Refereeing decisions

[Strewthcobber]

Thought I'd chuck another interesting one up here from the Wellington 7s final

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwzpSTxDjc8#t=17m07s


17:07 in the vid
Is SA #4 entitled to play the ball there?

 

[Braveheart81]

Thought I'd chuck another interesting one up here from the Wellington 7s final

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwzpSTxDjc8#t=17m07s

Is SA #4 entitled to play the ball there?

Yes. He can't be playing the ball from an offside position if the ball was last touched by his teammate in front of where he plays it from.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Yes. He can't be playing the ball from an offside position if the ball was last touched by his teammate in front of where he plays it from.

It's interesting because the laws don't seem to be able to handle the situation.
But I reckon, strictly speaking, he's offside.

In general play a player is offside if the player is in front of a team-mate who is carrying the ball, or in front of a team-mate who last played the ball.

In general play, there are three ways by which an offside player can be put onside by actions of that player or of team mates:
(a) Action by the player. When the offside player runs behind the team-mate who last kicked, touched or carried the ball, the player is put onside.

 

[Braveheart81]

I get the wording but I think where the ball goes is important.

If a player throws a long cut out pass as they are running backwards (and it is a legal pass) but when the player catches it they are in front of the player who passed the ball, they're not offside even though under that wording in the first section they would be.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

only if he was in front of the player throwing it when he threw it (otherwise he is not offside) - which I think is a logical impossibility

 

[Eyes and Ears]

The SA 4 is offside in this clip. It should come back for the Fiji knock on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Braveheart81]

SANZAAR Launches Enhanced Super Rugby Judiciary Process


SANZAAR has today confirmed a new and updated judicial process that will be implemented for Super Rugby 2017. Rugby’s governing body, World Rugby, has endorsed the process and SANZAAR believes it represents an enhancement to an important part of the tournament that will provide improved consistency and efficient decision-making.

The changes to the SANZAAR Judicial Rules for 2017 include:

• Permitting an incident to be referred back to the Citing Commissioner for review if new evidence becomes available outside the existing allowable time frame for determination.
  
• The introduction of a three-person Foul Play Review Committee
  
• The inclusion of the regular season bye rounds in any sanction
  
• The ability of Judicial Committees to issue a warning for foul play offences that in their opinion do not quite meet the “Red Card” threshold.

Central to the amendments in 2017 is the formation of the Foul Play Review Committee. The committee will be comprised of a consistent panel of three members who in the first instance will review all incidents of red cards, Citing Commissioner referrals and misconduct, and make a determination based on the information before them. The committee will meet at a fixed time to be determined at the conclusion of each round and the infringing player will have the ability to accept the decision of the committee or have the right to be heard at a formal judicial hearing within the following 24 hours.

SANZAAR has appointed senior Judicial Officer Nigel Hampton QC (Quade Cooper) (New Zealand) to chair the committee and he will be assisted by former Super Rugby and international players, John Langford (Australia) and Stefan Terblanche (South Africa).

In the determination of an incident and the handing down of any sanctions, the committee will now have the ability to include any regular season Super Rugby byes as part of a meaningful sanction. This is a significant change and will ensure all sanctions issued during Super Rugby are treated consistently across all teams.

Commenting on the new judicial process SANZAAR CEO Andy Marinos said, “The new process is the result of the identification of certain challenges within the application of an effective and consistent judicial process. It has followed a comprehensive review of Super Rugby 2016 and a consultation process with the Four National Unions (ARU, NZR, SARU and UAR). The changes also follow World Rugby’s acceptance, following a Judicial Review Conference last year, that competition organisers be allowed to tailor judicial processes to suit the challenges associated within their competitions.”

“SANZAAR believes Super Rugby has unique challenges across six territories and 15 time zones and the enhanced Super Rugby judicial process will deliver a more streamlined and effective system for teams and a more consistent outcome for players and fans to identify with.”

 

[Brumby Jack]

The bye round one should read 'exclusion'.

That 'playing club rugby that round' loophole thing was a complete joke.

 

[cyclopath]

They should ditch the "reduction for guilty plea" crap too. A sanction should be a sanction. By all means take into account the previous record, so an unblemished player gets one get slightly out of jail free card. Just one. If a player does something completely fuck-headed, I don't see why an early guilty plea should get them some kudos points.

 

[yourmatesam]

They should ditch the "reduction for guilty plea" crap too. A sanction should be a sanction. By all means take into account the previous record, so an unblemished player gets one get slightly out of jail free card. Just one. If a player does something completely fuck-headed, I don't see why an early guilty plea should get them some kudos points.

Or remorse, saying sorry after the fact is a cop out.

 

[Brumby Jack]

TMO changes from SANZAAR:

Should the referee or one of his team (Assistant Referees or TMO), wish to initiate a review of a decision (via replay by the TMO), the referee will first state to the TMO his "on-field decision" based on his real-time view. The TMO will then review the given incident accordingly based on the referee’s assessment.

The TMO must be persuaded that the evidence is compelling before proving the on-field referee’s call wrong, and therefore overturning the call.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

I'm gunna go out on a limb here & suggest that regardless of the above Veldsman & Ayoub will continue to make calls that render the rest of us speechless.

 

[cyclopath]

I'm gunna go out on a limb here & suggest that regardless of the above Veldsman & Ayoub will continue to make calls that render the rest of us speechless.

You expecting speechless? On here? You must be basking in the euphoria of your new continental status!

 

[Brumby Jack]

I'm gunna go out on a limb here & suggest that regardless of the above Veldsman & Ayoub will continue to make calls that render the rest of us speechless.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Check out some highlights of Italy England if you can. Italy didn't create rucks by not committing after a tackle to great effect.

Will be hearing plenty more on this one I suspect

 

[Highlander35]

It's not a new tactic, some Sevens teams have been doing it for the better part of a decade, and the Chris were doing it quite a bit a couple of years ago. Still, Brilliant stuff by Italy, albeit it isn't what you want to see every time two mismatched sides come up against each other a lá the park the bus in football.

I think you won't see any rule changes or anything, but before the June Internationals, there will be a comprehensive series of interpretations released based around whether or not pulling players in counts as a ruck, how close a player can be to the halfback etc.

As has been said, it's not a winning tactic in and of itself, it took a "favourable" interpretation by Poite, and England being unwilling to think outside the box in the first 33 minutes. For example, none of this standard pick and go, or one pass stuff, have Teo, Hughes, Itoje or Nowell run straight fucking over the top and look to offload with all the close defenders behind you.

At about the 36th minute, Danny Care has a snipe when no one commits to the ruck then chips and chases, nearly getting a try. They didn't do enough of that.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Eddie got outsmarted (for a while anyway), and as expected, is taking it well

England coach Eddie Jones launched an extraordinary attack on Italy's innovative breakdown tactics in their Six Nations clash, saying "that's not rugby" and that the fans should get their money back.

 

[MonkeyBoy]

It's not a new tactic, some Sevens teams have been doing it for the better part of a decade, and the Chris were doing it quite a bit a couple of years ago. Still, Brilliant stuff by Italy, albeit it isn't what you want to see every time two mismatched sides come up against each other a lá the park the bus in football.

I think you won't see any rule changes or anything, but before the June Internationals, there will be a comprehensive series of interpretations released based around whether or not pulling players in counts as a ruck, how close a player can be to the halfback etc.

As has been said, it's not a winning tactic in and of itself, it took a "favourable" interpretation by Poite, and England being unwilling to think outside the box in the first 33 minutes. For example, none of this standard pick and go, or one pass stuff, have Teo, Hughes, Itoje or Nowell run straight fucking over the top and look to offload with all the close defenders behind you.

At about the 36th minute, Danny Care has a snipe when no one commits to the ruck then chips and chases, nearly getting a try. They didn't do enough of that.

Pretty sure that is a side effect of Eddie Jones coaching, all about the plan. Means players struggle to think on their feet at games time... looks familiar at a Wallaby level too.

 

[Micheal]

I absolutely adore that game plan but the Poms are absolutely up in arms about it.

It's in the bloody rules! Not only that, if they'd seen enough Rugby they'd have known about it earlier. Pocock used it last EOYT and the Chiefs (I believe) utilised it for an opening game a few seasons back.

I have a distant memory that a NH club has used it before but I can't place my finger on who.

I'm perplexed as to how the English team weren't familiar with the legalities of it.

 

[Jagman]

The Chiefs used it against the Waratahs last year. Palu figured they should just pick and go and the team followed suit. Ended up being the Waratahs best game of the season.