MonkeyBoy
Bill Watson (15)
for me no!the cleanout on Etzebeth creates the ruck so no hands allowed
Refereeing decisions
- Thread starter boyo
- Start date
Is it still a ruck if none of those players on their feet (or who have been cleaned out) are anywhere near the ball?
Killer
Cyril Towers (30)
If the ball is out of the ruck anyone can pick it up, even tho the ball hasn't moved the ruck has, Hanigan has placed the ball so again anyone can pick it up if on their feet and no ruck. I'm not a ref so.....
Strewthcobber
Simon Poidevin (60)
That';s the question isn't it!
The laws aren't much help there
Coleman is penalised for coming "staright in from the side" so the ref thought ruck laws were in play, but was it the same ruck?
With the changes to the laws which take effect in Jan 2018 there would be no doubt but we're not there yet
MonkeyBoy
Bill Watson (15)
Fair point "If a bird can shit on it", then the ball is out. In that case its general play and how can you be penalised for entry... Hanigan could've been penalised for playing off feet though.
Strewthcobber
Simon Poidevin (60)
Coleman shouldn't have been penalised (for in at the side anyway) in that case - as no ruck had formed
That was what I was getting at.
Kriel came through the gate to the tackle, there is no ruck formed around the ball (or what was a ruck collapsed in the vicinity) and is free to pick it up.
It doesn't really make sense if Kriel can only come in and stand over the ball or that Australia has permanently won the ball at that ruck on the basis of the cleanout that happened.
Is it still a tackle though and he has to come through the gate?
At this point Kriel is contesting for the ball in the tackle and Coleman has to come through the gate to clear him out.
A fraction of a second later, Kriel presumably has possession and is a ball carrier and it is general play.
Strewthcobber
Simon Poidevin (60)
Yep that makes sense I guess - ref must have thought no ruck had formed after Hanngan was brought to ground
If one was formed and the ball had then left it - Kriel was in open play and Coleman is entitled to tackle him from any direction
Killer
Cyril Towers (30)
Yeah, and I think Hanigan is holding on, not much in it but probably?? fair, all all with the speed of the action probably a good/fair outcome.
MonkeyBoy
Bill Watson (15)
It was a tackle that became a ruck on the cleanout of EE, if the ball is then deemed out it can't go back to be a tackle. It is general play there are no offside lines or gates
Killer
Cyril Towers (30)
Yes I agree, wrong call, the only illegal play is Hanigan playing it on the ground, but that was very short so play could have gone on.
It wouldn't help with the AR yelling in your ear though so if a decision had to be made it probably went the right way?
The initial problem started with Hanigan getting driven back for whatever reason.
I'm no ref expert so will change my mind as required.
It wouldn't help with the AR yelling in your ear though so if a decision had to be made it probably went the right way?
The initial problem started with Hanigan getting driven back for whatever reason.
I'm no ref expert so will change my mind as required.
Derpus
Nathan Sharpe (72)
'If a bird can shit on it then it's out' sounds good in principle but is so rarely applied as such.
MonkeyBoy
Bill Watson (15)
Should be, its the ARU directive down to referees (obviously not worded as such in print)
Brumby Runner
Jason Little (69)
I'd say never these days. The ball can be at the back foot and even behind it but so long as the No 9 has his hands on it and hasn't picked it up, then most refs will penalise anyone coming through to play either the ball or the No 9.
Strewthcobber
Simon Poidevin (60)
Argentina's first try, awarded by the referee after consultation with the TMO.
Now I generally think refs do an excellent job, and even if they do make the occassional error, I can ususally see why they made that error with the luxury of super slow mo etc.
Now, that said, how was this try awarded?
Killer
Cyril Towers (30)
Yeah a clear penalty imo. Watch him and the 9 communicate just before he steps forward into Hanigan. Planned illegal play.
Brumby Runner
Jason Little (69)
50/50 I thought. Wouldn't be concerned which way it went. Same for Phipps' try later in the game. Most refs would have judged him not to have released the ball before advancing his position without releasing the ball. Win some, you lose some.
Pfitzy
Nathan Sharpe (72)
ABs v Boks - last minute of the first half.
Cane makes a tackle, gets blown off it, and rolls up to make the next tackle.
Lands on his elbows past the ball. Has one hand on the deck as he uses the other to go for the ball. Owens watches all this, then awards a penalty to the MiB for the Bok player not releasing.
Fuck.
A.
Duck.
Cane makes a tackle, gets blown off it, and rolls up to make the next tackle.
Lands on his elbows past the ball. Has one hand on the deck as he uses the other to go for the ball. Owens watches all this, then awards a penalty to the MiB for the Bok player not releasing.
Fuck.
A.
Duck.