PDA

View Full Version : [Law] List of widely believed Law myths - Version 2016



L'irlandais
23-02-16, 17:02
Hullo,
I posted this in another thread, but don't wish to be accused of highjacking that discussion, so I think it best to start a new thread.
Phil E's Urban-Law-Myths-PowerPoint-presentation was posted a couple of years ago now. Perhaps it would be an idea to add Law references, to quote to irrational coaching staff after the game. At the same time folks can discuss any widely believed Law myths they feel are missing for the existing RRF Wiki's myth list :

RRF Wiki's myth list
1. You must let a player on the ground up. 14.2 or 15.7 Forbidden practices
2. Can't take the second penalty quickly. 21.7 What the opposing team must do at a penalty kick (d). + 21.8 where Free Kicks are concerned
3. Player on their feet in a ruck can play the ball with their hands. law 16.4 Other ruck offenses (b)
4. The referee must stop the game for injuries. Law 5.4 (a) Injury
5. The ball is out when the player has their hands on it. Law 16.5 offside at the ruck.
6. A Kick-off or restart must travel 10m in the air. Law 13.6 Kick-off of under 10 metres but played by an opponent
7. You can ruck a player providing the studs are going backwards. Law 16.3(f) ruckingLaw references are my suggestions, feel free to correct them if you think I am mistaken.

8. Number 8 must not pick the ball from the base of an uncontested scrum. Law 3.6 Uncontested scrums doesn't disallow it, so it is presumably allowed.

Other myths which might make the top 10 :
9. No offside in-goal. Law 22.16 infringements in-goal

10. Your own favourite here...

Paule23
23-02-16, 19:02
5.4 injured player. What do you do if there is no-one medically trained but you don't believe it's serious? (Holding at arm,
Slow to get up, hobbling etc). How long do you leave it before you play on? What are your options is the situation is difficult to manage and they ignore your encouragement to either play on or leave the field?

ChrisR
23-02-16, 21:02
Heard this one this year.

"You can't step into the tunnel to jump for the ball at a line-out".

crossref
23-02-16, 21:02
5.4 injured player. What do you do if there is no-one medically trained but you don't believe it's serious? (Holding at arm,
Slow to get up, hobbling etc). How long do you leave it before you play on? What are your options is the situation is difficult to manage and they ignore your encouragement to either play on or leave the field?

when they go down injured you play on until the next stoppage UNLESS the play comes very close to the injured player, then stop (safety).

once stoppped you can't restart until they recover or leave the pitch. I don't think you can encourage them to 'hurry up' at all.

crossref
23-02-16, 21:02
Myths I encounter a lot (in addition to the above list)

- you can prevent the oppo from taking a QTI by two of you standing on the line of touch (commonly known as 'marking it')
- only hookers can hook
- no pick ups at uncontested scrums
- after a charge down everyone is onside

L'irlandais
23-02-16, 22:02
My own suggestion for the Top Ten addition would be "They started it" , which seems to me to be a widely held belief. Maybe I am wrong and it is simply the " Red mist" kicking in. The "he punched me first sir," so I can hit him back with impunity attitude, is it genuinely a myth? Or is it just that Punch ups are far more common this side of the channel?
Paul O Connell eloquently put it like this "I have to defend myself". (http://www.rugbydump.com/2008/12/775/jamie-cudmore-suspended-after-fight-with-paul-oconnell).
Law 10.4 (l). Retaliation. A player must not retaliate. Even if an opponent is infringing the Laws, a player must not do anything that is dangerous to the opponent.
The counter argument in use being "We were just getting our retaliation in first.":chin:

Ian_Cook
24-02-16, 05:02
Your own favourite here...

10. A ball that is passed and then travels towards the opposition dead ball line is a forward pass :pepper::pepper::pepper:

LAW 12 DEFINITION: THROW FORWARD
A throw forward occurs when a player throws or passes the ball forward.
‘Forward’ means towards the opposing team’s dead ball line.
See current TMO protocols and WR Forward Pass video for guidance on how this is to be interpreted


11. The ball carrier didn't get downward pressure, so no try

Law 22.1 (a) Player touches the ground with the ball. A player grounds the ball by holding the ball and touching the ground with it, in in-goal. ‘Holding’ means holding in the hand or hands, or in the arm or arms. No downward pressure is required.

Dickie E
24-02-16, 10:02
1. a PK at goal that hits post and goes into touch results in a lineout throw to the kicking team

2. a ball that goes into touch outside the 22 and rolls past the 22 can't be thrown in as a QTI and kicked for gain in ground

3. non-scoring team can't stand between the posts for the conversion

4. England will get through the pool stage

crossref
24-02-16, 10:02
some of these really aren't "commonly held" as they relate to scenarios that are really rare

some of these aren't really "myths", as they relate to scenarios that are contentious anyway and it's not certain they are wrong

TigerCraig
25-02-16, 03:02
3. non-scoring team can't stand between the posts for the conversion



Get that all the time here - rugby league influence

Phil E
25-02-16, 10:02
once stoppped you can't restart until they recover or leave the pitch.

I think that's a myth :chin:

crossref
25-02-16, 10:02
I think that's a myth :chin:

really? you would restart a game with an injured player being treated on the pitch?

I can see the logic, I guess, but is that common?

Phil E
25-02-16, 10:02
Yes.

If a player is down with an injury they have one minute. After that we play on. That's why we now have interchanges.

5.4 TIME LOST

(a) Injury. The referee may stop play for not more than one minute so that an injured player
can be treated, or for any other permitted delay.

If a player is seriously injured and needs to be removed from the field of play, the referee
has the discretion to allow the necessary time to have the injured player removed from the
field-of-play.

crossref
25-02-16, 11:02
Yes.

If a player is down with an injury they have one minute. After that we play on. That's why we now have interchanges.



but isn't the whole idea of interchanges that they go ahead make one - and the injured player leaves the pitch to be treated ?

SimonSmith
25-02-16, 14:02
Unless the medic is telling me to stop, or play is at or heading towards them, we keep going.

crossref
25-02-16, 14:02
Unless the medic is telling me to stop, or play is at or heading towards them, we keep going.

yes, of course.
But when the next stoppage does come -- scrum or whatever - would you resume play with the injured player still down, or would you wait for him to recover/leave the pitch?

L'irlandais
16-05-16, 11:05
......

TheBFG
16-05-16, 12:05
yes, of course.
But when the next stoppage does come -- scrum or whatever - would you resume play with the injured player still down, or would you wait for him to recover/leave the pitch?

I would try and carry on, even though all the players will be shouting "man down ref". if he's not a Fwd or a #9 we'd be playing on. Oh and of course, he's out of the way.

crossref
16-05-16, 12:05
(scratches head) I am surprised by these answers.
To me accepted practice is to play on until the next natural stoppage, and then to stop play.
This normally means that the injured player has been down for some time and, unless he's too injured to move, I'd be expecting him to either get up and play on or leave the pitch. I don't see much upside to resuming play with him still being treated, and I don't think the players (form either side) would be expecting to.

SimonSmith
16-05-16, 13:05
+
yes, of course.
But when the next stoppage does come -- scrum or whatever - would you resume play with the injured player still down, or would you wait for him to recover/leave the pitch?

Jeepers, missed this.

It would depend upon the player. If it's a FR, then we stop. A quick word with the medic to find out what the issue is and how long to fix. Any sign of longer than about a minute and I'll ask for him to be taken off so we can keep going.

TheBFG
16-05-16, 13:05
yep agree with SS.

Don't get me wrong if he's "really injured" we'd stop, but if he's down getting a blow, we're carrying on, hey if I have to keep running so can he!

I guess it could be a level thing, I appreciate that not all matches have medical cover and I'm not talking about a bloke with a magic sponge, but if they're out of the way and being treated, we're carrying on. I do tell physio's that if there's a problem give me a shout and we'll stop.

DocY
16-05-16, 14:05
I usually wouldn't start play again. As crossref alluded to, if he's been down that long it's probably pretty serious.

At a break in play, if a guy's down I'll usually run over to check what's going on. The phrase "get him up or get him off" is usually uttered and I'd give them a minute or two.

Only if they were messing around saying he was definitely staying on, but showing no sign of stopping treatment would we play on.

SimonSmith
16-05-16, 16:05
I usually wouldn't start play again. As crossref alluded to, if he's been down that long it's probably pretty serious.

At a break in play, if a guy's down I'll usually run over to check what's going on. The phrase "get him up or get him off" is usually uttered and I'd give them a minute or two.

Only if they were messing around saying he was definitely staying on, but showing no sign of stopping treatment would we play on.

I've seen players try to stay down a long time with cramp.
Whilst painful, it ain't serious

DocY
16-05-16, 17:05
I've seen players try to stay down a long time with cramp.
Whilst painful, it ain't serious

No, and in those cases when I go over to speak to them - particularly if there's a physio with them - I'll ask them to leave the field until it's sorted. That often leads to a fast recovery.

Lee Lifeson-Peart
17-05-16, 11:05
Myth:


You can't charge the conversion from a Penalty Try.

I don't tell them they're wrong as it saves having to adjudicate another issue if they charge it down and/or the ball falls over.

Pegleg
17-05-16, 15:05
I would try and carry on, even though all the players will be shouting "man down ref". if he's not a Fwd or a #9 we'd be playing on. Oh and of course, he's out of the way.

Why? As long as any scrum is correctly manned surely open play ruck mauls etc tough. If your 9 is injured tough he doersn ot remotely come under STE cover.

thepercy
17-05-16, 15:05
Because it would be awkward to have a scrum without a SH

beckett50
17-05-16, 15:05
(scratches head) I am surprised by these answers. To me accepted practice is to play on until the next natural stoppage, and then to stop play. This normally means that the injured player has been down for some time and, unless he's too injured to move, I'd be expecting him to either get up and play on or leave the pitch. I don't see much upside to resuming play with him still being treated, and I don't think the players (form either side) would be expecting to.

Depends upon the level, I would suggest.

Pegleg
17-05-16, 16:05
Because it would be awkward to have a scrum without a SH


Awkward but not unsafe so tough. STE is a requirement in the Front Row (and second row in youth) because of SAFETY and NOT because you want the best man there. If your SH is injured anyone can throw the ball it. Just not quite as well. Well that is tough.

DocY
17-05-16, 16:05
If your SH is injured anyone can throw the ball it. Just not quite as well. Well that is tough.

Indeed. An inexperienced guy might put it in straight!

crossref
17-05-16, 16:05
Do you guys really, commonly have scrums while someone is lying injured on the pitch?

I don't think I have ever done that.

SimonSmith
17-05-16, 16:05
Do you guys really, commonly have scrums while someone is lying injured on the pitch?

I don't think I have ever done that.

Why not?

crossref
17-05-16, 17:05
Why not?

because given we have reached a stoppage I'd check with the injury, to see what's up, and I'd expect the injured player to either leave the pitch or get up and play on.

if he's so injured that he can't do either, ie we're talking ambulance, we'd have to wait.

DocY
17-05-16, 17:05
Why not?

I don't think it's surprising that some referees have never done this. For me (who's only done this a couple of times) it has to be a mixture of:
The injured player is far enough away that the danger of him getting in the way is minimal
You're convinced he's malingering, or at least not very injured
Being close to half time/no side

I think this is largely personal preference and depends on the level at which you're playing. If you're more sympathetic than me and refereeing a level where the ball can be kicked nearly the length of the pitch, the first two clauses are going to rule out playing on.

crossref
17-05-16, 18:05
You're convinced he's malingering, or at least not very injured
.

but how would you guess, unless you've walked over to at least have a look....
and if he is malingering or not very injured all the more reason to say he must either leave the pitch or play on.


[NB I am not questioning the scenario of initially playing on when someone is injured, I whole heartedly approve of that, and always play on when practical .... until the the next natural stoppage)

thepercy
17-05-16, 19:05
Do you guys really, commonly have scrums while someone is lying injured on the pitch?

I don't think I have ever done that.

Commonly, no. Rarely, yes. Non-serious injury, play stops at next dead ball, player given their minute. "Captain, are you making a substitution?" They answer, "No." I say, "Ok, we are going to play on." At this point there is usually a miracle recovery, or rarely we play on with the player still lying on the pitch.

crossref
17-05-16, 21:05
Commonly, no. Rarely, yes. Non-serious injury, play stops at next dead ball, player given their minute. "Captain, are you making a substitution?" They answer, "No." I say, "Ok, we are going to play on." At this point there is usually a miracle recovery, or rarely we play on with the player still lying on the pitch.

I think that if I tried to to have a scrum while a player was lying injured on the pitch I'd have 29 players thinking I was a dick.

Rushforth
17-05-16, 21:05
I think that if I tried to to have a scrum while a player was lying injured on the pitch I'd have 29 players thinking I was a dick.

Safety above all else. I've been in games where I wasn't fit or fast enough (compared to the players) and stopped the action because of an injured player who was more important to me than what I couldn't see of the ball. Not a single complaint about that, ever, because if a rugby player is laid down sufficiently for the referee to whistle, players (including opponents) accept that safety comes first.

I don't mind if they (or you, not crossref but all of you) think I am a dick for other reasons, for that forward pass decision I made or the ball not being clearly moved on those quick penalties, but safety is something I am not a dick about. As refs, our official primary priority is enforcing laws. Some of us do. Some of us look for patterns. Some of us are clueless (I sometimes am). Some of us try to keep the game fun - I do so when it makes sense to do so.

Fortunately it is usually in the background of my thoughts, but as soon as there is a safety issue, a player sprawled on the field for whatever reason, that is a priority issue mentally.

Once the whistle has gone for some technical thing where a scrum has to happen? I am not interested in the scrum. Nor am I interested in giving the injured player first aid, mind. But hell yeah, I'm not going to order a scrum.

DocY
17-05-16, 23:05
but how would you guess, unless you've walked over to at least have a look....
and if he is malingering or not very injured all the more reason to say he must either leave the pitch or play on.


I'd always go and have a look and generally I'd agree, but there have been two instances when it seemed better to play on: the first when a player was having a knee iced in one 22 and there was an attacking lineout on the other with two minutes left in the half. Jogged over, saw what was going on and thought it better to play the last couple of minutes.

The second time wasn't really an injury - he was looking for a contact lens (well away from play, again). I did t have much patience with that.

ChrisR
18-05-16, 01:05
Player lying on the pitch.
Play continues, if player is not at risk, until next stoppage. Exception: Clearly a serious situation. Unconscious is serious.
Go to player. Can he be moved off the pitch? Replacement? Out of the way getting treatment (cramp), but not being replaced, then continue.

Lost contact. Three minutes to help find it unless he has a replacement in his kit.

C'mon. It's just an effing game.

FlipFlop
19-05-16, 10:05
I've played on with "player down" at scrums. Normally it is the same person, taking a breather. The other team WANTS to carry on. They think they have better fitness, and want that to impact the game.

Everytime I've done it, the player seems to have recovered before the ball is back in play.

Does it happen often? No. But there are times you "know" the player is taking a breather. And in smart teams, the FR will see this, and will get tehir own "injury" to prevent the scrum happening.

TheBFG
19-05-16, 13:05
If a player is down and is being reviewed by a trained person, unless they shout to say there is a major problem, we play on while it's practical to do so :shrug:

L'irlandais
19-05-16, 14:05
:offtopic:I guess we are agreed then it is a myth that one must stop play if a player is down injured.

Rich
13-09-16, 10:09
I think we're missing something here!! Our most important role is Safety. Everything else is secondary. As ChrisR says "It's only a f***g game!" We have a duty of care to all the players and a huge number of laws are based around player safety. It does not hurt to stop the game, assess and restart (or not) as appropriate. Nobody is ever going to criticise the Ref for checking....and if you really think he/she is faking it then see Law 10.2d.

OB..
13-09-16, 11:09
I think we're missing something here!! Our most important role is Safety. Everything else is secondary.
Yes, safety is paramount, but no need to over-react. If the player is being treated and not in the way, why stop the game? Use your judgement, but err on the side of caution.

TheBFG
13-09-16, 12:09
I don't expect a physio to tell me how to ref and i won't tell them how to asses an injured player. If it's safe to do so, we play on, if they say it's problem we stop, simples!

Blackberry
13-09-16, 14:09
As BFG is saying, if playing has no effect the player's treatment... why stop?

Phil E
13-09-16, 16:09
Heard a new one on Sunday.

Colts game (U18).
FR brief....crouch, bind, set, 45 degree, 1.5m push etc.

We don't do that anymore at this level Sir.
What don't you do?
Stop pushing at 1.5m, we can keep pushing now.
No you can't.
Last weeks ref told us it had changed and we could.
He was mistaken, law book says 1.5m, that's what we will be doing today.

I did double check my law book before the game just in case!
Would love to know who last weeks ref was?

SimonSmith
13-09-16, 16:09
"Saturday -College Men

"Sir, he stiff armed me to the face"
Yep.
Quizzical look
"But he can't..."
Oh, yes, he can.

OB..
13-09-16, 18:09
Heard a new one on Sunday.

Colts game (U18).
FR brief....crouch, bind, set, 45 degree, 1.5m push etc.

We don't do that anymore at this level Sir.
What don't you do?
Stop pushing at 1.5m, we can keep pushing now.
No you can't.
Last weeks ref told us it had changed and we could.
He was mistaken, law book says 1.5m, that's what we will be doing today.

I did double check my law book before the game just in case!
Would love to know who last weeks ref was?
Don't you use WhosTheREf?

Guyseep
13-09-16, 20:09
I had this one last year after a player scored a try between the posts but close to the right upright.

Kicker lines up dead center to which I tell him, you have to take the kick in line with where the try was scored.
His response "I've been playing for 20 years and it's always been that if you score between the posts you can kick wherever you want".

Not Kurt Weaver
13-09-16, 21:09
I had this one last year after a player scored a try between the posts but close to the right upright.

Kicker lines up dead center to which I tell him, you have to take the kick in line with where the try was scored.
His response "I've been playing for 20 years and it's always been that if you score between the posts you can kick wherever you want".

Kicker is 100% correct, it just won't count for 2

Dickie E
13-09-16, 21:09
"Saturday -College Men

"Sir, he stiff armed me to the face"
Yep.
Quizzical look
"But he can't..."
Oh, yes, he can.

Que??

CrouchTPEngage
13-09-16, 21:09
I wonder if there is a similar class of offences for which we have never penalised.
In many years of reffing and watching all levels i have never given nor seen given an offence against a Cavalry Charge or Fying Wedge.
Guess its like the number of scrum feeds which ever get spotted.

chbg
13-09-16, 22:09
Que??

Hand off in European English.

Decorily
13-09-16, 22:09
Hand off in European English.

With a stiff arm??

Nigib
13-09-16, 22:09
I wonder if there is a similar class of offences for which we have never penalised.
In many years of reffing and watching all levels i have never given nor seen given an offence against a Cavalry Charge or Fying Wedge.
Guess its like the number of scrum feeds which ever get spotted.

I will admit to penalising a Cavalry Charge on the 5m line about 10 years ago, reffing an U14 match. Attacking pen on 5m, kicker on the 5, everyone else in a line across the pitch about 10 m behind. They ran in unison, he tapped as they reached him and they ran towards the line. Obviously been coached - ping. And some very (well, extremely) disgruntled coaches - who should have known better, but perhaps it was legal when they played.

SimonSmith
14-09-16, 00:09
With a stiff arm??

For some unknown reason, a fend and a stiff arm are synonymous over here

thepercy
14-09-16, 02:09
Football is the reason.

irishref
14-09-16, 07:09
I pinged the cavalry charge just 3 days ago. Ladies premiership game. First pod to the left of the kicker run towards the ball, the pk is then tapped and the nearest runner receives the ball and immediately gives a flat pass to a runner from a second pod that was lined up to the right of the kicker.

It was coached but the captain - who was puzzled as to why I didn't allow it - said she'd inform her coach of the illegality.

Phil E
14-09-16, 09:09
Don't you use WhosTheREf?

Not in Staffordshire. I did check their website and they didn't have a game last week so it may have been a friendly with a club ref? I have passed it on to the Society.

Paule23
14-09-16, 10:09
I wonder if there is a similar class of offences for which we have never penalised.
In many years of reffing and watching all levels i have never given nor seen given an offence against a Cavalry Charge or Fying Wedge.
Guess its like the number of scrum feeds which ever get spotted.

I've penalised a Calvary charge, I did have to show the coach the law book after the game to show him I wasn't making it up!

Decorily
14-09-16, 11:09
For some unknown reason, a fend and a stiff arm are synonymous over here

That explains that!

OB..
14-09-16, 13:09
I had this one last year after a player scored a try between the posts but close to the right upright.

Kicker lines up dead center to which I tell him, you have to take the kick in line with where the try was scored.
His response "I've been playing for 20 years and it's always been that if you score between the posts you can kick wherever you want".Curiously, it used to be the exact opposite. 1874:
If the ball has been touched down between the goal posts, it must be brought out in a straight line from either of such posts.

This was changed in 1888The ball can be brought out anywhere between the posts, and not only from one of thw posts.

Here is an RFU Ruling from 1888:
Cambridge got a try between the posts against Bedford, and in bringing the ball out, instead of bringing it out straight, followed the old rule of bringing out from a post. Bedford made no charge and after the kick appealed for infringement: Referee (Whalley) allowed the appeal.
An appeal was made to the Rugby Union. who reversed the decision and brought in a decision that "it was the duty of defending side to see the ball is brought out according to Law."
I would have thought it was the referee's job, so being from Bedford I feel rather aggrieved, but I suppose it is too late to challenge it now.

SimonSmith
14-09-16, 13:09
I've penalised a Calvary charge, I did have to show the coach the law book after the game to show him I wasn't making it up!
Were they cross about it?

TheBFG
14-09-16, 13:09
You're not allowed to jump a tackle (from the other thread)

Dickie E
14-09-16, 14:09
Were they cross about it?

I see what you did there ... and so does my wife

Paule23
14-09-16, 15:09
Were they cross about it?

Players were OK, coach was a bit upset, but agreed it was a law (after I showed it him in black and white!).

I can't say he was over the moon after seeing that, but at least he understood where I was coming from (rather than thinking I was making this s!@t up!)

SimonSmith
14-09-16, 16:09
Players were OK, coach was a bit upset, but agreed it was a law (after I showed it him in black and white!).

I can't say he was over the moon after seeing that, but at least he understood where I was coming from (rather than thinking I was making this s!@t up!)

It was a (clearly bad) pun on your use of Calvary and not cavalry

Paule23
15-09-16, 10:09
It was a (clearly bad) pun on your use of Calvary and not cavalry

It was lost on me I'm afraid....never that funny when you've had to explain to the dunce who doesn't get it.....

Phil E
15-09-16, 11:09
It was lost on me I'm afraid....never that funny when you've had to explain to the dunce who doesn't get it.....

Unless everyone else got it apart from the one dunce? :chin:

Lee Lifeson-Peart
15-09-16, 12:09
Curiously, it used to be the exact opposite. 1874:
If the ball has been touched down between the goal posts, it must be brought out in a straight line from either of such posts.

This was changed in 1888The ball can be brought out anywhere between the posts, and not only from one of thw posts.

Here is an RFU Ruling from 1888:
I would have thought it was the referee's job, so being from Bedford I feel rather aggrieved, but I suppose it is too late to challenge it now.

I think the RFU would listen to a challenge from someone who was at the match! :biggrin:

Dan_A
05-10-16, 11:10
Two things from last weekend. I was playing a match for our Vets team on Friday evening. I was on the wing and chased a long kick that went into touch. Nobody touched the ball, so I picked it up and looked to take a quick throw to our full back (who was 10m infield and 5m behind the line of touch. Two opposition players had 'marked the lineout', but none of our forwards were anywhere near (still plodding back after the kick). Referee said I couldn't take it quickly as the lineout was formed. I did ask him who from our team he was including but then decided to shut up!

Next morning, school match, youngest son took a quick tap penalty and was immediately tackled. Referee blew for not ten and went up the field. Youngest grabbed the ball and ran to where the referee was now standing. Opposition coach (teacher) was shouting "You can't take the second one quickly". I was very polite but as he was right next to me and I couldn't resist asking why not :biggrin:

edited for typos!

TheBFG
05-10-16, 11:10
2 very well known "myths" Oh how we laughed!!!!

Dickie E
05-10-16, 11:10
I never let the 2nd one be taken quickly. Its a flash point.

DocY
05-10-16, 11:10
"You can't take the second one quickly". I was very polite but as he was right next to me and I couldn't resist asking why not :biggrin:


This really is ingrained. So much so that I'm thinking of adding it to my PMB.

I had one the other week that went: Penalty - quick tap; not back 10, playing advantage; (couple of phases); no advantage coming, back for the penalty; quick tap.

I thought that really showed up the silliness of this myth, but no, they still complained.

OB..
05-10-16, 12:10
I never let the 2nd one be taken quickly. Its a flash point.
The second one can be taken once the referee has indicated the mark. As you saying you deliberately delay doing so until the opponents are back 10m from the mark that you have not yet indicated?

Dan_A
05-10-16, 12:10
I never let the 2nd one be taken quickly. Its a flash point.

I'm completely ok with a referee 'managing' a situation by either walking slowly to the mark or even stopping the clock for a lecture. Both of these make sense to me, when required, in order to avoid the flashpoint.

TheBFG
05-10-16, 13:10
Contextual judgement to be used in this case, youth/low level "friendly" take your time and ensure they know what's going on, at the higher society levels, they know what they're doing, that said i'm not running to the second mark for a "gotcha!"

didds
05-10-16, 14:10
I'm completely ok with a referee 'managing' a situation by either walking slowly to the mark or even stopping the clock for a lecture. Both of these make sense to me, when required, in order to avoid the flashpoint.

would you do so though to avoid a 5 v 1 overlap from an immediate tap and go?

didds

Dickie E
05-10-16, 21:10
The second one can be taken once the referee has indicated the mark. As you saying you deliberately delay doing so until the opponents are back 10m from the mark that you have not yet indicated?

Sometimes it occurs that I (and the ball carrier) are on, or near, the 2nd mark with opponents milling in the vicinity. To blow for the 2nd penalty and the ball carrier immediately takes the 2nd quick tap is a "gotcha". Opponents need to be given some opportunity to comply and it is reasonable management to admonish them at this point.

The alternative is a 3rd PK and another 10 metres and the ref should really be looking at a YC. Won't do anything for your credibility or respect.

OB..
05-10-16, 21:10
I never let the 2nd one be taken quickly. Its a flash point.

Sometimes it occurs that I (and the ball carrier) are on, or near, the 2nd mark with opponents milling in the vicinity. To blow for the 2nd penalty and the ball carrier immediately takes the 2nd quick tap is a "gotcha". Opponents need to be given some opportunity to comply and it is reasonable management to admonish them at this point.

The alternative is a 3rd PK and another 10 metres and the ref should really be looking at a YC. Won't do anything for your credibility or respect.
"Sometimes" is covered by management. "Never" is very different.

Dickie E
05-10-16, 22:10
"Sometimes" is covered by management. "Never" is very different.

If I'm standing on the mark I won't let the 2nd one be taken quickly. If I have to move to the mark then it can't be taken quickly anyway. I'll leave the semantics with you.

SimonSmith
05-10-16, 23:10
I think it's situational. But I'm not sure I'm a fan of slowing down a team who want to play an up tempo game just because the opposition won't get their sh!t in gear

OB..
06-10-16, 00:10
If I'm standing on the mark I won't let the 2nd one be taken quickly. If I have to move to the mark then it can't be taken quickly anyway. I'll leave the semantics with you.It's not about semantics. It is a question of how you manage the situation. You are not required to make the new mark ASAP, but neither are you required to allow the offenders to re-organise before making the new mark. If you do the latter, you are allowing them to gain some benefit from having offended.

Some people seem to mean that they cannot take a second tap kick. I presume you would disagree with that view?

Dickie E
06-10-16, 01:10
Some people seem to mean that they cannot take a second tap kick.

Really? "Sorry, guys, you now have to kick for posts or touch". I've never come across that

Phil E
06-10-16, 09:10
I think it's situational. But I'm not sure I'm a fan of slowing down a team who want to play an up tempo game just because the opposition won't get their sh!t in gear

This....

I want to keep the game flowing and allow a team to play at pace if they want to. I will only slow a team down if there is a management issue to deal with that requires everyone to calm down. A disorganised defence is not a reason to slow the game down unless it's not their fault or there is a safety issue such as loads of bodies on the floor.

DocY
06-10-16, 12:10
Really? "Sorry, guys, you now have to kick for posts or touch". I've never come across that

I think it's more "Sorry, guys, you have to wait for them to organise their defence if you want to tap again". Not that it's any less wrong.

ianh5979
06-10-16, 18:10
If I'm walking 10 metres to the new mark I would expect the defence to be able to jog/run back the necessary distance, if they can't, tough

Dickie E
06-10-16, 21:10
If I'm walking 10 metres to the new mark I would expect the defence to be able to jog/run back the necessary distance, if they can't, tough

But that assumes that for a full phase of play you have remained rooted to the one spot. It doesn't work that way, does it?

More likely Blue takes QT and is wrapped up by Red player 6 metres from the mark. You play advantage. A bit more dicking around, maybe a maul and Blue make another 2 metres. You decide no advantage and blow for 2nd penalty for not retiring 10.

You're now a large step from the mark and so is the Blue ball carrier with lots of milling Red players.

What do you do?

crossref
06-10-16, 22:10
I understand your point, Dickie

First thing.. To avoid a gotcha you need to be communicating very clearly that it wasn't 10, this is advantage, and another PK is imminent.. So that when the pk comes its not a complete gotcha

And second I agree you dont make a mark in a split second. You find a reason to pause a moment

When you do make a mark.. They can go for it

The Fat
06-10-16, 23:10
I don't race to make the mark but then again I don't dither around. It's basically a quick walk if I am within say 10m of the new mark and possibly just a slow jog if I'm say 12-15m away. I encourage the opposition to get back their 10 as I am moving towards the mark. I figure that if they can't get back their 10 in the time it takes a fat old bloke like me to get to the mark, make the mark and step to the side, they're just not having a go. Seems to work for me.

L'irlandais
07-10-16, 17:10
A couple of commonly held myths in Rugby, although not in any way related to The LoTG, these are a little worrying

1. One of the most commonly held myths in sports medicine is the premise that wearing a mouthguard will prevent concussion.

2. Although most players in the study believe that rugby headgear may prevent concussion, only a minority reported wearing it. Coaches tended to be less convinced than the players that rugby headgear can prevent concussion. WTF?
Surely gum shields protect your teeth, although this report (http://bjsm.bmj.com/content/35/2/81.full) disputes that.
Also while scrum caps may (possibly) offset cauliflower ear, they were never intended to prevent concussion.
I have noticed many over protective Mum's at mini, midi, maxi rugby do buy scrum-caps for young Johnny, even though he plays on the wing.

OB..
07-10-16, 18:10
Also while scrum caps may (possibly) offset cauliflower ear, they were never intended to prevent concussion.
I have noticed many over protective Mum's at mini, midi, maxi rugby do buy scrum-caps for young Johnny, even though he plays on the wing.
It protects against abrasions.

L'irlandais
07-10-16, 21:10
Fair enough, OB.. Thanks.
I will have you know these same women encourage (nay force) their (mini/midi/maxi) sons to wear leggings during the winter months out here.

DocY
07-10-16, 21:10
Fair enough, OB.. Thanks.
I will have you know these same women encourage (nay force) their (mini/midi/maxi) sons to wear leggings during the winter months out here.

Sounds like they should be playing soccer!

Not Kurt Weaver
08-10-16, 00:10
I have noticed many over protective Mum's at mini, midi, maxi rugby do buy scrum-caps for young Johnny, even though he plays on the wing.


Fair enough, OB.. Thanks.
I will have you know these same women encourage (nay force) their (mini/midi/maxi) sons to wear leggings during the winter months out here.

Whose to say it is the mums? Freakin millennials.

In the US, it might be daddy. Wussification of America is ever present

L'irlandais
08-10-16, 09:10
You are not wrong. I guess as long as they refrain from screaming venom from the sides lines, I am "happy" to put up with a bit of Wussification, within reason.

ianh5979
08-10-16, 10:10
But that assumes that for a full phase of play you have remained rooted to the one spot. It doesn't work that way, does it?

More likely Blue takes QT and is wrapped up by Red player 6 metres from the mark. You play advantage. A bit more dicking around, maybe a maul and Blue make another 2 metres. You decide no advantage and blow for 2nd penalty for not retiring 10.

You're now a large step from the mark and so is the Blue ball carrier with lots of milling Red players.

What do you do?
If I am a distance from original mark I would jog back, and as others have said, if a fat git like me can travel that distance then fit young players can get back the 10

L'irlandais
08-10-16, 17:10
Is it just me?
Or are fewer threads making the century these days? :shrug:
In the active discussions there are not half a dozen, yet looking in the archives the are over two hundred visible.

didds
08-10-16, 19:10
] WTF?
Surely gum shields protect your teeth,.

They also protect other people's scalps from the otherwise unprotected teeth !

didds

Pinky
10-10-16, 01:10
They also protect other people's scalps from the otherwise unprotected teeth !

didds

And they do protect against concussion - from an uppercut to the jaw!

Dickie E
10-10-16, 02:10
not a myth but what I consider to be the most unknown law. Reffed 7s on the weekend and on several occasions kick off went into in goal and receiver attempted to run the ball out. SMH

Phil E
10-10-16, 09:10
not a myth but what I consider to be the most unknown law. Reffed 7s on the weekend and on several occasions kick off went into in goal and receiver attempted to run the ball out. SMH

I don't understand? If they don't ground it or make it dead they can just play on.
Am I missing something?

DocY
10-10-16, 09:10
I don't understand? If they don't ground it or make it dead they can just play on.
Am I missing something?

You can, but I think that's the point - why would you want to play on?

Nigib
10-10-16, 10:10
I don't understand? If they don't ground it or make it dead they can just play on.
Am I missing something?

I think Dickie's point is around Law 13.9 (b) - amended under 7s - if kickoff goes in goal and is grounded, then FK at centre - who wouldn't want that?

Dickie E
10-10-16, 11:10
I think Dickie's point is around Law 13.9 (b) - amended under 7s - if kickoff goes in goal and is grounded, then FK at centre - who wouldn't want that?

Indeed. I asked the players afterwards and they had no idea.

Phil E
10-10-16, 11:10
Indeed. I asked the players afterwards and they had no idea.

Got it now. Thanks for clarifying everyone.

DocY
14-12-16, 11:12
I have another one, which seems to be perpetuated by TV pundits (though it isn't alone in that):

Repeated infringements at a 5m scrum can lead to a penalty try.

And its corollary: you can only give a penalty try (at a 5m scrum) after repeated infringements.

Decorily
15-12-16, 13:12
Repeated infringements at a 5m scrum can lead to a penalty try.



Am I missing something? ?

Nigib
15-12-16, 14:12
Am I missing something? ?

A PT is not automatic for repeated infringements - you have to think, that in your view, a try would have been scored but for the infringement.

TheBFG
15-12-16, 14:12
I'm sure it's already been said but relevant today.

"That's not a high tackle, the ball carrier ducked into it" - makes my ***s boil :mad:

Decorily
15-12-16, 14:12
I have another one, which seems to be perpetuated by TV pundits (though it isn't alone in that):

Repeated infringements at a 5m scrum can lead to a penalty try.

And its corollary: you can only give a penalty try (at a 5m scrum) after repeated infringements.


A PT is not automatic for repeated infringements - you have to think, that in your view, a try would have been scored but for the infringement.

I'm clear on awarding a PT.

But how is the statement "Repeated infringements at a 5m scrum can lead to a penalty try " a myth?

Dickie E
15-12-16, 20:12
A PT is not automatic for repeated infringements - you have to think, that in your view, a try would have been scored but for the infringement.

So the "beam me up, Scotty" concept doesn't apply at scrums

L'irlandais
15-12-16, 23:12
So the "beam me up, Scotty" concept doesn't apply at scrumsTechnology makes advances each Millennium. "Beam them out of there, Scotty
We'll need all the power you can muster, mister."
In the future we may have enough quantum power from crystals to beam up both packs at the same time.

DocY
16-12-16, 09:12
I'm clear on awarding a PT.

But how is the statement "Repeated infringements at a 5m scrum can lead to a penalty try " a myth?Maybe I didn't word it well - I was meaning that repeated infringements in and of themselves can't lead to a PT. Of course the chance of an infringement leading to a penalty try are higher, but whether that's the 1st infringement or the 15th doesn't matter.

The situation that brought it to mind was last Saturday:

Red scrum 5, white infringe three times (before the scrum has got moving). I stop to remind the white FR that there are such things as yellow cards and the red captain (prop) pipes up saying "how many times do they have to collapse before it's a penalty try?"

Decorily
16-12-16, 12:12
I have another one, which seems to be perpetuated by TV pundits (though it isn't alone in that):

Repeated infringements at a 5m scrum can lead to a penalty try.

And its corollary: you can only give a penalty try (at a 5m scrum) after repeated infringements.


A PT is not automatic for repeated infringements - you have to think, that in your view, a try would have been scored but for the infringement.


Maybe I didn't word it well - I was meaning that repeated infringements in and of themselves can't lead to a PT. Of course the chance of an infringement leading to a penalty try are higher, but whether that's the 1st infringement or the 15th doesn't matter.

The situation that brought it to mind was last Saturday:

Red scrum 5, white infringe three times (before the scrum has got moving). I stop to remind the white FR that there are such things as yellow cards and the red captain (prop) pipes up saying "how many times do they have to collapse before it's a penalty try?"

Have you now.....thanks.