• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

Premiership Rugby 2018/19 Round 3

I didn't think crossing applied to when you are chasing a player back to your own try line... Surely a player is allowed to run wherever the hell they want as long as they are onside
 
@smartcooky (or any other ref.s) can you obstruct a player when you're both having the ball carrier?
Incident just now in Quin's v Bath (72 minutes), Bath SH has the ball, and is running forwards, with his own winger behind him running obstruction on the Quin's winger. He changes direction a couple of times, but my under is that he's allowed to. He's not chasing back, he's not offside, the ball is being carried not loose. I'm unaware of anything in the laws that says he has to run a straight line.


ETA: OK, looks like I'm wrong
https://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=9&language=EN
9.3 A player must not intentionally prevent an opponent from tackling or attempting to tackle the ball-carrier.
 
Last edited:
Best performance of the season, despite the scoreline.
Still in it until our lack of depth/lack of bench started to show and the Chiefs pulled away at the end.
Far more promising signs than the last two weeks, and still with most of our backline to return from injury/suspension/internationals.
 
Which Tyler said:
@smartcooky (or any other ref.s) can you obstruct a player when you're both having the ball carrier?
Incident just now in Quin's v Bath (72 minutes), Bath SH has the ball, and is running forwards, with his own winger behind him running obstruction on the Quin's winger. He changes direction a couple of times, but my under is that he's allowed to. He's not chasing back, he's not offside, the ball is being carried not loose. I'm unaware of anything in the laws that says he has to run a straight line.


ETA: OK, looks like I'm wrong
https://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=9&language=EN
9.3 A player must not intentionally prevent an opponent from tackling or attempting to tackle the ball-carrier.
Click to expand...

How far away do you apply the law though? Directly in front I could understand but they were a good 3/4m away and outside the range where he would actually be making the tackle.
 
ragerancher said:
How far away do you apply the law though? Directly in front I could understand but they were a good 3/4m away and outside the range where he would actually be making the tackle.
Click to expand...

to me, it comes down to why they made that movement. if it's clear that their purpose was to slow down a potential tackler it's obstruction. if it's 50/50 support line then play on, but he his sole purpose was to slow down the opponent.

think of it like f1: block once fair game... block twice it's a penalty
 
From the clip I saw I'd say it's a try,
Brew was constantly in a legitimate position/angle to receive the ball, it's not like he put his arms out and shepherded the chaser off into touch.
 
themole25 said:
to me, it comes down to why they made that movement. if it's clear that their purpose was to slow down a potential tackler it's obstruction. if it's 50/50 support line then play on, but he his sole purpose was to slow down the opponent.

think of it like f1: block once fair game... block twice it's a penalty
Click to expand...

Yeah but then have you tried to keep someone behind you when supposedly running full tilt? It's extremely difficult. Brew wasn't catching up with Cook and Earle wasn't getting past Brew, even when Brew lost track of where he was. Imagine the same was done but say 10m back? Surely you have to first determine that the player is actually in a position to tackle otherwise players in onside positions could be getting pinged for this all the time. If Earle was truly running much faster than Cook, he would also have been running much faster than Brew was and would have been able to get past him even with Brew weaving about. There was nothing that we could see to show conclusively that Earle would have caught up in time or been in a position to finally make the tackle so applying a law relating to tackles when he was in no position to actually make a tackle at any point seems to be stretching it.
 
ragerancher said:
Yeah but then have you tried to keep someone behind you when supposedly running full tilt? It's extremely difficult. Brew wasn't catching up with Cook and Earle wasn't getting past Brew, even when Brew lost track of where he was. Imagine the same was done but say 10m back? Surely you have to first determine that the player is actually in a position to tackle otherwise players in onside positions could be getting pinged for this all the time. If Earle was truly running much faster than Cook, he would also have been running much faster than Brew was and would have been able to get past him even with Brew weaving about. There was nothing that we could see to show conclusively that Earle would have caught up in time or been in a position to finally make the tackle so applying a law relating to tackles when he was in no position to actually make a tackle at any point seems to be stretching it.
Click to expand...

no you wouldn't... because 99% of the time player's are actually trying to receive a pass/ get in a position to ruck.

if he doesn't look around i'm fairly certain this try is given

the fact that he's constantly looking for the chaser makes it look like obstruction
 
TRF_Olyy said:
Best performance of the season, despite the scoreline.
Still in it until our lack of depth/lack of bench started to show and the Chiefs pulled away at the end.
Far more promising signs than the last two weeks, and still with most of our backline to return from injury/suspension/internationals.
Click to expand...

Didnt see the game but happy with the result, especially due to the fact we lost kvesic and SSimmonds to illness. Big loss for the team so well done to the young lads stepping up to starting line up
 
scotty507 said:
Didnt see the game but happy with the result, especially due to the fact we lost kvesic and SSimmonds to illness. Big loss for the team so well done to the young lads stepping up to starting line up
Click to expand...
Worth a watch (do premiership still put full games on their site?)
Cordero was electric every time he touched the ball, and Slade had a good game, despite losing out on physicality vs Jennings. Really even game with lots of nice attacking from both sides up until the subs started happening and Exter's depth showed and they pulled away.
I'd say the scoreline vaguely flattered Exeter - they deserved the win, but we fluffed a whole lot of chances in the 2nd half, haha
 
TRF_Olyy said:
Worth a watch (do premiership still put full games on their site?)
Cordero was electric every time he touched the ball, and Slade had a good game, despite losing out on physicality vs Jennings. Really even game with lots of nice attacking from both sides up until the subs started happening and Exter's depth showed and they pulled away.
I'd say the scoreline vaguely flattered Exeter - they deserved the win, but we fluffed a whole lot of chances in the 2nd half, haha
Click to expand...
Highlights bt sport at 2130 i believe so ill give that a watch. Fair enough and sale should be different getting RJVR(or what ever it is) and ashton back soon changing there back line for the better, what about JOC? Got any forwards to return?
 

Similar threads

TRF_Olyy
Premiership 24/25 - Round 3
4 5 6
Replies
100
Views
3K
Don't Skip Leg Day
Don't Skip Leg Day
Which Tyler
Premiership Rugby 24/25 - Round 1
3 4 5
Replies
97
Views
3K
Not Mike Brown's Sock
Not Mike Brown's Sock
TRF_Olyy
  • Sticky
Premiership 24/25 - Round 8
2 3 4
Replies
66
Views
1K
Vieux Talonneur
Vieux Talonneur
TRF_Olyy
Premiership 24/25 - Round 7
4 5 6
Replies
111
Views
3K
Which Tyler
Which Tyler
TRF_Olyy
Premiership 24/25 - Round 6
4 5 6
Replies
119
Views
6K
BPM
BPM

Latest posts

Top