Leinster Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread XII (The Byrne Supremacy)

irishbucsfan

There are too many penalties given where the ball carrier has released the ball and the defender is just holding the jackal position and holding the ball against the ball carrier’s body looking for a penalty. It’s very difficult to referee because you have to be able to see the ball carrier’s hands, but if refs were generally better at allowing play on there, and ball carriers were better at showing a clear release of the ball, it suddenly changes a penalty to a very scrappy slow turnover which is less valuable to the defensive team and less of a risk to the attacking team.

stephen_n

TRC10 wrote: »

And they can't change it because so many players have made a career out of that law.

If WR came out tomorrow and said "you can no longer handle the ball in a ruck", Curry, Itoje, Beirne, Willis, Cane would all be out of a job.

That shouldn’t be even a vague consideration. Players will adapt, good players will adapt quickly. They need to get rid of the jackal and go back to rucking over the ball. This would make things safer and also create space by forcing both teams to commit players to the breakdown.

theVersatile

Quin_Dub wrote: »

That is true , my big issue with current ruck interpretation is that they are giving turn-over penalties when the defender barely has contact with the ball.

To win a penalty the defender should have to be in a position to play the ball , getting a fingertip to the edge of the ball isn't them being unfairly prevented from playing the ball.

So many times a player is at full stretch over the tackled player and is just about touching the ball and there is not a chance in hell that they are in a position to lift the ball to play it , but they win the turn-over.

Similarly , they do penalise the "sweep" where the defender puts their hands on the ground past the ball and then "sweeps" up the ball as they stand up , so now tplayers are simply putting all their body weight on the ball through their hands using the ball to maintain their balance thus preventing the attacker lifting the ball.

But - If the defender actually tried to play the ball in that position they'd instantly lose their footing and be "off feet" and out of the game , but they are being given turn-over penalties from that position.

Eh, this isn't necessarily true on new interpretations. You hear constantly refs on the mic saying either (a) "never/not on the ball" or (b) something along the lines of "no pull" . Refs these days look for (or are at least meant to) look for a pulling motion from the jackler on the ball, which solves your off feet issue. Whenever anything happens otherwise, it's not that the rules are bad but the refs are

stephen_n wrote: »

That shouldn’t be even a vague consideration. Players will adapt, good players will adapt quickly. They need to get rid of the jackal and go back to rucking over the ball. This would make things safer and also create space by forcing both teams to commit players to the breakdown.

Eh, not quite sure this would work. This would essentially kill all contest at the breakdown. Rucks would be ultra safe and the game would devolve into a series of pick and goes with the odd kick. Why bother risking doing anything else? Teams are too good at legally dealing the ball these days (low height, forearms on the tackle player, seal behind him) that rucks are essentially be a no-contest as it is bar the jackals. There's a reason very few teams try to counter ruck traditionally - it doesn't work. Often you'll see one guy have a cut off the sealing man for a couple of shoulder shots before giving up and folding into the line.
There are rare examples of it happening ofcourse) Hurricanes scored a try off doing it last weekend) but they are rare and usually only succeed in creating a mess rather than a clean turnover.

stephen_n

theVersatile wrote: »

Eh, not quite sure this would work. This would essentially kill all contest at the breakdown. Rucks would be ultra safe and the game would devolve into a series of pick and goes with the odd kick. Why bother risking doing anything else? Teams are too good at legally dealing the ball these days (low height, forearms on the tackle player, seal behind him) that rucks are essentially be a no-contest as it is bar the jackals. There's a reason very few teams try to counter ruck traditionally - it doesn't work. Often you'll see one guy have a cut off the sealing man for a couple of shoulder shots before giving up and folding into the line.
There are rare examples of it happening ofcourse) Hurricanes scored a try off doing it last weekend) but they are rare and usually only succeed in creating a mess rather than a clean turnover.

That’s predicated on not enforcing the laws as they stand. About body height going into rucks. If head is no lower than hip height. Then you can be driven off the ball by defending teams. If you’re allowed to clamp on to the tackled player like a limpet with your arse in the air, no it wouldn’t work. We played for many years with players having to drive over the ball to turn it over. I have no doubt modern professionals would figure it out.

PMC83

https://twitter.com/iannagle/status/1397133273856454659

Ian Nagle calling it a day...

Dubinusa

It seems to me that there is little consistency amongst the refs and their interpretation of the rucks. No 2 refs are alike. We see a lot of strange calls at the rucks. The question is, do you play the refs? If Pearce is the refs, do we play the breakdown a specific way as compared to Peyper? Why is there no consistency? To me, I would tend to believe that all the refs should be on the same page. But the reality is vague at the best of times.

FrannoFan

Dubinusa wrote: »

It seems to me that there is little consistency amongst the refs and their interpretation of the rucks. No 2 refs are alike. We see a lot of strange calls at the rucks. The question is, do you play the refs? If Pearce is the refs, do we play the breakdown a specific way as compared to Peyper? Why is there no consistency? To me, I would tend to believe that all the refs should be on the same page. But the reality is vague at the best of times.

Yea. Teams do a lot of research on the ref and adjust accordingly.
Refs are a massive variable in games but if you go back and look at games from 10+ years ago they were even more inconsistent.
I think the most you can hope for is a ref to be consistent for the duration of the 80mins as opposed to game to game.
There is a lack of quality refs but if you look at the numbers who go into refereeing vs the amount who play etc it's not that surprising.

AbusesToilets

FrannoFan wrote: »

Yea. Teams do a lot of research on the ref and adjust accordingly.
Refs are a massive variable in games but if you go back and look at games from 10+ years ago they were even more inconsistent.
I think the most you can hope for is a ref to be consistent for the duration of the 80mins as opposed to game to game.
There is a lack of quality refs but if you look at the numbers who go into refereeing vs the amount who play etc it's not that surprising.

It's a bit mad that WR insists on making a refs job so difficult. There are so many infringements committed at every ruck, it's an impossible task, especially when no one respects the laws as is.

Lost Ormond

Dubinusa wrote: »

It seems to me that there is little consistency amongst the refs and their interpretation of the rucks. No 2 refs are alike. We see a lot of strange calls at the rucks. The question is, do you play the refs? If Pearce is the refs, do we play the breakdown a specific way as compared to Peyper? Why is there no consistency? To me, I would tend to believe that all the refs should be on the same page. But the reality is vague at the best of times.

Because its very difficult to have uniform interpretation of the tackle/ruck.
Of course you play the ref. If you don't you will be penalised more and are more likely to lose.

FrannoFan wrote: »

Yea. Teams do a lot of research on the ref and adjust accordingly.
Refs are a massive variable in games but if you go back and look at games from 10+ years ago they were even more inconsistent.
I think the most you can hope for is a ref to be consistent for the duration of the 80mins as opposed to game to game.
There is a lack of quality refs but if you look at the numbers who go into refereeing vs the amount who play etc it's not that surprising.

Thats it exactly in terms of wanting/needing ref to be consistent throughout specific games. It has to vary to some extent from game to game
Not enough people go into refereeing early enough. Many only take it up later in their career after they've finished up playing and then it can be too late to go to the elite level.

AbusesToilets wrote: »

It's a bit mad that WR insists on making a refs job so difficult. There are so many infringements committed at every ruck, it's an impossible task, especially when no one respects the laws as is.

Every player will always bend the laws to their advantage no matter what a ref does and its same in any sport. I dont think WR are making refs jobs so difficult. There are alot of infringements at every ruck and things will not be penalised but all depends on context/temperature of game etc whether some things will be picked more than others

Dubinusa

The problem is the likes of Itoji. He is constantly living on the the edge of the offside line. He gets away with a lot and fair play to him. But, what does he look like if a ref enforces the laws? I know that there's a lot of players like this and we all see it and complain. If and when they are penalized for their transgressions, what does that do? They just going to continue? How many times have we heard the refs issue warning after warning and yet there is rarely a card! I suppose it could depend on who you are?

TRC10

Dubinusa wrote: »

The problem is the likes of Itoji. He is constantly living on the the edge of the offside line. He gets away with a lot and fair play to him. But, what does he look like if a ref enforces the laws? I know that there's a lot of players like this and we all see it and complain. If and when they are penalized for their transgressions, what does that do? They just going to continue? How many times have we heard the refs issue warning after warning and yet there is rarely a card! I suppose it could depend on who you are?

It's not just Itoje now to be fair. Literally every team lives offside now. The offside line now is the midpoint of the ruck.

Lost Ormond

Dubinusa wrote: »

The problem is the likes of Itoji. He is constantly living on the the edge of the offside line. He gets away with a lot and fair play to him. But, what does he look like if a ref enforces the laws? I know that there's a lot of players like this and we all see it and complain. If and when they are penalized for their transgressions, what does that do? They just going to continue? How many times have we heard the refs issue warning after warning and yet there is rarely a card! I suppose it could depend on who you are?

Every team does it. Leinster are kings at doing it. They wouldnt have had all the successes theyve had without living on the edge.

AbusesToilets

Lost Ormond wrote: »

Because its very difficult to have uniform interpretation of the tackle/ruck.
Of course you play the ref. If you don't you will be penalised more and are more likely to lose.


Thats it exactly in terms of wanting/needing ref to be consistent throughout specific games. It has to vary to some extent from game to game
Not enough people go into refereeing early enough. Many only take it up later in their career after they've finished up playing and then it can be too late to go to the elite level.



Every player will always bend the laws to their advantage no matter what a ref does and its same in any sport. I dont think WR are making refs jobs so difficult. There are alot of infringements at every ruck and things will not be penalised but all depends on context/temperature of game etc whether some things will be picked more than others

By allowing players to use their hands in a ruck, you start a cascade of infringements. Entries, body positioning, not releasing,.rolling away etc. If you removed the option, and made so that teams had to drive over the ball to get it, there would likely be less for a ref to have to keep track of.

ARs are still not doing enough to assist either.

theVersatile

One caveat of this though is that if we force players into a more upright position (by forcing shoulders to be higher than hips), will that lead to an increase in head contact injuries at the breakdown in a similar fashion to higher tackling height?

AbusesToilets

theVersatile wrote: »

One caveat of this though is that if we force players into a more upright position (by forcing shoulders to be higher than hips), will that lead to an increase in head contact injuries at the breakdown in a similar fashion to higher tackling height?

It would be similar to how a defense engages a maul I'd think.

stephen_n

theVersatile wrote: »

One caveat of this though is that if we force players into a more upright position (by forcing shoulders to be higher than hips), will that lead to an increase in head contact injuries at the breakdown in a similar fashion to higher tackling height?

They won’t be hitting rucks with the same speed or force. It becomes a pushing contest like a maul, rather than having guys torpedoing in from 20 feet away. This of course will slow down ruck ball. The trade off being to do that the defending team would need to commit numbers to the ruck.

swiwi_

Sometimes reading this thread I feel that if angels were rugby players they would all come from Leinster.

thomond2006

swiwi_ wrote: »

Sometimes reading this thread I feel that if angels were rugby players they would all come from Leinster.

Leinster players never commit foul play.

molloyjh

swiwi_ wrote: »

Sometimes reading this thread I realise that if angels were rugby players they would all come from Leinster.

Fixed that for you.

stephen_n

swiwi_ wrote: »

Sometimes reading this thread I feel that if angels were rugby players they would all be Richie McCaw.

In the words of Carlsberg, probably.

sydthebeat

If Leva is heading to Connacht to replace Roux, maybe Vaea might head to Dublin to replace Fardy...

Just a thought

sydthebeat

incoming Leinster prop Michael Alaalatoa named manu samao captain for the forthcoming tests after only 5 caps.

ongarite

Leinster rugby have been granted permission to host pilot event with crowds for game against the Dragons.

Game is in 2 weeks, would love to go back to experience match day again.

pickarooney

theVersatile wrote: »

One caveat of this though is that if we force players into a more upright position (by forcing shoulders to be higher than hips), will that lead to an increase in head contact injuries at the breakdown in a similar fashion to higher tackling height?

Not if they enforce the rules about not running into a ruck and ensuring players bind before pushing. They did it for scrums after years of props smashing heads on the engage, it's about time they followed up in the ruck.

Hands are not allowed in the ruck but rucks were basically abolished, replaced with the breakdown and then back into existence within six months. Hands are only allowed when there's no support player in place and (legally) only after the carrier has placed. Defenders need to step over and a) take the ball if there's no support or b) ruck the support player out by binding and pushing. More wrestling/judo and less MMA and we should see player welfare increase.

Larbre34

ongarite wrote: »

Leinster rugby have been granted permission to host pilot event with crowds for game against the Dragons.

Game is in 2 weeks, would love to go back to experience match day again.

While I welcome this and the two LoI football games that will do likewise, I think they surrendered the Euros far too soon. 12,000 vaccinated people at those games would have been very easily done.

TRC10

sydthebeat wrote: »

incoming Leinster prop Michael Alaalatoa named manu samao captain for the forthcoming tests after only 5 caps.

I just don't believe he's coming to be 3rd choice TH.

Buer

swiwi_ wrote: »

Sometimes reading this thread I feel that if angels were rugby players they would all come from Leinster.

Whenever you hear a referee whistle against a Leinster opponent prop, he's just earned his wings.

pickarooney

Buer wrote: »

Whenever you hear a referee whistle against a Leinster opponent prop, he's just earned his wings.

That's almost too clever, Buer.

Buer

pickarooney wrote: »

That's almost too clever, Buer.

It's pretty clunky but I was determined to give it a go!

dregin

Cian Kelleher gone to Ealing.

https://twitter.com/ealingtfrugby/status/1398308085526106112