• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

CAS Rugby 2023

james richards

james richards

Allen Oxlade (6)
RedOrDead said:
If you could stop a maul AND earn a penalty by merely not joining it... Guess what... Come line-out time no team would ever join a maul, and the rolling maul would be a neat tactic. If the ball never moves backwards in the maul and remains in the jumpers hand, the ball can progress up the field.

Try.

rugby365.com

Law Discussion: Maul tactics

The maul from a line-out was a great South African weapon. They developed it first and used it most profitably. Until November, that is.
rugby365.com rugby365.com
Click to expand...
Something we can both agree on is that this topic needs an unbias opinion from someone like Snort currently it is a barker v cranbrook back and forth and we need an unbias opinion as a final answer we have both put out our arguments lets leave it for an unbias party to chip in.
 
Halfbackenthusiast

Halfbackenthusiast

Ted Fahey (11)
Appears as though the whistle is blow whilst Thomas is in the process of grounding the ball (he’s already over the line and diving). This isn’t a infringement some people would remember Trinity scored a try in identical fashion against barker last year, barker have attempted to do a similar play in games but have passed the ball backwards and correctly been penalised. This however does not constitute a penalty as the player who caught the ball scored
 
FoleyBealeFolau

FoleyBealeFolau

Ward Prentice (10)
james richards said:
Barker v Cranbrook incident <<There is the entire incident you see the penalty being blown before the try is scored (Cranbrook had stopped with no chance at controlling the try due to the ball being dead) The Barker players harass the referee demanding that he speak to the touchie which the touchie seemed angry or agitated in his decision almost. The touchie said it was the "wrong call" which is fine but it should not have been a try because the ball was dead on play and Cranbrook stopped due to the stoppage allowing the try. Another issue is the lineout as it should have been a penalty anyway.
Click to expand...
As you can see the barker number 2 at 0:18 going over to his father and asking him to change the call. comedic how that is allowed at the 1st XV Level.
 
F

Famed_Star

Allen Oxlade (6)
Halfbackenthusiast said:
Appears as though the whistle is blow whilst Thomas is in the process of grounding the ball (he’s already over the line and diving). This isn’t a infringement some people would remember Trinity scored a try in identical fashion against barker last year, barker have attempted to do a similar play in games but have passed the ball backwards and correctly been penalised. This however does not constitute a penalty as the player who caught the ball scored
Click to expand...
No.

the ref can Cleary be seen several seconds before the try is scored with his arm in the air.

The fact a try was allowed to be scored under those circumstances is a farce.

Looking at the call, it is not a penalty at all. Ball didn’t move from front Barkers hands. But it should have been a scrum reset because the ref had already called time off before a try was scored.

Same old Barker - imagine not being humble enough to admit how bad a call it is that we have Barker people on here justifying a ludicrous call.
 
RedOrDead

RedOrDead

Charlie Fox (21)
james richards said:
Something we can both agree on is that this topic needs an unbias opinion from someone like Snort currently it is a barker v cranbrook back and forth and we need an unbias opinion as a final answer we have both put out our arguments lets leave it for an unbias party to chip in.
Click to expand...

Whether or not it was a penalty or not isn't really up for debate. The law says the penalty call was incorrect, and should have been a try.

What could be argued is that the whistle was blown before grounding and hence even though it should have been a try, it can't be a try anyway. However, as I have stated, from an objective rugby fan standpoint common sense should prevail. No Cranbrook boy had a chance to stopping the try as the ball was in the process of being grounded when whistle blew.

What is most important though IMO is no cheating occurred. Hopefully the whinging will cease.
 
RedOrDead

RedOrDead

Charlie Fox (21)
Rugby League said:
As you can see the barker number 2 at 0:18 going over to his father and asking him to change the call. comedic how that is allowed at the 1st XV Level.
Click to expand...

No. Touchie was talking to the ref from the sideline. Hence why there are FOUR Barker boys pointing at the touchy (touchie has 4 kids in the 1st XV? Wow talented bunch). Also Number 2 doesn't get within 10 metres of his 'father' (which is probably a BS claim, no one has confirmed it lol).
 
RedOrDead

RedOrDead

Charlie Fox (21)
Famed_Star said:
Looking at the call, it is not a penalty at all. Ball didn’t move from front Barkers hands. But it should have been a scrum reset because the ref had already called time off before a try was scored.
Click to expand...

So let me get this right.... Your argument is "despite the fact whistle is blown when Barker is in process of diving for a try... And no Cranbrook player has any chance of stopping the try... I think it shouldn't be a try because both the ref and the Cranbrook team are clueless, and Barker should be punished for being the only people on the field (apart from the touchy) who understand the laws of the game."

That's your argument? Really?

Thank god for common sense. Try.

Additionally... If you believe it should have been a scrum reset from 5 metres out... You're probably looking at a try anyway. The better team won. Move on.
 
Halfbackenthusiast

Halfbackenthusiast

Ted Fahey (11)
Famed_Star said:
No.

the ref can Cleary be seen several seconds before the try is scored with his arm in the air.

The fact a try was allowed to be scored under those circumstances is a farce.

Looking at the call, it is not a penalty at all. Ball didn’t move from front Barkers hands. But it should have been a scrum reset because the ref had already called time off before a try was scored.

Same old Barker - imagine not being humble enough to admit how bad a call it is that we have Barker people on here justifying a ludicrous call.
Click to expand...
it wasn’t several seconds that video has been slowed down as often happens with highlights
 
RedOrDead

RedOrDead

Charlie Fox (21)
Halfbackenthusiast said:
it wasn’t several seconds that video has been slowed down as often happens with highlights
Click to expand...

I don't think it is slowed down. But the ball is grounded literally within 1 second of the whistle being blown with the closest Cranbrook player nowhere near the ball. It's common sense really.
 
M

Mule

Larry Dwyer (12)
Mule said:
Season format idea (may well have been touted previously)….

Easter holidays and first ~3 weeks of Term 2: friendlies/trials between any schools regardless of association (up to schools to organise, some great traditional matchups like Knox V Joeys on Gala Day)

~Weeks 4-8 Term 2: CAS, CHS, ISA, CCC, AICES, GPS etc run their (~5 game) inter Association Championships - first past the post wins, with table (of weighted points for each team; eg a win in 1st XV gets 50 points, win in 13DS gets 5 points) giving a ranking for Term 3 NSW Schools Championships Cup/Plate/Bowl

Mid Year Holidays: tours and camps

Term 3: using tables from the Term 2 Association Championships, schools get seeded into 32 school NSW Schools Championships that runs over 6 weeks (home and away rights drawn out of hat each week, losers week 1 go into bowl comp, losers week 2 go into plate comp etc)

Feel we need to do something different…
Click to expand...
attempted change of topic well & truly charged down....... but does play continue or is this attempted phase of play dead? ;-)
 
B

Backintheolddays

Billy Sheehan (19)
As an accredited junior and senior ref Barkers line out try was fair. That is with no visibility of the ref or being able to hear what was said before the try was scored.
Defensive line out teams that seek an obstruction penalty by stand off defence are usually well coached in the rule interpretation and also have a caller for the team (and ref) to indicate if the ball has been fed to the back of the maul (penalty) or if remains at the front and active defence is required.
Always looks bad when the defending team earns a penalty which is then overturned and a try is awarded instead. Shit happens.
 
RedOrDead

RedOrDead

Charlie Fox (21)
Mule said:
Season format idea (may well have been touted previously)….

Easter holidays and first ~3 weeks of Term 2: friendlies/trials between any schools regardless of association (up to schools to organise, some great traditional matchups like Knox V Joeys on Gala Day)

~Weeks 4-8 Term 2: CAS, CHS, ISA, CCC, AICES, GPS etc run their (~5 game) inter Association Championships - first past the post wins, with table (of weighted points for each team; eg a win in 1st XV gets 50 points, win in 13DS gets 5 points) giving a ranking for Term 3 NSW Schools Championships Cup/Plate/Bowl

Mid Year Holidays: tours and camps

Term 3: using tables from the Term 2 Association Championships, schools get seeded into 32 school NSW Schools Championships that runs over 6 weeks (home and away rights drawn out of hat each week, losers week 1 go into bowl comp, losers week 2 go into plate comp etc)

Feel we need to do something different…
Click to expand...

Sorry mate. You were drowned out the rubbish.

I really like the idea. Would love to hear if anyone has any criticisms.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top