Search:

Type: Posts; User: Treadmore; Keyword(s):

Page 1 of 16 1 2 3 4

Search: Search took 0.14 seconds.

  1. Re: Enforcement of current law - refereeing at the breakdown March 2020

    I think it means that just because they get pushed off the ball, they will win a penalty if they were in a good position lifting the ball (because if the lose the ball by "not surviving the contact"...
  2. Replies
    23
    Views
    697

    Re: Law 15.7 binding onto player in the ruck

    Well this case was quite simple, tackle, then ruck with only 2 players.

    In case where more than 2 in the ruck, and then some but not all go to ground, then the suggestion above to stick with...
  3. Replies
    23
    Views
    697

    Re: Law 15.7 binding onto player in the ruck

    ?
    Why not?
  4. Replies
    23
    Views
    697

    Re: Law 15.7 binding onto player in the ruck

    Apart from the two players that formed the ruck, the other players on the ground were not ruck participants (they were tackle participants). I do not believe they become ruck participants just...
  5. Replies
    23
    Views
    697

    Re: Law 15.7 binding onto player in the ruck

    Ian
    1. After white 19 clears the gold player the ball is left exposed, it has left the ruck, in my view. In this case the ruck moved beyond the ball.

    2. The lines you have drawn are for those...
  6. Replies
    23
    Views
    697

    Re: Law 15.7 binding onto player in the ruck

    I see the white 19 form a ruck and drive the gold player off the ball.

    I'd say the ruck has ended because the ball is clear of the players that formed the ruck.

    If, as WR appear to, you think...
  7. Replies
    23
    Views
    697

    Re: Law 15.7 binding onto player in the ruck

    It's not clear but the ref appears to give an offside signal with his left arm. Either way, weird choice for that law.
  8. Replies
    22
    Views
    1,256

    [Tackle] Re: Pulling through at the tackle

    No one said "control", the OP said "possession". A player in possession can be tackled.
  9. Replies
    12
    Views
    799

    [Tackle] Re: Clearout at the tackle

    Red 10 discussion here

    re that clearout...

    The blue player (tackler) is making some attempt to comply with the law (moving away) but is still on the ground when "cleared-out". Thus there is no...
  10. Replies
    19
    Views
    415

    Re: 22 Drop Out - Not taken properly

    12.12.c assumes a drop-kick was done (but failed to leave the 22m). The OP said it was a tap kick, which is why I referenced 12.1
  11. Replies
    19
    Views
    415

    Re: 22 Drop Out - Not taken properly

    Law 12.1 tells you there is a sanction ;)
  12. Replies
    22
    Views
    1,256

    [Tackle] Re: Pulling through at the tackle

    In which case, the blue player has been tackled, and legally so if players have complied with 14.9.c
  13. Replies
    25
    Views
    1,338

    [Law] Re: Wales Italy 6N 2020; was Biggar offside?

    My view:
    1. It's not a TWOL: no one on their feet over the ball.
    2. Biggar is in front of his team mate who last played the ball (the BC/tackled player - though red 7 appears to contact ball also...
  14. Replies
    12
    Views
    799

    [Tackle] Re: Clearout at the tackle

    Are you referring to cases such what Red 7 does in this link ? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDs6i5MzNco&feature=youtu.be&t=105

    Though this tackle event was discussed wrt Dan Bigger, it is an...
  15. Replies
    42
    Views
    1,253

    Re: New Front Row logic tree

    Eh?
    Is there a typo in the chart? Instead of "...and an interchange is available" it should be "...or an interchange is available."?
  16. Replies
    42
    Views
    1,253

    Re: New Front Row logic tree

    I think it's if not replaced initially
  17. Replies
    52
    Views
    1,709

    [Law] Re: Sco v Eng - Scrum back?

    ^nope, not timing per se. My view is blocking happens before the lineout begins (the ball is thrown).

    I'd happily accept any clarification of course :)
  18. Replies
    52
    Views
    1,709

    [Law] Re: Sco v Eng - Scrum back?

    Lineout

    I know we shouldn't use old Law books :) but the new Laws seem consistent in a "simplified" way on this point.

    Any player starting in legal position who plays the ball before it reaches...
  19. Replies
    52
    Views
    1,709

    [Law] Re: Sco v Eng - Scrum back?

    I can't recall an example. It is what the Laws used to show though.3968
  20. Replies
    52
    Views
    1,709

    [Law] Re: Sco v Eng - Scrum back?

    I assure you I am thinking of lineout!

    Blocking was previously described in the context of standing closer than 5m from touch, and before the ball is thrown (and such an player was also hampering...
  21. Replies
    52
    Views
    1,709

    [Law] Re: Sco v Eng - Scrum back?

    And I stick with options for the scenario described.

    The "blocker" is a bit of an odd one and the only point of reference I have is the the old Laws :-/ And to me blocking was something being done...
  22. Replies
    52
    Views
    1,709

    [Law] Re: Sco v Eng - Scrum back?

    Re 18.25 - or someone in the 5m channel just waving arms in front of the thrower trying to prevent the throw (or reduce options), as per the picture in an older Law book ;)

    (Btw, I think if they...
  23. Replies
    52
    Views
    1,709

    [Law] Re: Sco v Eng - Scrum back?

    Where is that in the Law? (It's not 18.25)
  24. Replies
    52
    Views
    1,709

    [Law] Re: Sco v Eng - Scrum back?

    The option is clear, yes, but "teammate"?? What am I missing?
  25. Replies
    52
    Views
    1,709

    [Law] Re: Sco v Eng - Scrum back?

    18.23b does not mention team mate (or opponent).

    18.25 does not mention anything about 5m (nor catching). Just for fun, there is no sanction given in the (Android) Laws app for 18.25!
Results 1 to 25 of 376
Page 1 of 16 1 2 3 4