Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 678910
Results 91 to 100 of 100

Thread: Springboks v Lions

      
  1. #91
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    Prefer not to say
    Grade
    Retired
    Join Date
    10 Dec 15
    Posts
    1,808

    Default Re: Springboks v Lions

    Quote Originally Posted by Arabcheif View Post
    Are you Talking about the Scottish Player Thom Evans, Brother of Max? If so no it wasn't. He was carrying the ball was tackled and collided with someone on the ground. The top of his head went in and was the point of the collision. With the force of the tacklers behind him, his own momentum and the force of the tackle in front meant there was a lot more force put through his neck than normal. Nothing to do with what we're talking about here.
    I must be getting my incidents mixed up. There was one in a Wales-Scotland game about 10 years ago when Lee Byrne jumped for a ball and a scotsman (I thought it was one of the Evans brothers, but 10 years is a long time ago!) ran into him and injured himself badly (and got penalised)

  2. #92
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    Prefer not to say
    Grade
    Retired
    Join Date
    10 Dec 15
    Posts
    1,808

    Default Re: Springboks v Lions

    Quote Originally Posted by DocY View Post
    I must be getting my incidents mixed up. There was one in a Wales-Scotland game about 10 years ago when Lee Byrne jumped for a ball and a scotsman (I thought it was one of the Evans brothers, but 10 years is a long time ago!) ran into him and injured himself badly (and got penalised)
    It was Hugo Southwell I was thinking of (in 2011).

    Can't find the video, but did come across this one (at 40 seconds): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32LJBXOPB_A

    Perfect example of what you're talking about.

  3. #93
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    None
    Join Date
    18 Mar 19
    Posts
    15

    Default Re: Springboks v Lions

    Quote Originally Posted by Arabcheif View Post
    But the man on the ground is in a strong position. When was the last time someone was seriously injured by colliding with someone in the the air (who isn't committing and act of Foul play ie kicking his foot up), while running to compete for the ball. The risk of hurting yourself in a tackle is way higher than this. Are we going to ban tackling. Rucks are also another area, with the new Law trials that have came in create another risk with the Croc Rolls or Leveraging. In a couple of years time, are we going to ban rucks? I don't think there's an issue with the Laws as they currently are, in terms of the aerial battles. Yes the player jumping should bear some responsibility but the chasing player should bear the brunt of responsibility as they are in the stronger position.

    For clarity from an earlier comment, even if Kolbe had jumped as little as 6 inches off the ground, that's still not OK. He needs to be high enough to realistically compete for the ball, meaning he needed to have been round about the same height. If he was a little lower, then fine play on. Murray's jump, while I'm not saying there was no forward momentum in his jump, most of the emphasis was vertical. Hence how he managed to get so high.
    I think we are going round in circles now. I know what the laws (and more importantly the accompanying guidelines) say. But I and the others who argue as I do are suggesting that the laws as currently interpreted are daft. The original intent was to prevent grounded or semi-grounded players from tacking other players who were in the air. I think everyone would agree that is sensible. However, the current interpretation has moved well away from that starting point, and gives licence to players to compete aerially in the most reckless fashion. Kolbe plainly did NOT tackle Murray in the air; nor do I think it is obviously the case that he took him out in the air. You could argue that Murray actually took Kolbe out, and fell down awkwardly himself as a result.

    To answer your specific points. Kolbe is in “a strong position” because he has elected, unlike Murray, not to recklessly put himself in a dangerous one. Why should he then be subject to sanction when he has not done anything wrong? And your second point about the contest in the air is problematic on two counts, to my mind. Firstly, if Kolbe has to jump essentially as high as Murray to avoid potential sanction, how can he estimate the leap necessary without taking his eye off the ball and looking at Murray … an action which in itself leaves him open to sanction! And secondly, it is hard to accept that a law which states that to avoid potential sanction Player B has to act as recklessly as Player A has player safety at its heart.

    It is off topic and would not eliminate all these aerial collisions (but it would certainly reduce them): the plethora of box-kicking is a blight on the game, in my view, adds nothing to the spectacle, and wastes a vast amount of playing time (caterpillar joins ruck, blocking pillar(s) get in place, scrum-half rolls ball delicately back with foot, ref calls "use it", scrum-half hoofs ball sixty feet up in the air, invariably followed by a knock-on). Simple solution - ban kicking from the base of a ruck or scrum except in your own 22, and force teams to actually play rugby again. Sanction a free-kick to the opposing team. Any views?
    Last edited by dfobrien; 06-08-21 at 14:08.

  4. #94
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    Quebec Society of Rugby Referees
    Grade
    Select Grade
    Join Date
    16 Feb 12
    Posts
    356

    Default Re: Springboks v Lions

    A team battering itself against a well established defensive line will kick from 10 instead of 9. It will be a little quicker, but it won't reduce the amount of kicking.

  5. #95
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    None
    Join Date
    18 Mar 19
    Posts
    15

    Default Re: Springboks v Lions

    Quote Originally Posted by buff View Post
    A team battering itself against a well established defensive line will kick from 10 instead of 9. It will be a little quicker, but it won't reduce the amount of kicking.
    Maybe, but you can't use the same long-drawn out process to make sure you are able get a decent kick away. The out-half will be under pressure from the defenders, or if not, will have to stand further back which will reduce the effectiveness of the kick-chase. And even if it ends up with same amount of kicking at least we'll be spared all the preparatory palaver which wastes all the time.

  6. #96

    Referees in England


    Soc/Assoc
    --
    Grade
    Grassroots
    Join Date
    14 Sep 09
    Posts
    19,370

    Default Re: Springboks v Lions

    Quote Originally Posted by dfobrien View Post
    Simple solution - ban kicking from the base of a ruck or scrum except in your own 22, and force teams to actually play rugby again. Sanction a free-kick to the opposing team. Any views?
    or alternatively

    - make a ruck law more like a scrum law so that when the ball is available and the ruck is no longer moving forward (ha, ha) then the ball must be used without delay. (So no more five seconds palaver time they are weirdly given under current laws)

  7. #97

    Resident Club Coach
    didds's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    N/A
    Grade
    Club Coach
    Join Date
    27 Jan 04
    Posts
    10,558

    Default Re: Springboks v Lions

    Quote Originally Posted by dfobrien View Post
    the plethora of box-kicking is a blight on the game, in my view, adds nothing to the spectacle, and wastes a vast amount of playing time (caterpillar joins ruck, blocking pillar(s) get in place, scrum-half rolls ball delicately back with foot, ref calls "use it", scrum-half hoofs ball sixty feet up in the air, invariably followed by a knock-on). Simple solution - ban kicking from the base of a ruck or scrum except in your own 22, and force teams to actually play rugby again. Sanction a free-kick to the opposing team. Any views?
    the question shouldnt be how do we stop box kicking, but why is box kicking seen as aa highly preffered strategy over other options?

  8. #98
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    ex-Manchester & District
    Grade
    Level 10
    Join Date
    04 Apr 12
    Posts
    195

    Default Re: Springboks v Lions

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry View Post
    It seems to me that if we go back to basics, Rugby is a game for players on their feet. So the man in the air has no right to the ball.
    In my early playing days to make a mark you had to do 3 things simultaneously: make a clean catch (no adjustments then), dig your heel into the ground, and call 'Mark!' Oh and you retreated to make the kick while opposing players could stand on your mark.

  9. #99

    Referees in England


    Soc/Assoc
    --
    Grade
    Grassroots
    Join Date
    14 Sep 09
    Posts
    19,370

    Default Re: Springboks v Lions

    Quote Originally Posted by timmad View Post
    In my early playing days to make a mark you had to do 3 things simultaneously: make a clean catch (no adjustments then), dig your heel into the ground, and call 'Mark!' Oh and you retreated to make the kick while opposing players could stand on your mark.
    And you could buy a portion of chips wrapped in newspaper for tuppence, with scraps thrown in for free.

  10. #100

    Resident Club Coach
    didds's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    N/A
    Grade
    Club Coach
    Join Date
    27 Jan 04
    Posts
    10,558

    Default Re: Springboks v Lions

    and we put kids up chimnies and down pits

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
  •