Search:

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

Page 1 of 13 1 2 3 4

Search: Search took 0.06 seconds.

  1. [Tackle] Re: Wales v All Blacks U20 - how is this not a red card?

    https://lmgtfy.com/?q=site:laws.worldrugby.org%20%22dangerous%20play%22
  2. [Tackle] Re: Wales v All Blacks U20 - how is this not a red card?

    good spot
  3. [Tackle] Re: Wales v All Blacks U20 - how is this not a red card?

    So it's the victims fault in some eyes?

    The ball catcher's actions look like 'bracing for impact' to me - entirely understandable in the circumstances. It is unreasonable to expect the ball...
  4. Replies
    24
    Views
    703

    [Law] Re: Offside support players

    Indeed, and the definition is more expansive:
    Offside: A positional offence meaning a player can take no part in the game without being liable to sanction
    Although the example looks unusual the...
  5. Replies
    24
    Views
    703

    [Law] Re: Offside support players

    Green 5 so far offside he wasn't in the picture for a while!

    No way he would have been in a position to receive that ball if he hadn't jogged forward whilst 10m offside so yeah , material.
  6. Thread: Lineout quiz

    by Treadmore
    Replies
    43
    Views
    1,278

    Re: Lineout quiz

    Crossref, in the this case the Definitions in the lawbook are clear (separate for Lineout players and Participating players), I think, and does make the distinction. Usage is consistent with 18.29.
  7. Thread: Lineout quiz

    by Treadmore
    Replies
    43
    Views
    1,278

    Re: Lineout quiz

    I agree we should use 2019 law book CR but:

    Re 1 the receiver is a participating player at a lineout, not in a lineout. So I would say 2019 lawbook does not say the receiver can join the line-out...
  8. Thread: Lineout quiz

    by Treadmore
    Replies
    43
    Views
    1,278

    Re: Lineout quiz

    From 2017:
    Once the lineout has commenced , the receiver may move into the lineout and may perform
    all actions available to players in the lineout and is liable to related sanctions.
  9. Thread: Lineout quiz

    by Treadmore
    Replies
    43
    Views
    1,278

    Re: Lineout quiz

    The distinction between lineout players and participants seems to be the crux.

    Dare I say that in 2017 it was explicit the receiver could join the line-out once the ball was thrown...now the...
  10. Thread: Lineout quiz

    by Treadmore
    Replies
    43
    Views
    1,278

    Re: Lineout quiz

    Once the line-out starts the receiver can compete for the ball (29.a). So it's moving before the throw (running from 4m to 2m) that's the issue for you?
  11. Thread: Lineout quiz

    by Treadmore
    Replies
    43
    Views
    1,278

    Re: Lineout quiz

    On the basis that the receiver is running, not standing?
  12. Thread: Lineout quiz

    by Treadmore
    Replies
    43
    Views
    1,278

    Re: Lineout quiz

    There is a definition for participating players in a lineout, and it includes the receiver
  13. Thread: Lineout quiz

    by Treadmore
    Replies
    43
    Views
    1,278

    Re: Lineout quiz

    Try
    Receiver is not closer than 2m when line-out starts and is allowed to compete for ball once the line-out starts
  14. Replies
    18
    Views
    1,356

    [Ruck] Re: Advancing Ruck Line

    The many TV 9s that stand metres in front of the hindmost foot whilst they roll it backwards should be pk'd!
  15. Replies
    64
    Views
    2,268

    Re: Why no red card?

    I remember that one but Russell wasn't static, as you say...

    I've not seen one given against a static non-jumper in a realistic position to catch the ball.
  16. Replies
    63
    Views
    1,391

    Re: Quick Line out (not quick throw in)

    Indeed, it reads as a requirement on the non-throwing team, not a requirement for a line-out to be formed per se, which seems to be covered minimally by 18.9-13. And 18.14 permits a quickly taken...
  17. Replies
    64
    Views
    2,268

    Re: Why no red card?

    Would be interesting to see such examples, and whether they were upheld post game.
  18. Replies
    64
    Views
    2,268

    Re: Why no red card?

    It's from the law guidelines May 2015 (hence law 10 reference), still up on the website https://laws.worldrugby.org/?domain=9&guideline=8
  19. Replies
    64
    Views
    2,268

    Re: Why no red card?

    In which case not even a YC was deserved!

    Gracie has this spot on - the law is clear enough (for once).
  20. Replies
    35
    Views
    1,588

    Re: Shirt Pulling

    What will sort out behaviour such as Blue 12 going straight off feet and then interfering with Red 6 from the floor?

    By ignoring the first offences you're missing the point about the TV rugby...
  21. Replies
    35
    Views
    1,588

    Re: Shirt Pulling

    If you think there is a ruck then how was it formed?
  22. Replies
    35
    Views
    1,588

    Re: Shirt Pulling

    “Reach over” - still liable to sanction if player reached not in ruck.

    As a tactic, pulling/pushing often used to disrupt the opponents, slow down distribution, rather than bring the ruck to a...
  23. Replies
    35
    Views
    1,588

    Re: Shirt Pulling

    with the second blue player, there is contact, and Blue is probably sufficiently on his feet, though hands are on the team mate on the ground. So let's say it is a ruck...the third Blue player is...
  24. Replies
    35
    Views
    1,588

    Re: Shirt Pulling

    The first blue player puts his hands on ground even before Itoje pulls him: not an uncommon event that goes unpenalised but surely the first infringement.
  25. Replies
    654
    Views
    13,730

    [Golden Oldies] Re: Nigel Owens on inclusive rugby.

    Not yet in this thread.
    L’Irlandais gave a response referring to current racist organisations; he didn’t do a comparison as per Godwin’s Law.
Results 1 to 25 of 320
Page 1 of 13 1 2 3 4