Search:

surely under your scenario 3, on transference of the ball without a maul forming, the ball is deemed to have left the lineout, and the lineout is therefore over?

the simplest explanations are often the best!

As is the case with any situation at the younger age groups, it is likely to be a mess. it serves no purpose to continue any longer than the situation demands, hence the tighter restrictions and the...

The Age grade rules assume the ball is won cleanly and not overthrown, fumbled or otherwise. Outside of that it is use your common sense. The jumper comes to ground, deal with what is there...

There seems to be an asymmetry in the treatment of a ripped ball.

Not a knock on in respect of the player having the ball ripped and it going forward from his hands, yet

A knock on in respect...

Two players moving in the same direction. So a reduced "closing" speed. Always likely to make it look less than the protocol sets out.

Having seen Wayne Barnes call advantage over for something not dissimilar in a Premiership game, it's worth raising the point again.

...A case of too much advantage?

A lame attempt to bind onto his own player was my initial thought

Missed the detail in the OP

The English language is a very dangerous tool and open to many interpretations! Could readily sweep up the point where the ball lands as being within the meaning of kick. But a clarification in the...

So yes, the ref basically messed up under the correct application of the 10m law.

law clarification from all the way back in 2011
...

Apart from being on the wrong side viewing a red card tackle and being confident there was no foul play!

When Read fluffed his lines and was unable to ground the ball, poite reverted to the Standing up infringement. All happened so quickly. So naturally some confusion.

judicial duties of the Law Lords were transferred following the creation of the the Supreme Court back in 2009.

Law Lords no longer exist. Keep up!

Surely could be called obstruction even if it wasn't a long arm transfer! Could be seen as a pk offence even if most would perhaps call it accidental offside.

Clearly jumping into/ over the tackle area to leave the tackler clutching at thin air IMO. Two instances where I thought Garces was both inconsistent, and wrong.

And hardly consistent with...

Saturday's variation from the Crusaders (forgive the stills)

3885

5 & 7 (Whitelock and Todd)

3886

Stepped out , Whitelock even out of shot ready to drift back in. Hardly meets the...

Certainly a poor decision and the wrong person driving it, imo. Seeing more these days of team of officials acting in concert rather than just the odd intervention

They can't peel until the ball leaves the hand and must keep moving until the line out has ended. Can't say there could even be any expectation that they are to be thrown or passed the ball. They are...

3882 3881

Crusaders doing what they do best. Should it really be allowed?

Lineout:



Taufua goes forward and right
Barrett heads off forward and right

Is their opinion expressed around the basis of the decision or the correctness/appropriateness of the laws.

The two are something different.

https://twitter.com/skysportsrugby/status/1112004112940519424?s=21

unpick this! And the chosen restart and the equity around the joint red cards?

Should schalk brits have been told to walk?
...

He is clearly on the comms and it is clearly "stop the game" in the first instance.

So if it wasn't noise from elsewhere, then it was him calling more than just "stop"

But hey ho, I don't...