Search:

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

Page 1 of 20 1 2 3 4

Search: Search took 0.08 seconds.

  1. Replies
    43
    Views
    1,787

    Re: Springboks v Lions

    I didn't notice many secondary signals either when he was giving penalties which for me is basic stuff.
  2. Replies
    14
    Views
    859

    [Law] Re: Scrum question

    Yes I've seen it a few times an penalised.
  3. Replies
    86
    Views
    2,428

    Re: Global Law Trials

    Agreed, no different to kicking the ball dead so 22 for me.
  4. Thread: Reaching Out

    by ctrainor
    Replies
    9
    Views
    295

    [In-goal] Re: Reaching Out

    I think they concluded the second legal reach didn't make the line therefore he couldn't perform a third movement to bring the ball back.
  5. Replies
    7
    Views
    253

    Re: These goal line dropouts

    Only a problem at the top level, rarely a problem at the grass roots
  6. Replies
    86
    Views
    2,428

    Re: Global Law Trials

    I wonder if somebody is going to define a new signal for goal line drop out? I saw one ref make one up with both arms outstretched.
  7. Thread: Trupping?

    by ctrainor
    Replies
    14
    Views
    540

    [Law] Re: Trupping?

    I've penalised this before.
    The tackler is clearly using their legs to trip the player and the likely outcome if the tackler perfects it, is the ball carrier going head first to the ground.
    I...
  8. Replies
    64
    Views
    2,763

    Re: Protocol awarding PT

    I regularly stand 3-4 meters into the defensive side for kick offs and restarts especially as the game wears on. Not as fast as I used to be and you can then clearly see any attackers in front of the...
  9. Replies
    23
    Views
    1,152

    Re: Upcoming law changes

    The only way to stop this boring pick and drive stuff is for the referees to clamp down on pre-binding. After all, it is a flying wedge and is already identified as illegal.
  10. [Tackle] Re: Head contact, with force, with mitigation - not even a PK?

    Pretty clear that should have been a penalty. For me penalty only but why it wasn't given is beyoun me.
    The ref couldn't see the big screen at that end as it was hardly working the whole game. As...
  11. Replies
    49
    Views
    4,980

    Re: Where are you this weekend 20/21?

    Well, just got my tickets so I'll be at Murrayfield Saturday watching the Lions, Happy Days
  12. Replies
    13
    Views
    956

    Re: NZ Schoolboy Rugby

    Well as an NH person, I thoroughly enjoyed it.
    Almost the same as my school playing days for Barrow Boys Grammar School in the 70s as we played round Lancashire on Saturdays.

    I think we only...
  13. [Maul] Re: Binding in front of the Ball Carrier/back foot.

    Wasn't attacking the messenger Phil, merely pointing out that it is not just the ref ignoring it.
    You've completely lost me on "dancing bear syndrome" even after a google search!

    For me what is...
  14. [Maul] Re: Binding in front of the Ball Carrier/back foot.

    Irrelevant Phil, they have fully qualified ARs and TMOs who are ignoring it too!
  15. [Maul] Binding in front of the Ball Carrier/back foot.

    Watched a few highlight reels over the weekend and saw multiple instances of attackers binding in front of the ball carrier or back foot in mauls particularly in the attacking lineout to maul...
  16. Replies
    27
    Views
    1,833

    Re: Hand-off heights

    Over the years I've penalised plenty of players for what I've deemed to be excessive force and a hit to the face where they've claimed it is a hand off! It is a case of if you see it, you just know....
  17. Replies
    80
    Views
    4,543

    [Law] Clarification 1 "021

    just received this "clarification" that I didn't know I needed.
    Assume this clarifies that you can bring a kicker on to take a shot at goal....
  18. Replies
    12
    Views
    1,371

    [Law] Re: Contact with the head

    The no RL scrums is definitely Covid related to reduce contact.
    Not seen the leg tackle but these are usually given as they are deliberately targeting the knee area in an upright, stationary tackle...
  19. Replies
    90
    Views
    5,974

    Re: France v Scotland

    I don't think it is that black and white Pinky.
    If you hand off a would be tackler going low and your open hand is on their head, I think that would be ok.
  20. Replies
    39
    Views
    5,054

    [Law] Re: Why isn't this pre binding penalised ?

    2 reasons, it creates an unfair contest for the ball, and more importantly it's boring :-)
  21. Replies
    39
    Views
    5,054

    [Law] Re: Why isn't this pre binding penalised ?

    my mistake, It is in the definitions.
    Flying wedge is specific that you cannot pre bind onto a ball carrier a it is dangerous.
    I wish they would enforce it.
  22. Replies
    39
    Views
    5,054

    [Law] Re: Why isn't this pre binding penalised ?

    Well, just watched the premiership highlights again and plenty of tries scored and created by pre-binding, pick and go scenarios.
    Law 9.22 Dangerous play specifically says, teams must not use the...
  23. Replies
    10
    Views
    919

    [Line out] Re: dropping the jumper on top of a maul

    There were a number of short, to the front lines out at the weekend that clearly were thrown straight at the standing first receiver but totally ignored by the ARs
  24. Replies
    117
    Views
    7,631

    Re: France Vs Wales

    Come on Didds, Irrespective of whether LP cards are right or wrong decisions, are you seriously saying you would not include repeat offences outside the red zone?
  25. Replies
    35
    Views
    2,539

    [Law] Re: Time to take a penalty.

    kickers have been taking the p*ss for years now, another area of the game which should be tightened up on.
Results 1 to 25 of 500
Page 1 of 20 1 2 3 4