Sorry, not sure if anyone is allowed critique your critique of the video but I thought it was so far off that it was worth a comment.
At 1:15: Read doesn't launch himself over the ball, he binds correctly and drives Habana away from the tackle area. This is a legitimate part of the game, and you see players from both teams doing exactly that at virtually every tackle/ruck situation.
I think his point was in relation to how Read sealed the ruck as part of the tackle. In thoery Law 15.7 (c) says No player may fall on or over the players lying on the ground after a tackle with the ball between or near to them. Sanction: Penalty kick
The key to the breakdown is to seal it off in a manner that seems legal (and so is legal in my book). If you ask me there was nothing wrong with it though. It was part of the tackle so a good way to stop the Boks interfeering with the ABs ball. Could easily be penalised though if the ref wants to allow a contest.
The player standing in an offside position is actually not taking part on the game, so he doesn't necessarily have to be penalised.
Law 11 definitions:At the start of a game all players are onside. As the match progresses players may find themselves in an offside position. Such players are then liable to be penalised until they become onside again.
"Liable to be penalised" means that he "can" be penalised, not that he "must" be penalised.
Nahhh that rule applies to open play and you know it. He was offside at the ruck, he should have been warned and if he or another AB repeats he should be penalised.
16.5 (b) Players must either join a ruck, or retire behind the offside line immediately. If a player loiters at the side of a ruck, the player is offside. Sanction: Penalty kick
It would have been petty, but those pillar guards should be removed by the referee immediately and penalised after a warning.
At 1:43: Owen Franks was entitled to to do what he did because NO tackle had yet been made; McCaw had not been taken to ground...
Law 15 Definitions A tackle occurs when the ball carrier is held by one or more opponents and is brought to ground.
Nor had any ruck/or maul formed.
Law 16 Definitions: A ruck is a phase of play where one or more players from each team, who are on their feet, in physical contact, close around the ball on the ground. Open play has ended.
Therefore, its General Play, and players can join from any direction.
What? In general play offside doesnt count? Take a look at Law 11
11.1 (b) Offside and interfering with play. A player who is offside must not take part in the game. This means the player must not play the ball or obstruct an opponent.
or maybe
11.8 When a ruck, maul, scrum or lineout forms, a player who is offside and is retiring as required by Law remains offside even when the opposing team wins possession and the ruck, maul, scrum or lineout has ended. The player is put onside by retiring behind the applicable offside line. No other action of the offside player and no action of that player’s team mates can put the offside player onside.
Even if I was to conceed Franks wasnt offside (which I dont ), Mealamu was a mile off. A ruck was forming and so they had to enter through the gate, they didnt. Good on them if they can get away with it, but dont blame the Aussie for pointing it out.
Same again and 2:21 and 2:41; nothing formed (i.e. no ruck) so no offside. The narrator seems to be bent on continuing to use the term "offside" in situations where there is none.
@ 2:41 He ran ahead of the ball and obstructed a player. He was a mile offside but as he retreated it wasnt an issue from the kick. He was still offside though.
At 3:30:Conrad Smith is perfectly entitled to take out Kirchner. This is called "cleaning out". This practice is enabled by the following Law
Law 15.7 (d) Players on their feet must not charge or obstruct an opponent who is not near the ball.
"Cleaning out" is a basic fundamental of the modern game. The only thing I would say is that he could have been pinged for entering at the side.
He has to come in through the gate (you actually say so yourself below). Kirchner retreats as if to enter by the gate and Smith came in the side and cleaned him out. Clear penalty but it was so quick no referee would spot it. 15.7 has nothing to do with that at all. No idea where you came up with that one.
At 3:53
What I see here is a bunch of All Black forwards taking advantage of the fact that the Springbok players are;
a: too slow to the breakdown.
b: not committing players on their feet to the breakdown even when the do eventually get there.
Pretty much agree with you on everything except for the ruck not existing.
The materiality you mention has nothing to do with anything he talks about. It effectively allows a ref to ignore the little things in order to allow a game flow. That doesnt make his point any less valid. Your definition of a ruck is similarly lacking. Your assuming that because the South Africans dont engage, a ruck doesnt exist and so there is no such thing as offside. Thats not the case and you know it too.
