Refereeing decisions

[Wilson]

Receiver is clearly in front of the kicker in the first video, and right in front of the refs eyeline too, so should've been an offside penalty.

I'm guessing SA cleared the kickoff tactic with the ref before the match and because he was expecting to see it he didn't pay proper attention to the offside. Shouldn't be legal either way though.

Agree on the 2nd one around pre-latching, but I think we should be banning lifting in play in general - it adds a fair bit of danger around the contest in the air off kicks.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Receiver is clearly in front of the kicker in the first video, and right in front of the refs eyeline too, so should've been an offside penalty.

In front of the kicker off the kickoff is only a scrum - so ref got that "right". Unless you think it's deliberate.

12.5 When the ball is kicked:

a. Team-mates of the kicker must be behind the ball.
Sanction:Scrum.

 

[Wilson]

Oh right, I didn't realise it was reduced there. Either way it's clearly deliberate, both the player in front of the kicker and the ball not going 10.

Interestingly that player in front of the kicker is different to most of the other kickoff infringements where the receiving team gets the option to have the kick retaken or a scrum.

 

[Ignoto]

What a shit way to play rugby that kick off is. I get that it benefits how South Africa wants the game to unfold, but simply going from set piece to set piece does not make for a spectacle and likens our game similar to NFL.

 

[LeCheese]

This is genuinely laughable. Worth a Yellow imo.

 

[Drew]

If you can’t tackle someone in the air, the lifters should’ve advanced the ball downfield while holding the catcher up…..
Just kidding
but yeah, weird tactics, I wonder if they’d bring it out against the All Blacks?

 

[A mutterer]

I would have penalised each instance.

Against the spirit of the game, cynical.

Meets the YC threshold.

YC to green.

 

[Strewthcobber]

If you can’t tackle someone in the air, the lifters should’ve advanced the ball downfield while holding the catcher up…..
Just kidding
but yeah, weird tactics, I wonder if they’d bring it out against the All Blacks?

9.28

In open play, any player may lift or support a team-mate. Players who do so must lower that player to the ground safely as soon as the ball is won by either team.

 

[Drew]

9.28

Ahhhh. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[liquor box]

What a shit way to play rugby that kick off is. I get that it benefits how South Africa wants the game to unfold, but simply going from set piece to set piece does not make for a spectacle and likens our game similar to NFL.

Maybe opponents could also manipulate the rules to teach the Boks a lesson.

The front row runs to the scrum and "accidentally" collides with each other leading to HIA checks, the replacements are equally clumsy and collide running onto the field and the scrum is now uncontested taking away the advantage in the scrum.

 

[Running_rugby_1954]

Maybe opponents could also manipulate the rules to teach the Boks a lesson.

The front row runs to the scrum and "accidentally" collides with each other leading to HIA checks, the replacements are equally clumsy and collide running onto the field and the scrum is now uncontested taking away the advantage in the scrum.

Imagine the Bokkie meltdown if someone did that which is well within the laws they were happy to manipulate to suit themselves.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Imagine the Bokkie meltdown if someone did that which is well within the laws they were happy to manipulate to suit themselves.

I think the ref kind of realized what was going on because he awarded Italy a free kick at the scrum restart

 

[Wilson]

I think the ref kind of realized what was going on because he awarded Italy a free kick at the scrum restart

Changing those kick off sanctions from scrums to free kicks wouldn't be a bad change, they're mostly not straight execution issues but ones that come from teams gambling on a big play close to the line of what's otherwise legal. They feel pretty well suited to the free kick that escalates into penalty on repeated infringements that's used elsewhere.

 

[Dan54]

Was interested in AB/France test last night, Refs was good I thought, seemed to miss a couple of things as anyone does, but was good. But thing that interested me , towards end of game the French has a goal line drop out, about 6 French players were in front of kicked, and 3 of them were in about 10m of where ball landed, yet he didn't pull it up. Am I wrong in thinking this is not legal ( and perhaps the ref being kind to beaten team) or was he right? or

 

[Wilson]

Was interested in AB/France test last night, Refs was good I thought, seemed to miss a couple of things as anyone does, but was good. But thing that interested me , towards end of game the French has a goal line drop out, about 6 French players were in front of kicked, and 3 of them were in about 10m of where ball landed, yet he didn't pull it up. Am I wrong in thinking this is not legal ( and perhaps the ref being kind to beaten team) or was he right? or

The one at about 69' on the clock that goes short? Impossible to say from the broadcast - they're showing a replay when the ball is kicked and only cuts back at the first ruck. When it cuts back there are one or two French players still down field, but they're ~50m away and not effecting the play at all.

 

[Dan54]

The one at about 69' on the clock that goes short? Impossible to say from the broadcast - they're showing a replay when the ball is kicked and only cuts back at the first ruck. When it cuts back there are one or two French players still down field, but they're ~50m away and not effecting the play at all.

There were 3 in area the ball landed, just beyond 5m line (not suggesting they had much impact) , and one down over halfway (that I remember) he was getting back from a bit of injury (looked a bit of cramp). Jsu I thought for drop outs etc everyone had to behind the line, and wasn't even thinking of the injured 1 back at halfway. Wasn't worried re game, just wondered about whether it something that was allowed.

 

[Strewthcobber]

12.9 The team-mates of the kicker must be behind the ball when it is kicked. Those who are in front of the ball when it is kicked may be sanctioned unless they retire and do not interfere with play until they are put onside by the actions of a team-mate.

 

[Mr Pilfer]

Firstly I give rassie credit for coming up with these things but it is not a good look for the game, giving away deliberate infringements. Like most of these hopefully world rugby makes some quick changes to the laws before these become common. Otherwise where does the craziness end

 

[Wilson]

Firstly I give rassie credit for coming up with these things but it is not a good look for the game, giving away deliberate infringements. Like most of these hopefully world rugby makes some quick changes to the laws before these become common. Otherwise where does the craziness end

I don't have an issue with Rassie getting creative with the laws, but in the first instance it only really reflects poorly on the ref, especially if they cleared it ahead of time. The second is a bit more complicated and I can't really blame the ref for allowing it, but I also think it should be specifically outlawed (ideally by banning lifting in play).

The other problem with this right now is that any interpretation that goes against SA here will be likely be played as some sort of anti-Rassie/anti-SA conspiracy by the broader SA rugby media. I have a feeling that's part of the reason Rassie is happy to play with these things in game where he just doesn't need them - he can use the reaction to fuel the chip on the shoulder, us versus them, underdog status that is so hard to otherwise maintain as 2 time world champions.

 

[Major Tom]

In front of the kicker off the kickoff is only a scrum - so ref got that "right". Unless you think it's deliberate.

Looked like the definition of deliberate to me.