• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Refereeing decisions

Pfitzy

George Gregan (70)
Off his feet - should have been penalised.

Not before the Munster player who dived onto the halfbacks feet from what I see as an offside position
 

Bullrush

Peter Sullivan (51)
A lot of "interference" lines being run in this autumn series tbh.
The first Japanese try against the ABs last week was scored off interference in my viewing.

There was one against Australia that I thought might have been as well but I didn't go back and review it multiple times like I did the AB/Japan one.
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
A lot of "interference" lines being run in this autumn series tbh.

This is something that needs to be dealt with in my view. There's too many cases where decoy runners in that front line are ending up too close to the defensive line and while they might not hit someone, they are often delaying players shifting across out wider.

The NRL has done pretty well with this in my view. They are far stricter on what is deemed obstruction and probably err on the side of penalising the attacking team for a technicality when it is questionable whether someone was actually impeded because of where ball/ball carrier were relative to the decoy runner.
 

Slim 293

Phil Waugh (73)
This is something that needs to be dealt with in my view. There's too many cases where decoy runners in that front line are ending up too close to the defensive line and while they might not hit someone, they are often delaying players shifting across out wider.

I'm also curious as to whether we're seeing more players penalised recently for tackling players without the ball because of this....
 

qwerty51

Stirling Mortlock (74)
I hate that, if an attacker runs into the line of the defender they deserve to get tackled, the rule should be pretty simple, if they're ahead of the ball they're fair game if in the way of a defender. If you don't want to get tackled off the ball, stay onside and run your line into space, not a defender.
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
I'm also curious as to whether we're seeing more players penalised recently for tackling players without the ball because of this....

Yep.

There needs to be more nuance from the referees in relation to this.

If a decoy runner stops well short of the defensive line then they can't be tackled. It's still foul play and needs to be avoided.

If they actively engage the defender then they are fair game to be tackled. If the decoy runner engages a defender before the ball passes behind them then the attacking team should be penalised.
 

Jimmy_Crouch

Peter Fenwicke (45)
I hate that, if an attacker runs into the line of the defender they deserve to get tackled, the rule should be pretty simple, if they're ahead of the ball they're fair game if in the way of a defender. If you don't want to get tackled off the ball, stay onside and run your line into space, not a defender.
Inside shoulder outside shoulder rule. If the lead runner runs to the outside shoulder of the defender and impedes the slide then it is obstruction. If they run to the inside shoulder and the defender bites it is play on.
 
Last edited:

cyclopath

George Smith (75)
Staff member
I wouldn't hold your breath expecting mauls to be officiated in any way approaching consistency. Attacking players joining in front, also swimming back instead of passing the ball back, the 5-10 seconds stall with nothing said, 3-4 "use it" calls and so on. It's an abomination currently, legalised obstruction which is anathema to the mantra of rugby being a game of contested possession. You hardly see 2 games, let alone 2 mauls in a game officiated the same.
 

LeCheese

Chilla Wilson (44)
Anyone else think the neck rolls could be a (poorly executed) symptom of players trying to mitigate risk of shoulder to head contact in rucks?
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
Anyone else think the neck rolls could be a (poorly executed) symptom of players trying to mitigate risk of shoulder to head contact in rucks?

I think it's a symptom of being late to the breakdown and not being in a good position to clean out.

Shoulder to the head contact entering the ruck is the same. You've arrived late and the player you are trying to clean out is already in a strong position.
 
Top