The Laws of Rugby

[All Blacks nil]

Do international players know the Laws?

Following on from England's much heralded and celebrated ignorance of the Laws against Italy, the Irish displayed a gamechanging (general consensus) ignorance of a pretty basic Law against Wales.

http://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/s ... 24295.html

"It's technical stuff, I'm not a forward

"

It's pretty basic technical stuff.

Connacht Academy hasn't done it's job.

Hard to believe.

[Dave Cahill]

Most people involved in Rugby don't know the laws

[All Blacks nil]

Most people involved in Rugby don't know the laws

True,
I hope Robbie doesn't suffer the ridicule directed at Haskell and Hartly for not understanding the Laws.

[Dave Cahill]

I always thought that whatever about Hartley, Haskell actually was doing the right thing - he was trying to find out what the ref would allow them to do about the situation rather than complaining about the situation itself.

But its hard to blame either. Stand on a terrace on any of the four provincial grounds and listen for the shouts of 'offside'. I'd say the PR-STV system is understood more widely than the offside law in rugby.

[FLIP]

You'd expect the captain of the team and the leading backrow player to know the laws surrounding the ruck because they're in them all the time. You wouldn't necessarily expect a back to understand the laws of a maul - Irish backs rarely every get involved in mauls at provincial and international level.

[All Blacks nil]

You'd expect the captain of the team and the leading backrow player to know the laws surrounding the ruck because they're in them all the time. You wouldn't necessarily expect a back to understand the laws of a maul - Irish backs rarely every get involved in mauls at provincial and international level.

I WOULD actually expect an international player to know the laws concerning entry to the maul. In fact I would expect any U13 with a minimum of 6 months experience to know and understand that law.
I'd even expect most clued in supporters to know that one.

[Dave Cahill]

I hope Robbie doesn't suffer the ridicule directed at Haskell and Hartly for not understanding the Laws.

If he does, we all know where it'll come from, don't we.

[Flash Gordon]

It's the player's responsibility to know the laws. They spend a lot of time on the training pitch working this stuff through and have international refs speaking to them regularly. Robbie is an honest player and stood up, admitted his error and said that he should have done better. With regard to Haskell asking Poite, my understanding is that the only person asking questions should be the skipper but that convention seems to have gone out the window these days.

[kermischocolate]

Aye, but to be fair Hartley was so bewildered he didn't even know the question to ask.

[All Blacks nil]

In fairness to Robbie he didn't ask any questions. He just tore into it.
An expensive lesson in the Laws.
Connacht Academy obviously didn't do a module on the Laws

[LeRouxIsPHat]

Something happened in the Italy game too. A ball was blocked down in the 22 and nobody knew what to do.

[Dave Cahill]

Something happened in the Italy game too. A ball was blocked down in the 22 and nobody knew what to do.

was that the one where the ball got blocked down from a kick in the in-goal area after being carried back - or was that in a different game?

[LeRouxIsPHat]

Yeah that was it. Pretty sure the ref called it wrong initially, players didnt know what to do, then the ref remembered what to do and explained it to everyone.

[Dave Cahill]

Yeah that was it. Pretty sure the ref called it wrong initially, players didnt know what to do, then the ref remembered what to do and explained it to everyone.

Yep the ref signaled a 22 drop out initially as the block down sent the ball dead in touch and goal. But as the kicking team had brought the ball into in-goal and it was charged down, then the scrum has to be awarded - which he realised soon enough!

[hugonaut]

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'?

[fourthirtythree]

Maybe if Henshaw is the captain and does it for forty minutes plus he will deserve some of the mockery. Particularly if he comes in at half time, has a chat with the coach about it and carries on doing it.

Next.

[All Blacks nil]

http://www.the42.ie/sean-obrien-ireland ... 9-Mar2017/

Reading this article it seems SOB seems to think a ruck is over when the competing player goes to ground.
In one instance he is shouting "release, release " as Heaslip attempts to steal the ball. Heaslip is cleared out, goes to ground and SOB then thinks there is no ruck shouting "tackle only, tackle only" Barnes tells him get out I.e get back when he could just have easily have penalised him again. Reading through the piece SOB doesn't really understand the concept.

O'Shea got a lot of credit for Italy using the "no ruck, no offside line" gambit but he surely warrants even more credit for ensuring his players were able to identify when no ruck had formed. This was obviously a predetermined ploy by Ireland but unfortunately something was lost in translation.

[FLIP]

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.

[All Blacks nil]

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

[FLIP]

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.