Search:

althouhg jz558 has got me genuinely wondering now if the AND is only supposed to be to the last one !

i think actually she poked the cobra, the cobra ignored her - or perhaps we heard the tiniest of hisses - and then she got completely roasted on twitter who accused her of cruelty to cobras.

I think you have proved my point as you have misunderstood the Law !

The law is actually (my line breask



Knock-on:
When a player loses possession of the ball and it goes forward,
___OR...

agreed - also an odd part of our game,

So we have found ourselves in a position where we have constructed a game where very often the winning strategy is often to kick the ball off the field, or...

I hate to say it - but the Law defining a knock on does need to be rewritten.

It's all very well decrying a 'legalistic' view of the Laws, but when TMOs are watching incidents in super slow...

She asked the same questions of every interviewee, Welsh and English . And those were the talking points of the match
The other talking point was that we got to 24 24 with all the momentum with...

Gosh, is that a significant change from 2017 to 2018 that doesn't appear in my table of differences ?

Well it is sort of covered in Law 20.1 Location of PK which gives the location of a PK for an...

Well , yes, as I said it's so ingrained in rugby folk that we no longer perceive how odd it is.

Perhaps as the focus on ball-in-play time grows, we'll start to become more aware of the anomaly

Yes, but my point is that the game is structured oddly, so that on many circumstances the best thing for a team to do is kick the ball off the pitch

Is there any other game where teams do that ?

didn't the TMO initiate the review (because he'd seen a knock on) ? Or did PG just decide to check

Which of of course is seldom used in TV rugby, it's gone quite out of fashion

For the knock on , the presence of a TMO, unusually, didn't help.
Without a TMO, without replays he would surely would have given a ko

The replays gave him time to confuse himself

Looking...

consider for half a second, and reject yes

There was some ambiguity prior to the rewrite, but since 2017 the Law has been very clear : on the ground already, ball comes to you, you can't play it.

yes I noticed- and it's a PK

It's great question .

I don't think the half is over until the conversion has been taken.

So the foul play happened in the first half, so we restart immediately.

If it was the second half...

the ref could declare the ruck as 'won' and from then no new player could join the ruck, no player could leave the ruck, and the winning team have [3] seconds to use it

It's definitely an oddity of rugby that a team awarded a PK .... kicks the ball off the field.

When you sit and think about it, it's very strange - I can't think of any other sport with...

No, it's a real question. My law books only go back to 2015 and it was the case then

QQ when was the Law changed so that you could kick a PK to touch, and keep the throw in ?
Feels like ten years ago ??

The possibility that May was engaged in dangerous play didn't seem to even occur to them. That really surprised me,

to be clear - I am happy for them to judge that May wasn't dangerous, to me...

in the old days there was a law that said

"Any player may tackle, hold or push an opponent holding the ball." - which (pretty much) covered the ankle tap .. it comes under push in that you push...

sounds like you would have deserved a 79th minute PK under the sticks !! :biggrin:

neither did I really - and yet his boot ddi seem to clip the tacklers head, so perhaps it was.

did you think May was dangerous -- or reckless?

It didn't seem to me to be very dangerous .... and yet his boot did clip the Italian's head (or came very very close) so perhaps it was?