Refereeing decisions
- Thread starter boyo
- Start date
JRugby2
Arch Winning (36)
I think they are referring to everything up until the contact - which I'd agree is true, we do see players charge in at speed and blow people off the ball in very similar ways to what Jac did at a lot of breakdowns. We just rarely see the contact point being the head or neck.
But yeah - if you do this, you decrease the amount of control you have and increase the risk to the whoever you hit/ increase the risk of committing foul play.
Major Tom
Nicholas Shehadie (39)
All comes back to the reffs needing to officiate the ruck better IMO.
Penalise players going off their feet more often and they will their change behaviour.
Equally, be more stringent on the jackal with hands past the ball. This should theoretically clean up breakdown.
Also where is it written in law 9.20 that refs will determine if head/neck contact is due to a ‘rugby incident’?
I know we’re going around in circles but WR (World Rugby) haven’t made this clear to the general public why it wasn’t a penalty so I feel the debate will rage on.
WR (World Rugby) will need to do something because you cannot have someone getting hit in the head/neck from a clean out and claim they performed the perfect clean out. It just doesn’t pass the pub test.
Penalise players going off their feet more often and they will their change behaviour.
Equally, be more stringent on the jackal with hands past the ball. This should theoretically clean up breakdown.
Also where is it written in law 9.20 that refs will determine if head/neck contact is due to a ‘rugby incident’?
I know we’re going around in circles but WR (World Rugby) haven’t made this clear to the general public why it wasn’t a penalty so I feel the debate will rage on.
WR (World Rugby) will need to do something because you cannot have someone getting hit in the head/neck from a clean out and claim they performed the perfect clean out. It just doesn’t pass the pub test.
John S
Ken Catchpole (46)
The Roar pod was talking about this - their guest Charlie Morgan said Lynagh was 1 - 2 m in front, but Russell getting close to 6m in front which was really having a laugh. Really testing the ref - asking permission not permission type stuff.
Good question - what's the penalty? Do they give a short arm to the other team? re-take the kick?
JRugby2
Arch Winning (36)
20.2 - A penalty or free-kick is taken from where it is awarded or anywhere behind it on a line through the mark and parallel to the touchlines. When a penalty or free-kick is taken at the wrong place, it must be re-taken.
Brumby Runner
Jason Little (69)
Conversions are also a bit of an issue, though perhaps not quite so bad.
One of the Lions' tries was scored a metyre or two in from touch, left hand side of the field. Russell set the ball for the conversion in line with where the try was scored but the ref brought him amnother 2 - 3 metres in field. I said to my son at the time that I hoped he would miss by that margin, and to be sure his kick duly sailed a couple of metres outside the right hand upright.
OTOH I've often noticed refs moving Wallaby kickers closer to the sideline than where the try was scored. Am I paranoid. Keep an eye on it and let me know.
One of the Lions' tries was scored a metyre or two in from touch, left hand side of the field. Russell set the ball for the conversion in line with where the try was scored but the ref brought him amnother 2 - 3 metres in field. I said to my son at the time that I hoped he would miss by that margin, and to be sure his kick duly sailed a couple of metres outside the right hand upright.
OTOH I've often noticed refs moving Wallaby kickers closer to the sideline than where the try was scored. Am I paranoid. Keep an eye on it and let me know.
molman
John Thornett (49)
molman
John Thornett (49)
I'm waiting for Rassie to use this as a future time wasting tactic
hey Ref, it's infinite re-taken free kicks if we take it in the wrong place right?...
Major Tom
Nicholas Shehadie (39)
I reckon Rassie will have blokes jumping for the tryline at penalty taps.I'm waiting for Rassie to use this as a future time wasting tactic
JRugby2
Arch Winning (36)
please don't my mental health can't take it.I'm waiting for Rassie to use this as a future time wasting tactic
Strewthcobber
Nick Farr-Jones (63)
As usual with Rassie's shenanigans, just need a ref with big enough balls to use the laws to stop him from taking the piss
Pfitzy
Phil Waugh (73)
And then more videos from Rassie about the Boks being victims
Eyes and Ears
Desmond Connor (43)
I actually thought this also used to be a scrum to the other team but the current Law is usually how it was refereeed
Strewthcobber
Nick Farr-Jones (63)
It used to be that any infringement by the kicking team was a scrum. Then they brought in an exception for quick taps taken from the wrong spot (mid-2000s?), then in 2018(?) they just made all penalty kicks from the wrong spot a retake.
JRugby2
Arch Winning (36)
Currently this is what happens for incorrectly taken kicks. Eg: a rugby league style tap. (20.11)
John S
Ken Catchpole (46)
"Becoming pointless" - Everyone wants the same law change after the final Lions test - Ruck
A key law in rugby union is being flagrantly ignored – and fans have had enough. The law in question? Scrum feeds. Or more accurately, the complete lack of fair…
www.ruck.co.uk
This seems the best place for this? (Happy to move to a more appropriate thread).
Points 1 and 2 seem legit enough - we've all been saying it for ages - no one feeds a scrum straight these days, the caterpillar ruck (while box kicks are a legit strategy) has become a bit of a joke.
However with point 3, I'm not sure they're on the money here. It's not as if the offending player is coming back - and for the really high end, it can be a permanent red I thought.
Seems to be a lot of NH whinge this morning lol
JRugby2
Arch Winning (36)
Scrum feeds? Bigger hills to die on IMO. If we broadly accept that in every aspect of the game, players will try and rig the moment in favour of their team and push the boundaries of law - then we understand this is going to happen and probably continue to happen even in a crack down. The likely result, to me anyway, will just be more whistle with no long lasting benefit."Becoming pointless" - Everyone wants the same law change after the final Lions test - Ruck
A key law in rugby union is being flagrantly ignored – and fans have had enough. The law in question? Scrum feeds. Or more accurately, the complete lack of fair…
This seems the best place for this? (Happy to move to a more appropriate thread).
Points 1 and 2 seem legit enough - we've all been saying it for ages - no one feeds a scrum straight these days, the caterpillar ruck (while box kicks are a legit strategy) has become a bit of a joke.
However with point 3, I'm not sure they're on the money here. It's not as if the offending player is coming back - and for the really high end, it can be a permanent red I thought.
Seems to be a lot of NH whinge this morning lol
I don't get the hate behind caterpillar rucks either? What do people so strongly dislike about them? Attacking team has 5 seconds from a use it call - provided they actually use the ball in that time who cares what happens in the interim? Maybe the issue is referees need to be dishing out a use it call quicker.
The 20min red card argument is a bit dead now I think, and the author of that article is just rehashing the same argument thats come from opponents to the policy from the start. Obvious pros and cons to it, but until we get hit with actual data that it is increasing the incidents of foul play I can't see it going away.