if its not preventing a contest, then play on.

very very simple.

Nah, not getting angry at all! A tad frustrated? Perhaps...

Yes, we both quoted the law, but the a.b.c. bits that you omitted are actually an integral part of the law and leaving them out substantially alters the meaning, in that leaving them out removes the fact that they are all separate from and additional to each other. The player must do* a and b and c, not a or b or c.

My point was that part a allows four things to happen. The only thing I've "added" is an interpretation of what those four words mean. Hopefully, I'm not going to need to pull out a dictionary definition for them for it to be established that "holding" is not one of the four things.

*Or at the very least, make a decent attempt to do so - What I mean by this is that we've all seen cases of where a guy physically can't roll away coz someone else is lying on top of him, but as long as he's not obstructing he'll probably not be penalised for it. And, tbh, that reality kinda IS reflected in the text of part c.

The Rape of Lucretia · 22-11-2018 9:21pm

I was thinking more of the case where the player on the ground never releases, pass, or puts the ball on ground, but holds it up and out, on the proverbial platter, to the scrum half, enabling him to pass more easily and quickly than he would if the ball were on the ground.

Water John · 22-11-2018 10:18pm

A scrum half would prefer the ball on the ground, far less risk of a fumble as he takes it from the hands of the tackled player.
A ref may judge that the tackled player, holding the ball in both hands, doesn't make it readily available to the opposition.

locum-motion · 23-11-2018 12:38pm

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

I was thinking more of the case where the player on the ground never releases, pass, or puts the ball on ground, but holds it up and out, on the proverbial platter, to the scrum half, enabling him to pass more easily and quickly than he would if the ball were on the ground.

And that's what I thought you meant.

The law does not permit it, unless you get into contortions about what 'push' or 'place' mean.

sydthebeat · 23-11-2018 2:01pm

locum-motion wrote: »

And that's what I thought you meant.

The law does not permit it, unless you get into contortions about what 'push' or 'place' mean.

the law can be interpreted in a way so as not to make it illegal...
and that interpretation has been said he many times already

you wont find a referee calling a penalty because a player holds the ball up for a scrum half to play as long as they are not preventing a contest for the ball.

MJohnston · 23-11-2018 3:49pm

Did this actually happen or is it a total hypothetical? As Water John says, I think it's very unlikely that a scrum half would want their teammate to hold it up for them.

sydthebeat · 23-11-2018 4:52pm

MJohnston wrote: »

Did this actually happen or is it a total hypothetical? As Water John says, I think it's very unlikely that a scrum half would want their teammate to hold it up for them.

it tends not to happen at pro level as holding it off the ground adds to the risk of a friendly boot kicking it, also a tackler in an exposed situation will try to get back to their feet immediately to challenge for the ball.

ive seen it a few times at underage level where the defending team dont bother attacking the ruck so the player on the ground is free to present as they want.

The Rape of Lucretia · 23-11-2018 8:12pm

It was a non under-age standoff in green doing it last Saturday against the team in black that prompted me to wonder why he got away with it. 5 minutes into the game for example, from a penalty lineout. Clearly wants to hand the ball to his scrummie rather than put it anywhere on the ground.

sydthebeat · 25-11-2018 2:24pm

Funny thing about the conversation about the ball being held up off the ball and presented for the 9 to take.....

I was at the game yesterday and noticed that exact thing happen at the ruck at 14:30 on the match clock.

The Lost Sheep · 17-12-2018 7:04pm

Couldnt think of a better thread to post these but the 4 ref associations/societies are hosting recruitment days in the new year
Leinster's will take place on Saturday the 26th of January 2019 (time/venue TBC) If you are interested in participating in the course please register your interest by emailing lorna.byrne@gmail.com by this coming Friday 20th December.

Munster Association of Referees are hosting a new members course on Sunday 13 January at Charleville Park Hotel https://munsterrugby.ie/domestic_news/munster-association-of-referees-call-for-new-recruits/ …

ARCB, Connacht are hosting new members course on Saturday 12th January.
Contact Peter Fitzgibbon at peter.fitzgibbon@irfu.ie for more info

No idea about Ulster

Losty Dublin · 21-12-2018 2:36am

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Couldnt think of a better thread to post these but the 4 ref associations/societies are hosting recruitment days in the new year
Leinster's will take place on Saturday the 26th of January 2019 (time/venue TBC) If you are interested in participating in the course please register your interest by emailing lorna.byrne@gmail.com by this coming Friday 20th December.

Munster Association of Referees are hosting a new members course on Sunday 13 January at Charleville Park Hotel https://munsterrugby.ie/domestic_news/munster-association-of-referees-call-for-new-recruits/ …

ARCB, Connacht are hosting new members course on Saturday 12th January.
Contact Peter Fitzgibbon at peter.fitzgibbon@irfu.ie for more info

No idea about Ulster

I wonder if we had any takers?

arccosh · 01-02-2019 9:50pm

blow in rugby watcher question...

Why are drop goals not utilised more often..? France tonight is probably the 1st time I've seen it used

sydthebeat · 01-02-2019 9:59pm

arccosh wrote: »

blow in rugby watcher question...

Why are drop goals not utilised more often..? France tonight is probably the 1st time I've seen it used

You don't watch enough rugby

The Lost Sheep · 01-02-2019 10:11pm

arccosh wrote: »

blow in rugby watcher question...

Why are drop goals not utilised more often..? France tonight is probably the 1st time I've seen it used

Can take a lot to set up. Risk of missing and giving away possession a lot more. Easier/better to work for 3 points from penalties

Losty Dublin · 01-02-2019 10:16pm

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Can take a lot to set up. Risk of missing and giving away possession a lot more. Easier/better to work for 3 points from penalties

And bugger all players are able to kick the ball over the posts drop kick style. Except for your fattest props.

arccosh · 01-02-2019 10:26pm

thanks guys !

Muahahaha · 10-02-2019 4:03pm

Few questions that have been bugging me- subs warming up in the in goal area- is this protocol as such, are they instructed by the fourth ref that this is where they can warm up or do they just go there of their own violition. For some reason I cant seem to remember it happening years ago, I think subs used to just warm up near their teams bench?

Also anyone remember what was the name of the English player who played circa early to mid nineties and had a huge kicking points total, he might off been the English record points holder until Johnny Wilkinson later took it off him. Off the rugby field he was a dentist and he wore glasses.

Finally in a contested line out can the hooker throw the ball to himself in the same way a player can when the line out is uncontested?

salmocab · 10-02-2019 4:07pm

Muahahaha wrote: »

Couple of questions that have been bugging me- subs warming up in the in goal area- is this protocol as such, are they instructed by the fourth ref that this is where they can warm up or do they just go there of their own violition. For some reason I cant seem to remember it happening years ago, I think subs used to just warm up near their teams bench?

Also anyone remember what was the name of the English player who played circa early to mid nineties and had a huge kicking points total, he might off been the English record points holder until Johnny Wilkinson later took it off him. Off the rugby field he was a dentist and he wore glasses.

Rob Andrew?, you have to warm up at the end your team is attacking. No space for warmups at pitch side. Think the idea is that you can’t look up the pitch and mistake someone warming up for a defender.
Technically he could throw to himself I think but in reality he couldn’t throw it 5 yards without someone getting there first.

sydthebeat · 10-02-2019 4:12pm

Are you thinking of Rob Andrew?

Muahahaha · 10-02-2019 4:16pm

salmocab wrote: »

Rob Andrew?, you have to warm up at the end your team is attacking. No space for warmups at pitch side. Think the idea is that you can’t look up the pitch and mistake someone warming up for a defender.

No I remember Rob Andrew, its not him I'm thinking of. I think it might be Jonathon Webb though Wiki tells me he is an orthopedic surgeon whereas for some reason I thought he was a dentist.

Makes sense now about the subs warming up in a place where they're not mistaken for an on field player. Do you know though was it always this way or more a feature of the modern game?

Losty Dublin · 10-02-2019 4:21pm

Muahahaha wrote: »

Few questions that have been bugging me- subs warming up in the in goal area- is this protocol as such, are they instructed by the fourth ref that this is where they can warm up or do they just go there of their own violition. For some reason I cant seem to remember it happening years ago, I think subs used to just warm up near their teams bench?

Also anyone remember what was the name of the English player who played circa early to mid nineties and had a huge kicking points total, he might off been the English record points holder until Johnny Wilkinson later took it off him. Off the rugby field he was a dentist and he wore glasses.

Finally in a contested line out can the hooker throw the ball to himself in the same way a player can when the line out is uncontested?

Protocol for the professional game is to go behind the try line that your team is attacking, where there is no area to do so elsewhere. Murrayfield is one such stadium which has an area off field.

A throw in at a line out must go at least 5 metres. It's fine in theory to reclaim your own throw in; this is common at quick throws but almost impossible at a formed line out.

Not sure who the dentist is but though he was an out half Rob Andrew works in rugby off field and has done for years. Paddy Johns is a dentist but he's Irish, and a second row. Now I'm all curious

Edit; to answer your follow on question the main reason why you warm up at the end you attack is to keep players from interfering in play. Doubtless it's happened at junior/pub level ball

Muahahaha · 10-02-2019 4:37pm

Yeah its defintely Jonathon Webb Im thinking of, just saw some images of him there. I remember him when he was kicking penalties and conversions, he used to spend ages down on bended knee organising the mound of sand so he could place the ball on it at the perfect angle for kicking it over. Though for some reason I had always thought of him as a dentist, I might be wrong on this part as Wiki says he became an orthopedic surgeon after his rugby playing days were up. Though it doesn't say what he worked at when he was playing rugby so maybe he could well have been a dentist and later changed career.

On the line out, that makes sense that it would be virtually impossible for a hooker to throw it to themselves if it has to cover five metres. I was just interested in whether or not the laws of the game allowed for it in contested line outs. Now I know it is legal- another question- does the first player in the line out have to stand at a specific spot X metres from the line? Or could you have a play whereby the first player takes up a position 10 or 12 metres from the line (and the defending team naturally matches their line up to that). The idea being that the attacking team place their line out deeper and trick the defending team into creating enough space for the hooker to throw it 5 metres to themselves and then completely bypass the lineout. I know its an unlikely play to ever see being tried or done but is it technically possible and within the laws?

salmocab · 10-02-2019 4:48pm

The line out has to be formed between the 5mtr and 15mtr hatched markings on the pitch. You could in theory start 12 mts back but no team would not have defenders up front. Also don’t forget the defending hooker would be loitering around the front somewhere.

Losty Dublin · 10-02-2019 4:58pm

Within the Laws a team could form in at the back and the thrower could throw short and join the line to contest his own ball. In theory at least; in practice it'd be some trick to pull off successfully but I'm sure it has been done.

The Lost Sheep · 10-02-2019 6:05pm

Muahahaha wrote: »

Few questions that have been bugging me- subs warming up in the in goal area- is this protocol as such, are they instructed by the fourth ref that this is where they can warm up or do they just go there of their own violition. For some reason I cant seem to remember it happening years ago, I think subs used to just warm up near their teams bench?

Also anyone remember what was the name of the English player who played circa early to mid nineties and had a huge kicking points total, he might off been the English record points holder until Johnny Wilkinson later took it off him. Off the rugby field he was a dentist and he wore glasses.

Finally in a contested line out can the hooker throw the ball to himself in the same way a player can when the line out is uncontested?

Protocol at higher levels will be that you warm up at each end in dead ball area of tryline you're team is scoring into. Subs used to(and do at other levels...) warm up near bench but less room and harder for refs to manage.
A hooker could throw it to themself in contested lineout but wouldnt win it as ball must travel 5m and straight which wouldnt happen

Muahahaha wrote: »

On the line out, that makes sense that it would be virtually impossible for a hooker to throw it to themselves if it has to cover five metres. I was just interested in whether or not the laws of the game allowed for it in contested line outs. Now I know it is legal- another question- does the first player in the line out have to stand at a specific spot X metres from the line? Or could you have a play whereby the first player takes up a position 10 or 12 metres from the line (and the defending team naturally matches their line up to that). The idea being that the attacking team place their line out deeper and trick the defending team into creating enough space for the hooker to throw it 5 metres to themselves and then completely bypass the lineout. I know its an unlikely play to ever see being tried or done but is it technically possible and within the laws?

Nothing in law stops it happening. Just incredibly unlikely.

Dave_The_Sheep · 17-02-2019 4:47am

https://v.redd.it/g9bsle7dd0h21/DASH_240

Double movement or not? Completed tackle?

Bogwoppit · 04-03-2019 4:48pm

Dave_The_Sheep wrote: »

https://v.redd.it/g9bsle7dd0h21/DASH_240

Double movement or not? Completed tackle?

Both players still in motion, momentum and strength got the ball carrier over the line before the tackle was completed.

The Lost Sheep · 04-03-2019 7:25pm

Dave_The_Sheep wrote: »

https://v.redd.it/g9bsle7dd0h21/DASH_240

Double movement or not? Completed tackle?

Try. Players momentum got them to place ball before tackle completed. No double movement.

connemara man · 11-03-2019 1:15am

The no Try in todays Ireland match

Where in the laws does it say downward pressure or control in the laws?

like on a loose ball contact is enough and in that scenario I thought contact would be enough

11-03-2019 5:01am

connemara man wrote: »

The no Try in todays Ireland match

Where in the laws does it say downward pressure or control in the laws?

like on a loose ball contact is enough and in that scenario I thought contact would be enough

Law 21 - grounding the ball

https://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=21

"By pressing down on it with a hand or hands, arm or arms, or the front of the player’s body from waist to neck."

Note the use of 'down'.

connemara man · 11-03-2019 8:54am

Basil3 wrote: »

Law 21 - grounding the ball

https://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=21

"By pressing down on it with a hand or hands, arm or arms, or the front of the player’s body from waist to neck."

Note the use of 'down'.

I get ya. Then the referees reason not to give it was wrong so.

Even if you could make the argument as his fingers hit the top half of the ball that downward pressure led it to squirting forward ( but that would a world of semantics)

sydthebeat · 11-03-2019 9:12am

connemara man wrote: »

I get ya. Then the referees reason not to give it was wrong so.

Even if you could make the argument as his fingers hit the top half of the ball that downward pressure led it to squirting forward ( but that would a world of semantics)

The referee didn't "disallow" it though.
The tmo said there was insufficient evidence of downward pressure and Healy knocked the ball forward.... Which was correct

connemara man · 11-03-2019 9:54am

sydthebeat wrote: »

The referee didn't "disallow" it though.
The tmo said there was insufficient evidence of downward pressure and Healy knocked the ball forward.... Which was correct

My argument would be as his hand came down on a static ball any touch of the ball on the upper half would apply downward pressure and knock it on in the process. He doesn't have to have control over it.

The ref says there's no downward pressure and no control as he's placed the ball and the ref has final say. Which is wrong as in that scenario like a loose ball he's not expected or required to place it or control it which

I'd argue the semantics of what constitutes downward pressure in that scenario though

lawred2 · 11-03-2019 9:56am

Can I ask a question about yesterday's game and Sexton's try?

Where is the line between being a decoy runner (Larmour) and crossing between a tackler and the ball carrier?

Water John · 11-03-2019 10:37am

Larmour did not run a line that prevented any French player tackling Sexton. He distracted the French tackler to a dummy runner. If Larmour had run close to Sexton, you're argument would be correct.

lawred2 · 11-03-2019 10:39am

Water John wrote: »

Larmour did not run a line that prevented any French player tackling Sexton. He distracted the French tackler to a dummy runner. If Larmour had run close to Sexton, you're argument would be correct.

Wasn't making an argument.

I was asking where the line was between being a decoy and blocking a tackler...

Watching the video here on slow motion - Larmour has run right between Sexton and I think it's Huget. So it's obviously a fine margin. Either way - nicely constructed try.

https://youtu.be/t-TlEozlZ3w?t=37

sydthebeat · 11-03-2019 10:40am

lawred2 wrote: »

Wasn't making an argument.

I was asking where the line was between being a decoy and blocking a tackler...

In Joe Schmidts head

sliabh 1956 · 11-03-2019 10:44am

What was the TMO's reasoning in giving that last score to France when the grounding of the ball was so hard to see.

lawred2 · 11-03-2019 10:45am

sliabh 1956 wrote: »

What was the TMO's reasoning in giving that last score to France when the grounding of the ball was so hard to see.

he said he saw it grounded so not sure why he needed the TMO at all... unless he was asking for a reason not to give it

nc6000 · 11-03-2019 10:46am

lawred2 wrote: »

I was asking where the line was between being a decoy and blocking a tackler...
https://youtu.be/t-TlEozlZ3w?t=37

The decoy needs to have a realistic chance of getting the ball.

Water John · 11-03-2019 10:50am

Yes some body mentioned earlier that the ref said he saw it grounded. I think he wanted to award it. The last I saw of it, from the best camera angle in slow mo was on a French player's back. You can see later movement when I suspect they were nuzzling it to the ground, at the time the Irish scrum half stuck in his hand.

locum-motion · 11-03-2019 12:35pm

connemara man wrote: »

My argument would be as his hand came down on a static ball any touch of the ball on the upper half would apply downward pressure and knock it on in the process. He doesn't have to have control over it.

The ref says there's no downward pressure and no control as he's placed the ball and the ref has final say. Which is wrong as in that scenario like a loose ball he's not expected or required to place it or control it which

I'd argue the semantics of what constitutes downward pressure in that scenario though

It's quite obvious.

Hand Movement A = downward pressure = Try
Hand Movement B = forward pressure = Knock on

TryNoTry.png

Rugby 101 - Know your rucks from your mauls!

Comments