Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 234567 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 62

Thread: Biggar Taken in Air?

      
  1. #51

    Referees in England
    Balones's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Leics
    Grade
    NP Performance Reviewer
    Join Date
    24 Oct 06
    Posts
    1,022

    Default Re: Biggar Taken in Air?

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Wakeham View Post
    It's pointless "kicking tennis" we need to get rid of not kicking per see.
    Admittedly it is boring, but we are really discussing the problem of what is happening when the ball is coming into land.

  2. #52
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    Cardiff Society of Welsh Rugby Union Referees
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    05 Jan 18
    Posts
    2,111

    Default Re: Biggar Taken in Air?

    Indeed.

  3. #53

    Resident Club Coach
    didds's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    N/A
    Grade
    Club Coach
    Join Date
    27 Jan 04
    Posts
    10,407

    Default Re: Biggar Taken in Air?

    Quote Originally Posted by Balones View Post
    Why? I can’t see any problems - other than changing the nature of the game as we know it and the necessity of rewriting the laws.
    so the drop goal disappears ?

    the grubber, chip over the top? which just strengthens wide field trench defences?

    None of this happens in a vacuum... the current trend of lots of kicking and chasing is due to the solidity of the wide field trench defense, which occurs because rucking to win the ball is dead (multiple reasons here) so defending sides have up to 6, even 7, forwards available to fill the defensive line.

    Want to make kicking less prelavant? ensure rucking attracts multiple forwards.

    etc etc etc.

    didds

  4. #54

    Referees in New Zealand
    Ian_Cook's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Retired player and referee
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    12 Jul 05
    Posts
    13,531

    Default Re: Biggar Taken in Air?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jz558 View Post
    At first glance I quite like something along the lines of Ian's suggestion. The only other way logically is for the catcher or chaser to relinquish all rights if they get airborne for the catch, however in a game looking to become safer I dont see that being acceptable.
    It doesn't quite quite work like that. The gist of the basketball rule is that a jumping player has the right to a clear landing zone if the landing zone was clear at the moment he jumps.

    If the player jumps with a clear landing zone, then someone moves into that zone and there is a collision, the player who moved into the jumper's landing zone is penalised for a contact foul.

    If the player jumps while someone is already in the landing zone and is stationary, and the jumper collides with that player, the jumper is penalised for a charging foul.

    The way I envisage it working in rugby is that if player jumps....

    1. with a clear landing zone, then no other player can come in to contest the ball, but they could position themselves to tackle him the moment his feet hits the ground.

    2. without a clear landing zone, and he clatters the player already standing there, then regardless of whether he catches the ball in the air or not, if he crashes into a stationary player whose feet are planted waiting to catch the ball, then jumping player is PK for dangerous play.

    The tactics used by Biggar here, IMO, show a reckless disregard for the safety of other players as well as his own. They are clearly an attempt at an "Eddie Charlton shot-to-nothing"- if he doesn't win the ball, he usually buys a PK and maybe a YC or even a RC of an opponent for his team.
    "You can Google for information, but you can't Google for understanding"
    - Jay Windley

  5. #55

    Referees in Australia
    SimonSmith's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Central Australian Rugby Referees
    Grade
    B3
    Join Date
    27 Jan 04
    Posts
    8,725

    Default Re: Biggar Taken in Air?

    Quote Originally Posted by didds View Post
    so the drop goal disappears ?

    the grubber, chip over the top? which just strengthens wide field trench defences?

    None of this happens in a vacuum... the current trend of lots of kicking and chasing is due to the solidity of the wide field trench defense, which occurs because rucking to win the ball is dead (multiple reasons here) so defending sides have up to 6, even 7, forwards available to fill the defensive line.

    Want to make kicking less prelavant? ensure rucking attracts multiple forwards.

    etc etc etc.

    didds
    I think teams kick because of the prevalence of scoring from breakdowns and turnovers - better to let the oppo have the ball and turn them over than have it happen to you.

    Rucking should be allowed. I know OB worries about the bad old days of people indiscriminately getting a shoeing, but you have to believe that in this day and age that would be low risk. It would create fast, go-forward ball and cause the defense to retreat. It seems no-one has done the maths that the longer a breakdown takes, the better organized the defense will be...

    As to the jumper in the air question, we have ended up with this decision tree because they want every incident, as far as possible, to be refereed identically, regardless of match circumstance. It is, in its way, a statement that referees cannot be trusted to use their own common sense.
    The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.
    Marcus Aurelius

    Man may do as he will; he may not will what he wills
    Arthur Schopenhauer

    Tullamore Dew, the Afghan Wigs, and many, many strippers - how to get over your ex. How true.

  6. #56

    Referees in England


    Soc/Assoc
    --
    Grade
    Grassroots
    Join Date
    14 Sep 09
    Posts
    19,063

    Default Re: Biggar Taken in Air?

    Quote Originally Posted by SimonSmith View Post
    It is, in its way, a statement that referees cannot be trusted to use their own common sense.
    I agree - but nevertheless I hope that at some point a referee will use commons sense and PK someone for dangerous jumping.

  7. #57

    Referees in England
    winchesterref's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    UK
    Grade
    Select Grade
    Join Date
    14 Dec 09
    Posts
    2,012

    Default Re: Biggar Taken in Air?

    Quote Originally Posted by SimonSmith View Post
    Rucking should be allowed. I know OB worries about the bad old days of people indiscriminately getting a shoeing, but you have to believe that in this day and age that would be low risk. It would create fast, go-forward ball and cause the defense to retreat. It seems no-one has done the maths that the longer a breakdown takes, the better organized the defense will be...
    I'd personally be in favour of that certainly at the elite end of the game. Less keen on it in amateur rugby. The incidents that do get out of hand worry me.

  8. #58
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    Cambridge and St Neots
    Grade
    I am a Fan
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Posts
    1,522

    Default Re: Biggar Taken in Air?

    The breakdown is a mess, but how much of that is because referees let players break the law to keep the game flowing - only to create turgid play.

    But even with that the penalty count is terrible. At international level referees only ever seem to give cards or repeated offences in the 22. But the law says they can be given whenever a side commits the same offence three or more times. We are seeing games where there are 20 penalties by one side and possibly fifteen by the other. There is no time left in the match for rugby at that point.

  9. #59

    Resident Club Coach
    didds's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    N/A
    Grade
    Club Coach
    Join Date
    27 Jan 04
    Posts
    10,407

    Default Re: Biggar Taken in Air?

    Quote Originally Posted by Camquin View Post
    ......

    Like .......................

  10. #60
    Player or Coach

    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Level 1
    Join Date
    02 Nov 18
    Posts
    587

    Default Re: Biggar Taken in Air?

    Quote Originally Posted by crossref View Post
    I agree - but nevertheless I hope that at some point a referee will use commons sense and PK someone for dangerous jumping.
    But it only dangerous for them. If they were endangering the opposition then fine. I'd say just not penalise the defending player (unless they ducked or did something to endanger the jumping player). Just tell the attacking team their player jumped into the defending player so it was his own technique that resulted in him going over. The resultant injury and time out of the game without gaining any advantage should be enough to discourage the practice. So for this maybe we should just play on (unless there's an injury), no Penalty for either player. If play needs to be stopped for injury the Scrum restart for the team in possession. No-one in possession then the defending team.

    Someone also had the Halo idea. Not sure how that would work as the Halo constantly would be moving. Then in windy conditions it would change all the time too. When would you declare where the landing zone was? How would this be communicate to the players? I like the concept, just not sure it's something that can be easily implemented quickly.



    Here's my 2 cents on the OP though. Biggar was clearly tackled in the air. Yes it was only just and there wasn't any safety concerns. But we still penalise high tackles (subject to advantage caveats) even when there is no safety concerns. So this should've been picked up too. PK Red, no cards needed.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •