General rugby thread

General rugby thread

Author
Discussion

GravelBen

15,654 posts

229 months

Tuesday 13th November 2018
quotequote all
Kermit power said:
I fear you've oversimplified the link somewhere!
Is it not showing for you? How about this time


irocfan

40,152 posts

189 months

Wednesday 14th November 2018
quotequote all
GravelBen said:
Kermit power said:
I fear you've oversimplified the link somewhere!
Is it not showing for you? How about this time

Silly Q time here... in the above image isnt the ball actually out? It's behind the rear foot of the last AB.... ('tis funny though)

GravelBen

15,654 posts

229 months

Wednesday 14th November 2018
quotequote all
I don't think the ball is 'out' until its picked up - but he was already offside before that IMO, if you look at this screenshot from a few frames earlier:



I'm no expert on the finer points of rugby rules though, I'm a hockey player! Really just posted the one above as a joke rather than a source of debate.

Edited by GravelBen on Wednesday 14th November 05:42

768

13,601 posts

95 months

Wednesday 14th November 2018
quotequote all
^
I can see Ford's head in front of Lawes. I can't see an England foot in the ruck further back than that.

768

13,601 posts

95 months

Wednesday 14th November 2018
quotequote all
Also, I suspect the ball was out before it was picked up -


Slaav

4,240 posts

209 months

Wednesday 14th November 2018
quotequote all
GravelBen said:
I don't think the ball is 'out' until its picked up - but he was already offside before that IMO, if you look at this screenshot from a few frames earlier:

[url]|https://thumbsnap.com/YI1gSE5s[/urll]

I'm no expert on the finer points of rugby rules though, I'm a hockey player! Really just posted the one above as a joke rather than a source of debate.

Edited by GravelBen on Wednesday 14th November 05:42
In this photo, I think it is safe to say Lawes was ONside at that actual point in time. The defensive line is often coached to start their blitz from BEHIND the offside line rather than on it. The question is though whether Williams(?) joins the ruck and therefore his back foot becomes England’s offside line? If so, Lawes would have needed to retreat a yard or so to remain onside? He seemingly didn’t.

I’ve said it elsewhere but the ref himself made a technical mistake and abdicated himself from the final decision, allowing the cheating Saffer Bastid to ref that incident smile

Now if we had a line out in the second half, we would have won that game rather than be arguing over the non try..... why are we not debating that issue?

beer



DocJock

8,341 posts

239 months

Wednesday 14th November 2018
quotequote all
And that sums up the referee's problem.

He has to simultaneously watch for the moment the SH picks up the ball and the position of the (moving) defenders re the offside line.

vetrof

2,466 posts

172 months

Wednesday 14th November 2018
quotequote all
I see many here don't really know what a ruck is. There is no English player on his feet at the contest, so it is a tackle not a ruck.
So the offside line for Lawes is actually the forward most point of the forward most All Black. Offside is the correct call.

https://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=14

Edited by vetrof on Wednesday 14th November 09:45

Kermit power

28,634 posts

212 months

Wednesday 14th November 2018
quotequote all
vetrof said:
I see many here don't really know what a ruck is. There is no English player on his feet at the contest, so it is a tackle not a ruck.
So the offside line for Lawes is actually the forward most point of the forward most All Black. Offside is the correct call.
I'm not sure you can tell that from the stills can you?

As I understand it, once a ruck has formed, it remains a ruck until the ball moves or the ref calls the ball unplayable? As such, whilst you're correct in saying that no English players are on their feet, if they'd originally been on their feet in the ruck and then taken to ground by Kiwis clearing the ruck out, it's still a ruck, no?

Whether that's what actually happened, I don't know, hence saying I'm not sure you can decide just from the stills without seeing the preceding few seconds.

vetrof

2,466 posts

172 months

Wednesday 14th November 2018
quotequote all
A ruck never formed, there was a single English tackler, no other England player joins the contest.

https://youtu.be/msJcTDNBkDs?t=2548

Kermit power

28,634 posts

212 months

Wednesday 14th November 2018
quotequote all
vetrof said:
A ruck never formed, there was a single English tackler, no other England player joins the contest.

https://youtu.be/msJcTDNBkDs?t=2548
Fair enough. So he would've been perfectly onside before World rugby responded to that England vs Italy game, but in this case, as you say, it's clearly offside.

768

13,601 posts

95 months

Wednesday 14th November 2018
quotequote all
Yeah, I'd lost that in the stills.

I'm still confused about the Italy game too - I thought the update was something around staying away from the scrum halves rather than anything about whether they were offside? Reading the link above I'm not sure when the ball is still in the tackle area either.

vetrof

2,466 posts

172 months

Wednesday 14th November 2018
quotequote all
Good point about end of the tackle. In this case it's either point 11b or c.

b - A player on their feet from either team gains possession of the ball and moves away or passes or kicks the ball.
c - The ball leaves the tackle area.

I would lean towards b. Which would reinforce the offside. Perenara takes possesion of the ball at the tackle and doesn't move away, so the tackle isn't over and the offside line is still the forward AB player and this doesn't change until he actually kicks it. Whether or not the ball is 'out' of the tackle.

Kermit power

28,634 posts

212 months

Wednesday 14th November 2018
quotequote all
Is anyone else cheering on Germany for a shot at the RWC?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/46208244

Reading elsewhere, it looks like it might just be now or never for them as well. They guy who bought Heidelberg rugby club and invested a fortune in it to get them up to the point where they qualified for the Challenge Cup then had to give it up, as he also owns Stade Français, and the rules say you can't own two clubs in European competitions.

The thought that a guy who drives a cable car as his day job before working nights as a club bouncer could still manage to also find the time to get through to the RWC is definitely one of those underdog stories that you want to see win! smile

Hong Kong (who were 8 places above them in the World rankings before the match) beaten in the repechage tournament. Canada (5 places above them) and Kenya (3 places below) to go.

Canada have to be favourites to win, but I never thought I'd be in the position of cheering on the Germans! rofl

Jinx

11,345 posts

259 months

Wednesday 14th November 2018
quotequote all
Kermit power said:
Is anyone else cheering on Germany for a shot at the RWC?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/46208244

Reading elsewhere, it looks like it might just be now or never for them as well. They guy who bought Heidelberg rugby club and invested a fortune in it to get them up to the point where they qualified for the Challenge Cup then had to give it up, as he also owns Stade Français, and the rules say you can't own two clubs in European competitions.

The thought that a guy who drives a cable car as his day job before working nights as a club bouncer could still manage to also find the time to get through to the RWC is definitely one of those underdog stories that you want to see win! smile

Hong Kong (who were 8 places above them in the World rankings before the match) beaten in the repechage tournament. Canada (5 places above them) and Kenya (3 places below) to go.

Canada have to be favourites to win, but I never thought I'd be in the position of cheering on the Germans! rofl
Urge to support underdogs at war with "The Germans"






Dieter7S4

198 posts

193 months

Thursday 15th November 2018
quotequote all
GravelBen said:
Had to chuckle at this one... wink



Yeah yeah oversimplification etc I'm sure, but it made me laugh.
Both pics the ball is out of the ruck!

Kermit power

28,634 posts

212 months

Thursday 15th November 2018
quotequote all
Dieter7S4 said:
Both pics the ball is out of the ruck!
As has been established, it was never in a ruck, so it's the offside law at the tackle which is relevant, and under that, he was offside.

df76

3,614 posts

277 months

Thursday 15th November 2018
quotequote all
Kermit power said:
Dieter7S4 said:
Both pics the ball is out of the ruck!
As has been established, it was never in a ruck, so it's the offside law at the tackle which is relevant, and under that, he was offside.
It might not have been a ruck, but if the ball leaves the "tackle area" the tackle is over. You could argue that's the case in that photo. You'd need to see the whole thing moving rather than a photo. I don't have much of an issue with the decision though, a tricky call.

tight5

2,747 posts

158 months

Thursday 15th November 2018
quotequote all

Kermit power

28,634 posts

212 months

Thursday 15th November 2018
quotequote all
tight5 said:
Lozowski & Nowell in the centres is an interesting choice!!

Do you think they deliberately went for...

19. Hill
20. Underhill

rofl