The Laws of Rugby

Forum for the discussion of all International Rugby

Moderator: moderators

Re: The Laws of Rugby

Postby Oldschool » March 14th, 2017, 1:39 pm

FLIP wrote:
All Blacks nil wrote:
FLIP wrote:I think it's actually SOB pushing the point that if that was actually a ruck it should have been a holding on penalty on both occasions, since none was given it wasn't a ruck. This is with a ref O'Brien has described as someone there is no talking to, so he's trying another approach to try and get what Ireland should of received.


That's good disciplined play by SOB, " pushing the point " of a Law for which he showed a fair degree of ignorance, with an international referee,while standing in an offside position


He attempted it twice, one warning, one penalty, didn't try it again. That is pretty disciplined play given his well known and extremely understandable frustrations with Wayne Barnes.

The less said the better.
Mirror, Mirror on the Wall who's the greatest player of them all? It is Drico your majesty.
User avatar
Oldschool
Shane Horgan
 
Posts: 10102
Joined: March 27th, 2008, 2:10 pm

Re: The Laws of Rugby

Postby leinsterforever » March 14th, 2017, 5:34 pm

hugonaut wrote:
Dave Cahill wrote:Most people involved in Rugby don't know the laws


The laws are bloody complicated and full of contradictions and inconsistencies in the first place. Referees interpreting them differently makes them even more confusing.

How many times do you see a collapsed maul from a lineout penalised? Quite frequently. How many times do you see a collapsed maul from a choke tackle penalised? Quite infrequently. They're both collapsed mauls.

Can you tackle the ball carrier in a maul?
If a maul can only take place in the field of play, does it mean that if one person in a maul puts his foot on the touchline, then it's no longer a maul? Why/why not?

How many people realise that you only need three people to form a maul?

"A maul begins when a player carrying the ball is held by one or more opponents, and one or more of the ball carrier’s team mates bind on the ball carrier. A maul therefore consists, when it begins, of at least three players, all on their feet; the ball carrier and one player from each team. All the players involved must be caught in or bound to the maul and must be on their feet and moving towards a goal line. Open play has ended."
[source: http://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=17 ]

So if a supporting player latches on to the ball carrier who is being held by an opposition player, that is, by definition, a maul. Why do we see mauls with five or six players involved being called [and refereed] as 'tackle only'?


Because the ball-carrier has managed to touch the ground with a knee?
leinsterforever
Graduate
 
Posts: 662
Joined: March 18th, 2015, 2:20 am

Re: The Laws of Rugby

Postby johng » March 14th, 2017, 9:02 pm

Ain't that the new law interpretation to combat the choke tackle? Player's knee hits the ground = no maul
User avatar
johng
Leo Cullen
 
Posts: 16744
Joined: March 23rd, 2009, 11:37 pm
Location: Behind You!!

Re: The Laws of Rugby

Postby hugonaut » March 14th, 2017, 11:33 pm

leinsterforever wrote:
hugonaut wrote:
Dave Cahill wrote:Most people involved in Rugby don't know the laws


The laws are bloody complicated and full of contradictions and inconsistencies in the first place. Referees interpreting them differently makes them even more confusing.

How many times do you see a collapsed maul from a lineout penalised? Quite frequently. How many times do you see a collapsed maul from a choke tackle penalised? Quite infrequently. They're both collapsed mauls.

Can you tackle the ball carrier in a maul?
If a maul can only take place in the field of play, does it mean that if one person in a maul puts his foot on the touchline, then it's no longer a maul? Why/why not?

How many people realise that you only need three people to form a maul?

"A maul begins when a player carrying the ball is held by one or more opponents, and one or more of the ball carrier’s team mates bind on the ball carrier. A maul therefore consists, when it begins, of at least three players, all on their feet; the ball carrier and one player from each team. All the players involved must be caught in or bound to the maul and must be on their feet and moving towards a goal line. Open play has ended."
[source: http://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=17 ]

So if a supporting player latches on to the ball carrier who is being held by an opposition player, that is, by definition, a maul. Why do we see mauls with five or six players involved being called [and refereed] as 'tackle only'?


Because the ball-carrier has managed to touch the ground with a knee?



"Opposition players who hold the ball carrier and do not go to ground are not tacklers."
[source: http://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=15]

If there are no tacklers, how can there be a tackle? Somebody from the opposite team has to tackle the player in possession and go to ground themselves in order for there to be a tackle.

If the upright 'tackler' makes full contact with the ball carrier while a player from the ball carrier's team is bound to him, he's instantly in a maul [as above, you only need the right three people - two from the attacking team and one from the defending team - to form a maul]. Just because the ball carrier puts his knee on the ground, it doesn't mean he is tackled – he needs the player from the opposite team to go to ground too for there to be a tackle. You can't have a tackle without a tackler [as Law 15 above states].

But "a player must not intentionally collapse a maul. This is dangerous play." [source http://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=17 ]. The 'tackler' is already in a maul once he is in full contact with the ball-carrier and the leach. He can't collapse a maul, otherwise he gives away a penalty.

Or can you always tackle the ball carrier in a maul, even if there are 16 men in it and the whole thing subsequently collapses?
User avatar
hugonaut
Rob Kearney
 
Posts: 4422
Joined: May 5th, 2009, 7:44 pm

Re: The Laws of Rugby

Postby johng » March 15th, 2017, 1:45 pm

or to look at it the other way round....

If ball carrier getting his knee on the ground turns a maul into a tackle. Who is the tackler? Does it turn the players in contact with said kneeler into tacklers?
User avatar
johng
Leo Cullen
 
Posts: 16744
Joined: March 23rd, 2009, 11:37 pm
Location: Behind You!!

Re: The Laws of Rugby

Postby ronk » March 15th, 2017, 11:04 pm

Players in opposition to the ball carrier who remain on their feet who bring the ball carrier to ground so that the player is tackled must release the ball and the ball carrier. Those players may then play the ball providing they are on their feet and do so from behind the ball and from directly behind the tackled player or a tackler closest to those players’ goal line.
User avatar
ronk
Devin Toner
 
Posts: 8626
Joined: April 9th, 2009, 12:42 am

Re: The Laws of Rugby

Postby ronk » March 15th, 2017, 11:11 pm

johng wrote:or to look at it the other way round....

If ball carrier getting his knee on the ground turns a maul into a tackle. Who is the tackler? Does it turn the players in contact with said kneeler into tacklers?


A maul can't become a tackle. It can go to ground.
User avatar
ronk
Devin Toner
 
Posts: 8626
Joined: April 9th, 2009, 12:42 am

Re: The Laws of Rugby

Postby leinsterforever » March 15th, 2017, 11:17 pm

hugonaut wrote:"Opposition players who hold the ball carrier and do not go to ground are not tacklers."
[source: http://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=15]

If there are no tacklers, how can there be a tackle? Somebody from the opposite team has to tackle the player in possession and go to ground themselves in order for there to be a tackle.

If the upright 'tackler' makes full contact with the ball carrier while a player from the ball carrier's team is bound to him, he's instantly in a maul [as above, you only need the right three people - two from the attacking team and one from the defending team - to form a maul]. Just because the ball carrier puts his knee on the ground, it doesn't mean he is tackled – he needs the player from the opposite team to go to ground too for there to be a tackle. You can't have a tackle without a tackler [as Law 15 above states].

But "a player must not intentionally collapse a maul. This is dangerous play." [source http://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=17 ]. The 'tackler' is already in a maul once he is in full contact with the ball-carrier and the leach. He can't collapse a maul, otherwise he gives away a penalty.

Or can you always tackle the ball carrier in a maul, even if there are 16 men in it and the whole thing subsequently collapses?


My understanding would be that for a maul to form the first player from the ball-carrier's team has to bind on after the tackler has made contact with the ball carrier. This would mean that a tackler doesn't form a maul if he tackles a ball-carrier with a leech already attached.

Can you not call anyone attempting a regulation tackle a ''tackler'' until they're on the ground?
leinsterforever
Graduate
 
Posts: 662
Joined: March 18th, 2015, 2:20 am

Re: The Laws of Rugby

Postby johng » March 16th, 2017, 12:45 am

ronk wrote:
johng wrote:or to look at it the other way round....

If ball carrier getting his knee on the ground turns a maul into a tackle. Who is the tackler? Does it turn the players in contact with said kneeler into tacklers?


A maul can't become a tackle. It can go to ground.

Fair enough. So the ball carrier must get his knee to the ground before it becomes a maul. Otherwise the ref can't call tackle.

Which leaves the problem of who is the tackler then.

Hmmm. Perhaps the authors of this directive/law interpretation to combat choke tackles didn't think it through.
User avatar
johng
Leo Cullen
 
Posts: 16744
Joined: March 23rd, 2009, 11:37 pm
Location: Behind You!!

Re: The Laws of Rugby

Postby Oldschoolsocks » March 16th, 2017, 9:27 am

johng wrote:
ronk wrote:
johng wrote:or to look at it the other way round....

If ball carrier getting his knee on the ground turns a maul into a tackle. Who is the tackler? Does it turn the players in contact with said kneeler into tacklers?


A maul can't become a tackle. It can go to ground.

Fair enough. So the ball carrier must get his knee to the ground before it becomes a maul. Otherwise the ref can't call tackle.

Which leaves the problem of who is the tackler then.

Hmmm. Perhaps the authors of this directive/law interpretation to combat choke tackles didn't think it through.

They've obviously just decided they no longer want choke tackles so probably told refs cal tackle as soon as you can if at all possible and ignore the laws around the formation of a maul unless it's a line out in which case whatevs
the irony being that ad-hominen and appeal to majority are the most often used defences of the apologist.
User avatar
Oldschoolsocks
Mullet
 
Posts: 1758
Joined: January 4th, 2015, 11:36 am
Location: Stepping out of the Supernova

Previous

Return to International Rugby

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest