The Laws of the Game/Referee - Discussion Thread

[sigesige00]

anyone else think that the kick off is not being referred .
some kickers are on the opposition half when they kick the ball.
chasers seem to be infront when the ball is kicked.

Yes, very often kick-off fouls are ignored. The kick-off rule should be strict.

"Kick-off must be done from behind the halfway line, including approach run".

 

[sigesige00]

Going back to points for goals. Rugby, IMO, is supposed to be about scoring tries. Having 4 points for a conversion is ridiculous. It should stay the same as it presently is. However, I would reduce the penalty to 2 points and drop goals / field goals to 1 point. I know this will be unpopular with some: there seems to be a difference between NH and SH, many of the latter wanting it reduced.

I do not agree. Please consider the Rugby of the early days. Try was not score, only after successful conversion points were scored. So more points for conversion is historically right, I think.

And look at American Football. The choice of 1-point and 2-point plays after touchdown is very interesting. Rugby should also have choice for Try-scoring team.

 

[Tadginator]

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6GMkuPiIZ2k
Elizabeth: Wait! You have to take me to shore. According to the Code of the Order of the Brethren...

Barbossa: First, your return to shore was not part of our negotiations nor our agreement so I must do nothing. And secondly, you must be a pirate for the pirate's code to apply and you're not. And thirdly, the code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules. Welcome aboard the Black Pearl, Miss Turner

 

[sigesige00]

What would happen if we reduced the number of on-pitch players from 15 to 13 by abolishing Flankers?

 

[ajwffc]

What would happen if we reduced the number of on-pitch players from 15 to 13 by abolishing Flankers?

We get rugby league

 

[Beau Geste]

We get rugby league

Don't agree. You keep the present rules. I would like to see it trialled and also ban kicking directly to touch from the 22 also unless a penalty has been awarded; and would also do away with calling the 'mark'.

 

[goodNumber10]

My beautiful thread. RIP!

 

[sigesige00]

If we reduce the number of on-pitch players from 15 to 14, what position would be abolished?

 

[gaston le gaff]

if we reduce the number of on-pitch players from 15 to 14, what position would be abolished?

yours!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[jonny24]

"Hey guys, isn't hockey great? But they should play it on grass so they don't need skates. And increase to 11 players. The net should be bigger too. Need a different off side rule. And a ball would roll better than a puck. And no contact.... Guys? Hey guys! Why don't you think these ideas for hockey are great? guys?"

I think you just need to admit you're watching the wrong sport. You clearly don't like rugby.

 

[smartcooky]

sigesige should be barred from posting in this thread

 

[gaston le gaff]

Why just this thread the guys an idiot nothing more nothing less

 

[sigesige00]

I have a question.

(e) If a defending team has put the ball into their own in-goal and a defending player kicks the ball so that is charged down in in-goal and then made dead, the attacking side is awarded a 5-metre scrum in line with where the ball is made dead and they throw in the ball.

Could you explain what this "put" mean? Only when a defending team carries the ball into in-goal? Or this "put" includes the case when the attacking side enters the ball into in-goal (grubber-kick etc)?

 

[munstermuffin]

I have a question.

(e) If a defending team has put the ball into their own in-goal and a defending player kicks the ball so that is charged down in in-goal and then made dead, the attacking side is awarded a 5-metre scrum in line with where the ball is made dead and they throw in the ball.

Could you explain what this "put" mean? Only when a defending team carries the ball into in-goal? Or this "put" includes the case when the attacking side enters the ball into in-goal (grubber-kick etc)?

Put means only when the defensive team carried the ball back over. If I understand it correctly.

 

[psychic duck]

Can anyone clarify the law about the gap at the lineout?

I was watching Canada vs Samoa, and at one lineout a player from the defending team essentially jumped in front of the player from the attacking team so that he when he caught the ball he was standing in front of him.

Then I was watching another game where the attacking team had a lineout and the defending team's jumper was going for the ball and his balance in towards the attacking team's jumper so that they were side by side and what happened was essentially it ended up knocking and leaning into the attacking team's jumper and resulted in the ball getting overthrown with the attacking jumper put off balance.

Anyone know the laws on this. How strictly does the metre gap need to be enforced once the ball is thrown in?

 

[munstermuffin]

Can anyone clarify the law about the gap at the lineout?

I was watching Canada vs Samoa, and at one lineout a player from the defending team essentially jumped in front of the player from the attacking team so that he when he caught the ball he was standing in front of him.

Then I was watching another game where the attacking team had a lineout and the defending team's jumper was going for the ball and his balance in towards the attacking team's jumper so that they were side by side and what happened was essentially it ended up knocking and leaning into the attacking team's jumper and resulted in the ball getting overthrown with the attacking jumper put off balance.

Anyone know the laws on this. How strictly does the metre gap need to be enforced once the ball is thrown in?

Our discussion on other thread regards refs. This is what I mean when I say there's no clear guideline sent from IRB so basically each individual ref judges it as they see fit.

 

[psychic duck]

Perhaps some visual evidence will help get an answer. In the picture on the left you can see the gap between the two sides, but then on the second pic the defending jumper jumps into the gap and takes the ball from the middle, rather than his line. What I want to know is that are you allowed to jump into the gap in the lineout?

 

[psychic duck]

Another example of what I was talking about. Look at the USA lifter. You can see just from way his body is facing the Tongan lineout, that he has just lifted the jumper into the gap so that he's gone up where the gap was, rather than the USA line and is nearly in front of the Tongan jumper. Is that legal? Or are referees just continually missing it? Because I've seen the defending team jump in the gap a few times and it work in disrupting the lineout ball, like it did here, and it did in the previous example.

 

[smartcooky]

The metre gap applies to the forming of the line-out, i.e. before the line-out starts.

[TEXTAREA]19.8 FORMING A LINEOUT
(n) Metre gap. Each line of players must be half a metre on their side of the line of touch.[/TEXTAREA]

Once the line-out begins...

[TEXTAREA]19.9 BEGINNING AND ENDING A LINEOUT
(a) Line-out begins. The line-out begins when the ball leaves the hands of the player throwing it in.[/TEXTAREA]

... and as soon as the ball touches a player or the ground, the line of touch disappears and the offside line becomes the ball.

[TEXTAREA]19.13 OFFSIDE LINES AT THE LINEOUT
(b) Participating players. One offside line applies to the players taking part in the lineout
(usually some or all of the forwards, plus the scrum half and the player throwing in). Until
the ball is thrown in, and has touched a player or the ground, this offside line is the line of
touch. After that, the offside line is a line through the ball.[/TEXTAREA]

Players are allowed to jump across the line-out in order to compete for the ball, however, there are conditions...

[TEXTAREA]19.14 OFFSIDE WHEN TAKING PART IN THE LINEOUT
(a) Before the ball has touched a player or the ground. A player must not overstep the line
of touch. A player is offside if, before the ball has touched a player or the ground, that player
oversteps the line of touch, unless doing so while jumping for the ball. The player must jump
from that player’s side of the line of touch.
[/TEXTAREA]
However, players who do are not usually penalised if they do not affect play and retreat immediately (ie. if the offence has no material effect on their opponents).

[TEXTAREA](b) If a player jumps and crosses the line of touch but fails to catch the ball, that player is not
penalised provided that player gets back onside without delay.[/TEXTAREA]

 

[psychic duck]

Thanks smartcooky, so in both cases it's legal that the player jumped or was lifted into the gap after the ball was thrown.

But what about this scenario I also saw on the weekend. Here on the picture you can see that metre gap has completely disappeared and the two lifters arms are centimetres apart, and what happened was the jumper in competing for the ball kind of ended up leaning into the black jumper and knocking him away from the catch and the ball being overthrown.

In this scenario from what I've understood of what you said. The jumper is legal as he's going for the ball, but the lifter who can't be considered as 'jumping for the ball' should have been ruled offside for closing the gap?