Search:

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

Page 1 of 20 1 2 3 4

Search: Search took 0.28 seconds.

  1. Thread: Offside or not

    by didds
    Replies
    32
    Views
    830

    [Law] Re: Offside or not

    didnt we do this a couple of weeks back?

    that's not a dig - admins may be able to merge the two calls or summat

    didds
  2. Replies
    82
    Views
    2,079

    [Law] Re: Tap penalty to player already running: allowed?

    ... and the pivot may typically be just a couple of meters from the scrumhalf (who legs it out of the vicinity after the pass) and very flat of course.

    didds
  3. Re: How's this season going re new law interprretations down in the weeds?

    and TBH Id hope that this ranks higher than a "this isn't really important but I'll mention it to you in passing" to a mentor/assessor. It demonstrates a gross lack of understanding of what is...
  4. Re: How's this season going re new law interprretations down in the weeds?

    Not limited to newbies IME, but usually its coach referees that I suspect have never done an ELRA/are under a society's care.

    Its woeful - when I see it done I just wonder how much rugby they...
  5. Replies
    82
    Views
    2,079

    [Law] Re: Tap penalty to player already running: allowed?

    yup.

    It was clearly "needed" at some point in histpry for safety.

    then certainly since I started playing (circa 1975) up until quite recently everybody ran crash ball tap playes and nobody...
  6. Replies
    82
    Views
    2,079

    [Law] Re: Tap penalty to player already running: allowed?

    yup. Or in the simplification the bit about single player was left out without any thought whatsoever.

    which is pretty much what Jz said!
  7. Replies
    82
    Views
    2,079

    [Law] Re: Tap penalty to player already running: allowed?

    obviously his point is that they run a big bloke at speed at a smaller bloke. With tweo large blokes immediately with him to add extra OOOMPH as contact is made if they so desire.

    very standard. I...
  8. Re: How's this season going re new law interprretations down in the weeds?

    so what is the signal for a scrum? Or is it just that it doesn't get signaled at all, ever, so anybody not in ear shot of the ref has to guess based on what the forwards may start to do - or not.
    ?
  9. Replies
    82
    Views
    2,079

    [Law] Re: Tap penalty to player already running: allowed?

    except the OP had a 5m PK tap. So there is no 10m to advance.

    didds
  10. Replies
    82
    Views
    2,079

    [Law] Re: Tap penalty to player already running: allowed?

    ??

    At a ruck 5m out (the same distance as in the OP) that's a try?

    didds
  11. Replies
    82
    Views
    2,079

    [Law] Re: Tap penalty to player already running: allowed?

    The point being made - and certainly by me - is that the pop off a ruck IS the same level of danger etc as a FK/PK pop.

    So IF one was to PK the FK pop, then presumably one would also PK the pop...
  12. Replies
    82
    Views
    2,079

    [Law] Re: Tap penalty to player already running: allowed?

    I guess that would also bring into question ruck ball with defenders static unable to progress past the rear feet offside line whilst an on rushing attacker can be at full tilt when the ball is...
  13. Replies
    19
    Views
    759

    Re: Owens to referee Wales

    All very reasoinable comments ?:-) Though on the whole the troucnings dont seem these days to be as bad as 20 years ago maybe... 100 poiunt wins dont seem to be the norm against the minnows in each...
  14. Thread: Choke 'Tackle'

    by didds
    Replies
    28
    Views
    1,200

    [Law] Re: Choke 'Tackle'

    the convention AIUI is to call tackle in effect as chbg says to get the game moving again... as otherwise we get this stalemate scenario . ultimately its most likely that eventually the defenders...
  15. Replies
    19
    Views
    759

    Re: Owens to referee Wales

    even within the potentials of RWC qualification, whilst I agree entirely, would that likely ever happen?

    095 NORWAY
    096 RWANDA
    097 COSTA RICA
    098 NIUE ISLAND
    099 CAMEROON
    100 SOLOMON ISLANDS...
  16. Replies
    19
    Views
    759

    Re: Owens to referee Wales

    Other than a FYI its a bit of non-news really innit?

    didds
  17. Replies
    24
    Views
    987

    [Law] Re: Scoring a try against the padding/post

    indeed. why wouldnt you ? assuming you have a squad capable of achieving it :-)

    didds
  18. Replies
    24
    Views
    987

    [Law] Re: Scoring a try against the padding/post

    .... and then again... how often do such tries actually get scored?

    I cant honestly recall any match Ive ever been involved in ever having such a score. then again I may just have forgotten. I...
  19. Thread: "Knock-on"

    by didds
    Replies
    42
    Views
    1,046

    [Law] Re: "Knock-on"

    ditto his guts of course...

    didds
  20. Thread: "Knock-on"

    by didds
    Replies
    42
    Views
    1,046

    [Law] Re: "Knock-on"

    would your response be the same if it happened on half way and there was no try to be scored ?

    (I suspect so and that's fine :-)

    didds
  21. Replies
    24
    Views
    987

    [Law] Re: Scoring a try against the padding/post

    I've a lot of sympathy with this idea. Its a hangover from the days when there was no post padding and the post was quite literally the part of the try line on which it rose from. Ground against...
  22. Re: How's this season going re new law interprretations down in the weeds?

    did you mean "think that it should NOT be allowed" ? Just checking.

    didds
  23. Thread: "Knock-on"

    by didds
    Replies
    42
    Views
    1,046

    [Law] Re: "Knock-on"

    I get that. As somebody else stated however, this is a complete reverse of the C&O approach to making decisions. Intriguing.

    didds
  24. Thread: "Knock-on"

    by didds
    Replies
    42
    Views
    1,046

    [Law] Re: "Knock-on"

    yes - fair enough there - the Tim Stimpson ruling :-)

    Ok - how about actually holding the ball or trying to bring it under control. Kneeing/.shinning/heading the ball presumably though wouldn't...
  25. Thread: "Knock-on"

    by didds
    Replies
    42
    Views
    1,046

    [Law] Re: "Knock-on"

    My 2p. Surely you can only ever lose possession of the ball if you had it in the first place eg held it. Chesting it or heading it forwards when it is in the air last played by somebody else...
Results 1 to 25 of 500
Page 1 of 20 1 2 3 4