Its ingrained for the likes of you & I but consider the casual observer.
A kick for touch in GP gives you gain in ground and throw in to opposition.
Unless its kicked out on the full in which case no gain in ground.
Unless the kicker is in own 22 in which case gain in ground.
Unless ball...
Let me see if i can untangle this.
1. Defending pillar is offside near goal line
2. Attacking ball carrier barrels through offside player & a couple of others to apparently ground ball
3. TMO decides ball carrier has knocked on so no try
BB suggests PT is the go.
Yeah, nah
Break out the sunscreen
https://www.limerickleader.ie/news/national-news/1493764/alert-irish-weather-forecast-predicts-temperatures-of-19c-over-next-few-days.html
It looked to me like the ref just wanted to get out of there. Penalties hadn't done it as the attacking team declined shots at goal, so without an attacking knock on, the game would still be going now.
Couldn't see it in detail but a head contact PT in a pick & go situation with bodies...
https://www.canva.com/design/DAGCdP7c7mM/_l4gjbL1CfX4mDqXOvWDDg/view?utm_content=DAGCdP7c7mM&utm_campaign=designshare&utm_medium=link&utm_source=editor#57
A new resource published by RA. Thoughts?
Slide 21 is interesting. Because you can't have a tackle in-goal (as per definitions), you can't...
If it was 1% then you'd see 99 phases of play in a row which never happens. I reckon its more like 10% which is what the PTB want. If it was any more than that the ball carrying team would be disinclined to take the ball into contact and we go back to aerial ping pong
Its difficult to comment without seeing it.
So Saracens have possession at back of ruck. Ref calls "use it". Bath counter-ruck but unsuccessfully and Saracens still maintain possession.
How much did the counter-ruck disrupt the Saracens SH? If at all, then I'd restart the "use it" once it had...