Interpretation of Rules

[KevinO]

I have noticed a lot of Refs on this forum, others who watch a lot of Rugby.

I am sure people will have questions with future calls and one forum for them all seems like the right idea.

Was having a talk with a friend and we can't decide on if this is "Crossing" or "Genius"

 

[terry j]

who cares!

lovely. The ref prob thought 'man, I'll let that go and damn the rules'

 

[Sully]

I can't see anything wrong with that.

Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Tapatalk HD

 

[qwerty51]

I thought deliberately passing to yourself was illegal? Otherwise you could just pass the ball over a defender to yourself.

It's definitely obstruction anyway.

 

[Manuel]

It was backwards, so it's ok.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Carlos Spencer had one like that

 

[Bardon]

I was in the crowd on that side right on the half way line with my dad and my brother for that game. Even though it happened right in front of us, we were all looking at each other asking did he just do what I think he did. Moment of genius that I'll never forget.

 

[Ash]

Think it was crossing, although brilliant.

Same rule applies as if he was juggling it I would've thought.

 

[Nusadan]

I'll have called it as 'unfair play' and penalise him accordingly...if it was legal, every man and his dog would do it!

 

[JSRF10]

I tried this in Oztag and got blown up for a penalty!

What a moment of genius by BOD, he'll be missed once he calls it a day. Although it is crossing in my opinion

 

[forwards4ever]

its got to be obstruction, regardless of the rule re the pass.

 

[yourmatesam]

The ref can damn whatever rules he likes as long as he referees the laws. . .

boom-tish??

I'm in two minds on this one. It's been floating around since 2007 and I haven't seen a definitive answer yet from anyone.

Apologies for linking to another website, but this is a large topic that even the referees can't agree on. . .

http://www.rugbyrefs.com/showthread.php?7011-The-Self-Pass&highlight=o'driscoll

http://www.rugbyrefs.com/showthread.php?15920-counter-measure-to-pass-behind&highlight=o'driscoll

http://www.rugbyrefs.com/showthread.php?1908-Neat-play-by-O-Driscoll&highlight=o'driscoll

 

[Bruwheresmycar]

I don't see a problem with it. As long as the pass is fair and the dummy runner isn't in front of the ball when it's thrown. Play on.

I think the timing is just too good here and it had no chance of being pulled up. All happened so quickly as well.

Not everyone has to agree. The reason we have refs is because there IS grey areas. Some will interpret this differently.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

I don't see a problem with it. As long as the pass is fair and the dummy runner isn't in front of the ball when it's thrown. Play on.

I think the timing is just too good here and it had no chance of being pulled up. All happened so quickly as well.

Not everyone has to agree. The reason we have refs is because there IS grey areas. Some will interpret this differently.

Why does it matter if the dummy runner gets in front of the ball? Do you mean as long as the ball does not pass behind him relative to the defenders?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Bruwheresmycar]

Why does it matter if the dummy runner gets in front of the ball? Do you mean as long as the ball does not pass behind him relative to the defenders?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The laws are pretty vague about obstruction. So the way I see it, as long as an offside player doesn't prevent the defenders access to the ball or ball carrier, I don't mind.

If BOD had thrown the ball behind this guy in a similar fashion, then you would almost say he was juggling it to himself. But if he throws it like he did (in front), it gives everyone access to the ball (even the dummy runner who is kinda offside). But for me - play on.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

The laws are pretty vague about obstruction. So the way I see it, as long as an offside player doesn't prevent the defenders access to the ball or ball carrier, I don't mind.

If BOD had thrown the ball behind this guy in a similar fashion, then you would almost say he was juggling it to himself. But if he throws it like he did (in front), it gives everyone access to the ball (even the dummy runner who is kinda offside). But for me - play on.

thats why I asked - he cannot defeat the obstruction law by merely throwing the ball in the air: can he?

 

[Braveheart81]

My thought is that it is obstruction. The play should be treated as if he never let go of the ball. If the decoy runner obstructed the defenders whilst BOD was running behind him then it should be a penalty.

In my mind it is the same as juggling a ball. He should be fair game to be tackled as well even if not currently holding the ball.

 

[Bruwheresmycar]

thats why I asked - he cannot defeat the obstruction law by merely throwing the ball in the air: can he?

Well you definitely can't defeat any law by throwing the ball up. But the way I see it, the moment he let go of the ball the runner next to him is a legitimate option for the pass. Everyone thought it was going to him. The obstructions I hate are the ones where a player who is no chance of getting the pass takes out a defender who wasn't even going for him. Realistically the only obstructions that get called at full speed are the clear and obvious ones.

I like this play and don't think a tackle was prevented from being made. But like I said it's open to interpretation. I don't think either one leads you down a slippery slope.

 

[Braveheart81]

But the way I see it, the moment he let go of the ball the runner next to him is a legitimate option for the pass.

The other player didn't take the ball though. I think that is the important part.

 

[Bruwheresmycar]

The important part is whether or not an offside player has prevented a tackle. I'm just saying I thought the defender was too committed to the #11 to change his mind and tackle BOD instead. So while the guy was technically offside, the move was timed so well it didn't have an effect so play on was fair enough.