Refereeing decisions

[JRugby2]

I don't think Nige actually saw what he was describing here, for the first one. The issue isn't that he wasn't bound, the issue is he's offside (in front of the last feet) when he picks the ball up

Even then it's pretty close, you just need a single foot behind the ball.

Also can't see many referee's allowing the defensive team to move off the line if, as it's described, the Japanese player "detaches" and picks up the ball. Can see most referee's saying that the ball isn't clearly out until it's been picked up.

 

[Major Tom]

I'd have to watch it again but was the AB player bound to the ruck or tackle (i.e. holding on to someone) when he picked the ball up? I think the rule should just be you need to have a foot behind the ball and not be holding on to another player while you pick the ball up. Making you the halfback.

 

[Strewthcobber]

I'd have to watch it again but was the AB player bound to the ruck or tackle (i.e. holding on to someone) when he picked the ball up? I think the rule should just be you need to have a foot behind the ball and not be holding on to another player while you pick the ball up. Making you the halfback.

Have heard the foot behind the ball thing before, but not really sure where that comes from in the laws? Nige does talk about it in the clip

All I can see is the offside line (which is back foot)

 

[Major Tom]

Have heard the foot behind the ball thing before, but not really sure where that comes from in the laws? Nige does talk about it in the clip

All I can see is the offside line (which is back foot)

Wouldn’t it just clear it up by making it more obvious who the halfback is? By that you can’t pick the ball up if your hand is on or bound to the ruck / tackler player.

 

[JRugby2]

Wouldn’t it just clear it up by making it more obvious who the halfback is? By that you can’t pick the ball up if your hand is on or bound to the ruck / tackler player.

I suppose but it doesn't really change much from a practical sense. If you have a hand on the ruck, a foot behind the ball and a freakishly large enough free hand to pick it up one-handed - what difference does the first hand make? Defensive lines should have pillars set around the base of rucks anyway.

We see line breaks through this method semi-regularly judged as play on.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Wouldn’t it just clear it up by making it more obvious who the halfback is? By that you can’t pick the ball up if your hand is on or bound to the ruck / tackler player.

In a ruck - You can't be bound to the ruck and handle the ball. You can detach and pick it up, as long as you are behind the last feet when you do (onside).

Hands on is not bound, and you can pick it up if onside.

In a tackle - you can pick up the ball as long as you come from an onside position. Doesn't matter if you are bound or touch a team mate. If any oppo player is in contact, then it's a ruck.

In the clip Nige says you have to have one foot behind the ball, or you are offside.

I don't know where he has got this from. I can't find it in the laws.

*Nige doesn't always treat the lawbook as the only way to referee a rugby game

 

[JRugby2]

In a ruck - You can't be bound to the ruck and handle the ball. You can detach and pick it up, as long as you are behind the last feet when you do (onside).

Hands on is not bound, and you can pick it up if onside.

In a tackle - you can pick up the ball as long as you come from an onside position. Doesn't matter if you are bound or touch a team mate. If any oppo player is in contact, then it's a ruck.

In the clip Nige says you have to have one foot behind the ball, or you are offside.

I don't know where he has got this from. I can't find it in the laws.

*Nige doesn't always treat the lawbook as the only way to referee a rugby game

This could be another one of those "shadow" laws that we all know, but are never communicated in writing.

Another I can think of is all penalty tries must have a yellow card, except if that PT is from the scrum.

 

[Strewthcobber]

This could be another one of those "shadow" laws that we all know, but are never communicated in writing.

Another I can think of is all penalty tries must have a yellow card, except if that PT is from the scrum.

I think the latest one that has shadow changed is you have to wrap with both arms. Until very recently (last year?) you only had to "attempt to grasp" a ball career with one arm.

These latest batch of red cards all hinge on both arms needing to wrap (nothing in the laws require both arms wrapping)

 

[JRugby2]

I love rugby.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Franco Mostert and Harry Hockings both have their red card rescinded at tribunals overnight.

These TMO led red cards are starting to become a real problem for WR (World Rugby). Just use the bunker guys

 

[Strewthcobber]

“Having conducted a detailed review of all available evidence, including all camera angles and additional evidence and submissions made by and on behalf of the player, the disciplinary committee determined that although there had been head contact and an act of foul play occurring within the incident, the offending did not reach the red card threshold.

“Rather, the evidence established that the initial contact made by the player was directly to the shoulder of Italy 10 with there being “daylight” between the shoulder contact and head/neck area of Italy 10. Head contact was then found to have occurred, but was found to be secondary to the initial shoulder contact and made with much lower force and without the requisite level of “danger” required under World Rugby’s Head Contact Process to make the offending reach the red card threshold.

They reached the conclusion that just about everybody except TMO, Tual Trainini, did on Saturday.

Shoulder contact first, indirect contact with head which reduces the degree of danger to a yellow card.

The TMO still appear to get themselves tangled up in the "no mitigation" thing, when there is a step before that to determin entry level. Take the decision off the field!