Search:

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

Page 1 of 20 1 2 3 4

Search: Search took 0.07 seconds; generated 43 minute(s) ago.

  1. [Law] Re: World Rugby announces law amendment relating to scoring against the post protecto

    Quite surprised in both cases that it wasn't a penalty - easily justified as an act that is "reckless or dangerous to others" under Law 9.11. Given they both interrupted a dominant attacking move, I...
  2. [Law] Re: World Rugby announces law amendment relating to scoring against the post protecto

    Not really surprising given a) the fatness of modern-day post protectors vs when the law was first written and b) this seasonís antics of several defending teams lifting them up or ripping them off...
  3. Replies
    76
    Views
    2,293

    Re: Covid-19 Returning to play in Sept?

    Interesting scenarios - micro-leagues not very far from my round robin idea in post #9.

    What's TaB? And what difference does it make to the scheduling?
  4. Replies
    76
    Views
    2,293

    Re: Covid-19 Returning to play in Sept?

    With my life scientist hat on, all proposals - rugby or otherwise - for a "COVID-19 passport" are worthless until a) we are certain that recovery implies immunity and b) we have a reliable antibody...
  5. Replies
    76
    Views
    2,293

    Re: Covid-19 Returning to play in Sept?

    At this point, I think real leadership from the RFU would be admitting that competitive community rugby should only start in January, and planning for a round robin half-season, instead of a full...
  6. Replies
    9
    Views
    385

    Re: Mornington Croissant

    Ugh, Line 13. Tant pis!

    Saint-Lazare
  7. Replies
    35
    Views
    1,235

    Re: Mornington Crescent

    King's Cross is it? You're right, there is only one choice!
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    ..
    ...
    ....
    .....
  8. Replies
    35
    Views
    1,235

    Re: Mornington Crescent

    Honestly, crossref, you canít go all legal literalist and then over look something as basic as LIFO for being in Nidd! I said very clearly at the start that this was Cambridge Standard! Tsk tsk.
    ...
  9. Thread: FizzBuzz

    by Pablo
    Replies
    32
    Views
    770

    Re: FizzBuzz

    Er... Fizz.

    I think. :shrug:
  10. Thread: FizzBuzz

    by Pablo
    Replies
    32
    Views
    770

    Re: FizzBuzz

    Three

    (?)
  11. Replies
    35
    Views
    1,235

    Re: Mornington Crescent

    From Richmond, I'll play a Back Hand and take us to Leicester Square.

    (And I think you'll find Ellis's spheroid was prolate. If I'm being picky, I could deduct you a mark.)
  12. Replies
    35
    Views
    1,235

    Mornington Crescent

    Right, a simple one so the newbies can get involved too. Since the network is largely suspended, we'll play the Cambridge Standard Rules, with broken escalators as wild.

    I'll start: Chalfont &...
  13. [6N] Re: Eng v Wal: Courtney Lawes charged for making a dangerous tackle

    Lawes draws back his left arm immediately before contact. As soon as he does that, he's in trouble - it guarantees the hit will be shoulder-first, with virtually no likelihood of completing a wrap.
  14. [Law] Re: England Women vs Wales Women - player off feet playing ball

    With red-tinted specs, thatís a penalty. Definitely not a PT. Maybe a YC - could accept either way, depending on wider tone of the match.
  15. Replies
    28
    Views
    1,546

    Re: Can anyone help please?

    These letter piles donít always make the correct order very clear - just look at the Barbarians FC badge. Could it possibly be ďOTRCĒ, as in ďOld T-something-ians Rugby ClubĒ?
  16. [Law] Re: Contact with head, with force, no arms... ? Sco v Fra

    First time I've seen this (didn't get to watch the match live), and I have to agree that it doesn't look great!

    I think "no arms" is a harsh assessment though - I saw it as trying to wrap, but...
  17. Replies
    29
    Views
    16,525

    Sticky: Re: TJ Advice (In Time For Cup Comps)

    Thatís what you took from this?!
  18. [In-goal] Re: Restart into in goal - defender kicks it dead via touch in goal - decision?

    Agree with retaken kick / scrum back options, assuming it was done without delay. Law doesnít specify how a player must make it dead!
  19. Replies
    5
    Views
    299

    [Ruck] Re: What is the actual point of linesman now?

    Ignore him. He only ever resurfaces when he has an axe to grind with a televised referee. In his 8 posts on the forum, he hasnít once contributed anything positive.
  20. Replies
    68
    Views
    2,939

    Re: [6N] Eddie Jones Post Match Comments

    Thatís disgraceful. How are we supposed to cultivate belief in TREDS in our kids when the national teamís coach and figurehead doesnít demonstrate those values?
  21. Replies
    5
    Views
    236

    Re: Eng-Wal Under 20ís - Yellow Card

    Following the flow chart, Iíd have to agree thatís a red card. Dangerous, no visible mitigation. Quite surprised to learn it was only yellow.
  22. Thread: Marler grope

    by Pablo
    Replies
    95
    Views
    4,261

    [Law] Re: Marler grope

    Struggle to see how thatís anything short of a red card, TBH. If it happened in the street, itís a criminal offence.
  23. Replies
    34
    Views
    1,081

    [Law] Re: Penalty Try or not? Opinions please

    The law doesnít require ďcertainĒ, it only requires ďprobableĒ, which to me is 51% plus. Sounds like a solid case in your scenario.

    The ďbeam me upĒ test is a good one - imagine the circumstance...
  24. Replies
    9
    Views
    625

    Re: Cleaning some eye boogers

    Disagree. Contact may well be brief, but that doesnít make it any less of an offence. It only takes a small scratch or pressure in the wrong place to permanently damage someoneís sight. Red is...
  25. Thread: Law 14.7 & 21.7

    by Pablo
    Replies
    13
    Views
    588

    [Tackle] Re: Law 14.7 & 21.7

    Iíll add to the chorus: try!
Results 1 to 25 of 495
Page 1 of 20 1 2 3 4