General Rugby Discussion II

irishbucsfan

Sangre wrote: »

I think the point Bazzo is making is that the ref in the article says the ruck needs players from BOTH teams, which is no longer the law.

Ah, I see. That ref is wrong so

shootermacg

Bazzo wrote: »

. I doubt people will use it to inform themselves more(even with some of the incorrect information I pointed out above) rather than picking through it for some confirmation bias.

I agree totally, thought he would be above these types of articles.

At the same time, I'm not sure myself about leaving the ball go and getting back up. I always thought that was a bit cheap myself.

My current understanding, at least with the gif supplied and the new ruck laws brought in after the italy-England game, is that the ruck had formed and even if the ball was out, he was in an offside position.

joseywhales

The leniency of refs completely depends on the importance of the game , the time in the game and the scorline, particular when it comes to the ruck. Also the 'picture'. I always feel like if a player gets smashed behind the gainline and even if his support secure the ruck under pressure, the ref is likely to be more stringent on the team in possession because he feels they are likely to infringe out of desperation. Same with miscatching a ball that goes flat or slightly backward, far more stringent than on a flat pass with momentum.

Buer

shootermacg wrote: »

My current understanding, at least with the gif supplied and the new ruck laws brought in after the italy-England game, is that the ruck had formed and even if the ball was out, he was in an offside position.

That's a good observation. The referee called hands in the ruck though which is incorrect if the ruck was over. There were a few penalties he could have chosen but he went with one that wasn't correct, to my mind.

No big deal. Frustrating but it happens in every match.

errlloyd

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Ah, I see. That ref is wrong so

I think the article is wrong, but maybe someone else can clarify, the ball was way out of the ruck when Stockdale played it, so it can't be hands in the ruck? Is he offside?

Sangre

errlloyd wrote: »

I think the article is wrong, but maybe someone else can clarify, the ball was way out of the ruck when Stockdale played it, so it can't be hands in the ruck? Is he offside?

Article is wrong in the sense that it said that it couldn't have been a ruck because no Irish players joined and therefore it shouldn't have been the penalty. that is no longer the case.

swiwi_

Maybe, I'm misreading it, but...

Law 15.2: A ruck is formed when at least one player from each team are in contact, on their feet and over the ball which is on the ground.

Think people are confusing maybe with the amended tackle law (the anti-Italian tactics law)

Law 14.10: Offside lines are created at a tackle when at least one player is on their feet and over the ball, which is on the ground. Each team’s offside line runs parallel to the goal line through the hindmost point of any player in the tackle or on their feet over the ball. If that point is on or behind the goal line, the offside line for that team is the goal line.

As an aside, I don't mind the analyses of the ref decisions, provided people realise no ref ever gets all decisions right in a game...and provided they also look at ways Australia missed out, rather than juts bla bla Irish injustice.

Squidgy Black

Was that not changed after the England v Italy game?

swiwi_

Squidgy Black wrote: »

Was that not changed after the England v Italy game?

Not immediately after but as a result. Before there was no offside at the tackle. Now there is as per my post above.

sydthebeat

swiwi_ wrote: »

Maybe, I'm misreading it, but...

Law 15.2: A ruck is formed when at least one player from each team are in contact, on their feet and over the ball which is on the ground.

Think people are confusing maybe with the amended tackle law (the anti-Italian tactics law)

Law 14.10: Offside lines are created at a tackle when at least one player is on their feet and over the ball, which is on the ground. Each team’s offside line runs parallel to the goal line through the hindmost point of any player in the tackle or on their feet over the ball. If that point is on or behind the goal line, the offside line for that team is the goal line.

As an aside, I don't mind the analyses of the ref decisions, provided people realise no ref ever gets all decisions right in a game...and provided they also look at ways Australia missed out, rather than juts bla bla Irish injustice.

http://laws.worldrugby.org/?domain=20&language=AF


Law 16
Law 16: Amended Ruck Law
A ruck commences when at least one player is on their feet and over the ball which is on the ground (tackled player, tackler). At this point the offside line is created. A player on their feet may use their hands to pick up the ball as long as this is immediate. As soon as an opposition player arrives no hands can be used.

Squidgy Black

Squidgy Black wrote: »

Was that not changed after the England v Italy game?

swiwi_

sydthebeat wrote: »

http://laws.worldrugby.org/?domain=20&language=AF


Law 16
Law 16: Amended Ruck Law
A ruck commences when at least one player is on their feet and over the ball which is on the ground (tackled player, tackler). At this point the offside line is created. A player on their feet may use their hands to pick up the ball as long as this is immediate. As soon as an opposition player arrives no hands can be used.

OK, thanks. But the WR website is all over the place - there are May 2018 variations, these trial variations you linked above, the official laws etc.

:eek:

Did IBF design the website - it's the kind of crafty thing I could imagine him doing...

stephen_n

swiwi_ wrote: »

Maybe, I'm misreading it, but...

Law 15.2: A ruck is formed when at least one player from each team are in contact, on their feet and over the ball which is on the ground.

Think people are confusing maybe with the amended tackle law (the anti-Italian tactics law)

Law 14.10: Offside lines are created at a tackle when at least one player is on their feet and over the ball, which is on the ground. Each team’s offside line runs parallel to the goal line through the hindmost point of any player in the tackle or on their feet over the ball. If that point is on or behind the goal line, the offside line for that team is the goal line.

As an aside, I don't mind the analyses of the ref decisions, provided people realise no ref ever gets all decisions right in a game...and provided they also look at ways Australia missed out, rather than juts bla bla Irish injustice.

I think I fairness 99% of posters on here reckoned the TMO and ref screwed Australia over just as much, if not more. The ref and TMO didn’t decide the result in any way, but they made a lot of errors and harsh calls.

shootermacg

stephen_n wrote: »

I think I fairness 99% of posters on here reckoned the TMO and ref screwed Australia over just as much, if not more. The ref and TMO didn’t decide the result in any way, but they made a lot of errors and harsh calls.

I actually think Australia got a shove on in the scrum too. There was some wheeling, but Furlong was going backwards at the time.

Interested Observer

French red card after 10 mins of this match. Wonderful.

ScrubsfanChris

Fiji win the Pacific Nation cup winning both their games against Samoa and Georgia.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kE7l3tJ_po

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33SxSsig3wg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pb2WradfXZY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvhbC8N2Te0

sydthebeat

when did Georgia get replanted into the Pacific ocean???

ScrubsfanChris

sydthebeat wrote: »

when did Georgia get replanted into the Pacific ocean???

Canada, Japan and United States have chosen not to participate since 2016.
Georgia were invited to take part for 2018

The Lost Sheep

sydthebeat wrote: »

when did Georgia get replanted into the Pacific ocean???

Romania were also due to take part as some of the usual sides that enter didnt these year so they added the east europeans for extra games

thomond2006

Dan Tuohy has signed a two year deal with Vannes in the ProD2. He was most recently a medical joker at Stade Francais.

thomond2006

https://twitter.com/juliansavea7/status/1008618310332628998?s=19

The man himself confirms his move to Toulon.

Howlett's try record lives on!

thomond2006

http://www.rctoulon.com/news/article/recrutement-2018-19-le-all-black-julian-savea-sengage-avec-le-rct/

Two year contract. Ashton and Savea in the same back three!

Buer

thomond2006 wrote: »

Dan Tuohy has signed a two year deal with Vannes in the ProD2. He was most recently a medical joker at Stade Francais.

Still only 32 and should be near his peak. His career fell off a cliff.

thomond2006

Buer wrote: »

Still only 32 and should be near his peak. His career fell off a cliff.

Did he have a bad run of injuries or something? One minute it seemed like he was a cornerstone player in the Ulster pack and then he wasn't.

Buer

thomond2006 wrote: »

Did he have a bad run of injuries or something? One minute it seemed like he was a cornerstone player in the Ulster pack and then he wasn't.

Not that I'm aware of but Ulster folk would know better. I always got the impression that there was a bit more to his departure than was revealed.

stephen_n

Thought from memory he missed nearly all of his last season with Ulster through injury?

Buer

stephen_n wrote: »

Thought from memory he missed nearly all of his last season with Ulster through injury?

I'm not sure. He was playing in the B&I Cup instead of the ECC on his return to fitness in October and then a couple of league games before suddenly departing to Bristol. He definitely had his injury problems but the departure in mid season and being released from his contract was definitely unexpected.

MJohnston

If a player has a sudden downturn in form, and they were an Ulster player at the time, is there really any further explanation necessary?

awec

Tuohy gave Ulster a few seasons of decent form. Other than that.. meh.

Not sure there was anything sinister in his departure, just an old player who knew he wasn’t getting near the team.

Buer

awec wrote: »

Tuohy gave Ulster a few seasons of decent form. Other than that.. meh.

Not sure there was anything sinister in his departure, just an old player who knew he wasn’t getting near the team.

He had just turned 31 when he left i.e. younger than Devin Toner currently is. He had missed 10 months through injury when he returned and then very quickly announced his departure thereafter.

It was more than likely the injury situation but it all seemed quite a surprise at the time. His contract should only have been finishing now so it was very early in it to be looking for a release.