Laws Question? Ask here!

It wasn't a block, it happens 200 times a game, he ran a support line that wasn't required.

An absolute non-issue.

wonton

what about the other one? just as bod made the break?

also legal?

d'Oracle

ajeffares wrote: »

Hook :rolleyes:

It was completely legal. He kept running his line and although he dipped the shoulder a bit that was more to stop himself getting hurt. He knew what he was doing but he was clever about it.

The one for the second try?

Looked like he stepped into a player to me.
I wouldn't have batted an eyelid if he got a yellow.

tolosenc

d'Oracle wrote: »

The one for the second try?

Looked like he stepped into a player to me.
I wouldn't have batted an eyelid if he got a yellow.

That's the one.

Nothing wrong with it. He didn't change direction to obstruct a player, and didn't really get in the way until he was onside again. No problem, he's not obliged to stop on the spot.

castie

tolosenc wrote: »

That's the one.

Nothing wrong with it. He didn't change direction to obstruct a player, and didn't really get in the way until he was onside again. No problem, he's not obliged to stop on the spot.

As far as I knew you cannot make contact with the defensive line away from the ball. Otherwise I could pass it behind me and ram through a player like an American football blocker. Its obstruction.

Shelflife

Castie is on the money there imo, it was definite blocking and would have been a pen if it was spotted. Its experience/cuteness when you get away with it and your an ass when you dont.

From a law point of view its a pen.

Are we watching the same incidents I wonder?

http://www.rte.ie/player/#v=1099061

First incident that people are questioning is at 3:20 ish in that video? Where Heaslip legitimately rucks Mujati? His back is to the ball, he has no idea that the ball is out of the ruck, and he protects the ball like he's supposed to be staying tight to the ruck and keeping a low body position.

Second incident at 4:35, Heaslip checks his run as he's entitled to do, Dowson gets caught up behind him. Definitely not black and white, but Dowson getting himself tangled up with Jamie makes it look a lot worse than it is. The second Sexton gets level with Heaslip, Heaslip is perfectly entitled to offer a support line there. Those baying for a yellow card in that incident, would you pooh pooh the opposite zealots asking for a yellow for Dowson for tackling Heaslip without the ball? If Sexton goes for an offload there (if he hadn't made the tryline), that is exactly what would've happened.

Rugby isn't a black and white game, and the second incident isn't clear cut because there's a bit of skulduggery both ways, but Heaslip isn't required to move when he's made that pass.

castie

Deleted User wrote: »

Are we watching the same incidents I wonder?

http://www.rte.ie/player/#v=1099061

First incident that people are questioning is at 3:20 ish in that video? Where Heaslip legitimately rucks Mujati? His back is to the ball, he has no idea that the ball is out of the ruck, and he protects the ball like he's supposed to be staying tight to the ruck and keeping a low body position.

Second incident at 4:35, Heaslip checks his run as he's entitled to do, Dowson gets caught up behind him. Definitely not black and white, but Dowson getting himself tangled up with Jamie makes it look a lot worse than it is. The second Sexton gets level with Heaslip, Heaslip is perfectly entitled to offer a support line there. Those baying for a yellow card in that incident, would you pooh pooh the opposite zealots asking for a yellow for Dowson for tackling Heaslip without the ball? If Sexton goes for an offload there (if he hadn't made the tryline), that is exactly what would've happened.

Rugby isn't a black and white game, and the second incident isn't clear cut because there's a bit of skulduggery both ways, but Heaslip isn't required to move when he's made that pass.

Im on about sextons try.
Heaslip was in front of sexton when he first made contact with the defender. Then sexton got in line and Heaslip was in the way.

Agrfeed if hes inline he has the right to run alongside but before this he offloads and drops the shoulder into a defender while being ahead of the ball so clear penalty.

castie

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fWfeEbZMrk

1:07 onward. Heaslip makes contact and then continues to disrupt. Jonny runs through the channel with Heaslip standing there.
1:08 while still being ahead of sexton he stretches out his arms also.

I question what you expect him to do in that situation that is legal.
Stop running so as not to impede Dowson at a cost to his own chances of supporting Sexton?

crisco10

Thought Dowson was a little naive too, he sort of let Heaslip in the way and then appealed to the ref. Dowson should have just shoved Heaslip out of the way.

Don't think it was a penalty in the spirit of the law (should Heaslip have jammed on the brakes not to get in the way??). However by the letter of the law he was in front of the ball carrier and offside. Law 11b says that offside player must not obstruct an oppenent.

Shelflife

Deleted User wrote: »

I question what you expect him to do in that situation that is legal.
Stop running so as not to impede Dowson at a cost to his own chances of supporting Sexton?

EMMET If your two yards ahead of him your not in support

If your ahead of the ball you cant get in the way, simple as.

Happening alot in tag rugby now as well which is very annoying.

Shelflife

Shelflife wrote: »

EMMET If your two yards ahead of him your not in support

If your ahead of the ball you cant get in the way, simple as.

Happening alot in tag rugby now as well which is very annoying.

again I will ask, what do you expect of him instead of continuing his line? That he slams on the brakes to allow Dowson through?

He is not obliged to change his course to allow Dowson through.

He clearly slows to make himself available to Sexton, offering support.

Shelflife

emmet the rules are simple , you cant continue your line ahead of the ball if its going to interfere with an opposition player who is onside.

so the answer to your question is, yes apply the brakes so that you dont interfere with a player in an offside position.

you cant run whatever line you want to, you have to be onside.

There's no way that that's in the rules. I'd be interested to see what your interpreting to state that.

Also, Heaslip can't possibly be offside at any stage in the above play. It is open play.

crisco10

Deleted User wrote: »

There's no way that that's in the rules. I'd be interested to see what your interpreting to state that.

Also, Heaslip can't possibly be offside at any stage in the above play. It is open play.

Section 11 of the laws.

IRB laws wrote:

In general play a player is offside if the player is in front of a team-mate who is
carrying the ball, or in front of a team-mate who last played the ball.

Emphasis is mine.

that's directly in front. As in the cases of accidental offside, crossing etc.

The offense that Heaslip "can" be charged with there is tackling a player without the ball. But that would be nitpicking to the absolute extreme.

Anyway, I'm finished with this because it's only going to go in circles. It's an almighty non-issue, and nobody would've even seen anything in it if Hook hadn't had an epi over it.

Shelflife

emmet its the same principle as a lazy runner coming back and interfering with play.

i agree that its a non issue and being honest its cute play from heaslip.

as for hook??? well if he told me my name id check my birth cert, hasnt a clue god love him.

crisco10

Deleted User wrote: »

that's directly in front. As in the cases of accidental offside, crossing etc.

The offense that Heaslip "can" be charged with there is tackling a player without the ball. But that would be nitpicking to the absolute extreme.

Anyway, I'm finished with this because it's only going to go in circles. It's an almighty non-issue, and nobody would've even seen anything in it if Hook hadn't had an epi over it.

I saw it at the time and as i said to my mate, never a penalty. Much less a Yellow. :rolleyes:

but i would argue your directly in front interpretation. What about kick chases?

castie

He hasnt just continued his line though either.
Hes dropped the shoulder and then stretched his arms out to impede anyone getting around him while being in an offside position.

daveharnett

crisco10 wrote: »

Section 11 of the laws.



Emphasis is mine.

Deleted User wrote: »

that's directly in front. As in the cases of accidental offside, crossing etc.

No, that's 'in front' (as in 'closer to the opponent's try line'). Players find themselves offside all the time, and it's not a problem - they are not "liable for sanction" as long as they actively avoid interfering with play.

In the instance of the Sexton try, Heaslip was pretty blatantly interfering with play from an offside position. He is subsequently put onside by Sexton's run, but the damage is done at that point. I'd have been surprised at the ref missing it, if any other ERC ref had been in charge.

IMO the smart move from Dowson would have been to shove the offside Heaslip out of his way, and "Oops!" slightly into Sexton's path.

tolosenc

Deleted User wrote: »

that's directly in front. As in the cases of accidental offside, crossing etc.

Not quite. If you are stationary, and a team mate is closer to the opposition end line than you, and you pass him the ball, it's offside not a forward pass.

Clareman

During Saturday's match BoD was down injured and was seen to by 2 people, play went on for a bit and game back to the area where he was lying, he got up and tackled the player, surely he had to have been offside?

BTW, I'm not having a go, I think it showed amazing bravery and courage for him to do it, he was clearly injured.

tolosenc

Where was he in relation to the previous ruck at the time of the previous ruck. If he was onside there, then he's fine. A defending player cannot be offside in open play, as his team doesn't have the ball.

Right?

castie

yea Im pretty sure he was onside as even if he was offside at the ruck he would of ended up behind the defensive line by it moving up.

Could hardly claim it was intentional since he was on the floor,

cython

Clareman wrote: »

During Saturday's match BoD was down injured and was seen to by 2 people, play went on for a bit and game back to the area where he was lying, he got up and tackled the player, surely he had to have been offside?

BTW, I'm not having a go, I think it showed amazing bravery and courage for him to do it, he was clearly injured.

Nah, he was definitely onside. He was onside running to a support position when Horan took him out, and the ball was with Leinster in attack then. Ball got turned over after that, and Munster were running it, so he was behind any defensive line that there might have been, as he made the tackle from in front of the ball carrier. I have to admit was shocked to see the BOD-shaped form come out of the group to make the tackle though, he really is something else.

Clareman

He was behind the ruck with his team, so he was on side, but once Munster got a ruck behind him and he was in front of the hindmost foot surely he was offside? I know it's semantics and is a great reason why there are laws for interuptation rather than rules by the way

cython

Clareman wrote: »

He was behind the ruck with his team, so he was on side, but once Munster got a ruck behind him and he was in front of the hindmost foot surely he was offside? I know it's semantics and is a great reason why there are laws for interuptation rather than rules by the way

But did they get a ruck behind him (by which I take it you mean one closer to the Leinster try line)? I don't recall one, and I was pretty sure he made the tackle following an offload in open play, as the offloading player was looking like running straight into the medics tending to BOD before he made the pass to the player that BOD in turn tackled.

daveharnett

castie wrote: »

yea Im pretty sure he was onside as even if he was offside at the ruck he would of ended up behind the defensive line by it moving up.

AFAIR, O' Driscoll was behind the back foot of the most recent ruck when he became involved. If not, then his teammates could not have brought him onside.

When a player is offside at a ruck, maul, lineout or scrum, only they themselves (by retreating to where the offside line is/was) or their opponents (by running 5m or kicking, not passing) can put them onside.

Taco Corp

Can anyone remember when lifting in the lineout was first introduced?