Law trials and changes
-
-
Rugby is fucked #937
Watching Racing v Toulon. Halfpenny and Dulan jump for the ball, Dulan the defender actually gets himself higher than HP, both get hands on the ball, but HP makes the better catch. Both crash to the ground, Dulan on top (still with hands on the ball). Penalty, and Dulan to the bin because while the timing was good, his hands were deemed the reason HP hit the deck. Even in super slow-mo this one didn't look a penalty.
The game has an issue if we have reached the point that chasing a kick and jumping for it has such a high chance of winning your team a penalty and getting one of them carded.
-
Carded for this.
https://streamable.com/6nb1r -
Carded for this.
https://streamable.com/6nb1r@antipodean what a joke...he even jumped higher too.
Seems unless you catch it, you are in the wrong.
-
Carded for this.
https://streamable.com/6nb1r@antipodean said in Law trials and changes set for 2017:
Carded for this.
https://streamable.com/6nb1rWhat the fuck?
This looks like a ridiculous new application of laws, and I don't see how it increases player safety. Players will just gamble on not getting carded if they catch it.
-
That's just ridiculous! I fear with great fears what a "card fest" it's going to be during the Super Rugby season, although I still have a little bit of hope that our SH refs have more common sense and find common ground on a more reasonable interpretation and application of the rules. WR and NH refs are killing the game damn it! Who still wants to watch games if teams end up playing with 12-13 players for some time during the game and reach the final whistle with fewer than 15 players on a regular basis?
-
@antipodean said in Law trials and changes set for 2017:
Carded for this.
https://streamable.com/6nb1rWhat the fuck?
This looks like a ridiculous new application of laws, and I don't see how it increases player safety. Players will just gamble on not getting carded if they catch it.
@gt12 said in Law trials and changes set for 2017:
@antipodean said in Law trials and changes set for 2017:
Carded for this.
https://streamable.com/6nb1rWhat the fuck?
This looks like a ridiculous new application of laws, and I don't see how it increases player safety. Players will just gamble on not getting carded if they catch it.
Shit, I hadn't seen this one.
Yep. Rugby has lost the fucking plot.
-
I was at a club game yesterday and the biggest area of confusion was players getting penalised for "over the shoulder" tackles, especially in close quarters. Nobody was doing anything dangerous but until the practice is unlearned it leads to endless penalties and eventually YCs for continued infringements.
-
Wayne Barnes explains the 'new' tackle laws:
http://www.rugbyonslaught.com/2017/01/wayne-barnes-will-make-you-completely.html
What's your analysis?
I'm in favor of the new interpretations, except for the red card ruling, based on what I've heard there.
I watched the video and it seems to me that they're guessing what is red and yellow. From what I heard, it seems like non-penalty versus penalty are clear enough (perhaps not in practice) and penalty versus card is clear enough (perhaps not in practice) but I still couldn't really see much difference between yellow and red.
-
I'm a big fan. Can only be an advantage for NZ with tackle laws that are likely to increase offloads. I've yet to watch a game in the NH that has bee "ruined" by them. And I've already watched a few games this weekend.
-
Carded for this.
https://streamable.com/6nb1r@antipodean said in Law trials and changes set for 2017:
Carded for this.
https://streamable.com/6nb1rAlright that is a shocker.
-
Jamie Cudmore: 'Suspecting a Concussion Means It's Probably a Concussion'
http://news.rugbypass.com/view/suspecting-a-concussion-means-its-probably-a-concussion
@Stargazer said in Law trials and changes set for 2017:
Jamie Cudmore: 'Suspecting a Concussion Means It's Probably a Concussion'
http://news.rugbypass.com/view/suspecting-a-concussion-means-its-probably-a-concussion
Good read. He really gets wound up after a bit doesn't he? Makes excellent points from the view of someone who has actually been there and has the clarity of hindsight.
I do tend to agree that the emphasis on high tackles is paying lip service to the problem and taking the opportunity to try and clean up some 'visuals' of the game to the casual observer.
Even WRs own studies show that concussions from high tackles are only a small % of concussive head injuries (the tackler is actually the one at the highest risk).
I know that NZRU work hard with ACC in coaching coaches at all levels to improve tackling technique for safety of both players but that is because of our accident compo system in NZ, not because of a WR directive. -
Only watched the first one. Are you all missing the fact that 7s is always reffed much stricter than XVs?
Many a YC on the Sevens circuit would be deemed harsh in XVs. In part I think the reasoning on this is that Sevens, by necessity, looks for a clean open game with little latitude. The harsher interpretations are meant to make the players play a game with less infringements.
Haven't we already seen via that Wayne Barnes clip that some of these would not be YC'd in XVs and that the ones slipping through are from refs adjusting?
To me though, there were a couple of important elements not addressed in that Barnes explanation. One is regarding the incentive for ball carriers to lead with the head in a very low body position when driving. The other is that innocuous head contact that has been upped to a penalty falls into YC and PT territory when it occurs close to the line. The ruling that an infringement that stops a probable try results in a YC and PT now applies to a quite 'light' penalty offence that can be milked by the attacking team.
It is certainly going to take time for players and coaches to retrain techniques and instincts as well as for Refs to find the right balance.
I was at a club game on the weekend and even though there was a big quality gap between the two sides (a 50-25) win, there was a long period where the lesser side maintained possession and scored points simply because the ref got on a roll with penalties for contact above the shoulder then starting issuing YCs for continued infringements. The contact was almost all just arm hitting above shoulder on driving ball carriers around the breakdown. -
Only watched the first one. Are you all missing the fact that 7s is always reffed much stricter than XVs?
Many a YC on the Sevens circuit would be deemed harsh in XVs. In part I think the reasoning on this is that Sevens, by necessity, looks for a clean open game with little latitude. The harsher interpretations are meant to make the players play a game with less infringements.
Haven't we already seen via that Wayne Barnes clip that some of these would not be YC'd in XVs and that the ones slipping through are from refs adjusting?
To me though, there were a couple of important elements not addressed in that Barnes explanation. One is regarding the incentive for ball carriers to lead with the head in a very low body position when driving. The other is that innocuous head contact that has been upped to a penalty falls into YC and PT territory when it occurs close to the line. The ruling that an infringement that stops a probable try results in a YC and PT now applies to a quite 'light' penalty offence that can be milked by the attacking team.
It is certainly going to take time for players and coaches to retrain techniques and instincts as well as for Refs to find the right balance.
I was at a club game on the weekend and even though there was a big quality gap between the two sides (a 50-25) win, there was a long period where the lesser side maintained possession and scored points simply because the ref got on a roll with penalties for contact above the shoulder then starting issuing YCs for continued infringements. The contact was almost all just arm hitting above shoulder on driving ball carriers around the breakdown.@Crucial Yeah, that and I find it a bit sad that video has already been posted twice now, on a board where 7's gets short shrift and is not even considered rugby by some. So next to nobody watched the 7's, yet they're happy to post up a video trying to highlight the shit stuff that happened - and not a highlights video to be found.
-
@Crucial Yeah, that and I find it a bit sad that video has already been posted twice now, on a board where 7's gets short shrift and is not even considered rugby by some. So next to nobody watched the 7's, yet they're happy to post up a video trying to highlight the shit stuff that happened - and not a highlights video to be found.
@Bones said in Law trials and changes set for 2017:
@Crucial Yeah, that and I find it a bit sad that video has already been posted twice now, on a board where 7's gets short shrift and is not even considered rugby by some. So next to nobody watched the 7's, yet they're happy to post up a video trying to highlight the shit stuff that happened - and not a highlights video to be found.
I watch 7's and I have never seen it reffed like that for high shots. Guys ducking under tackles and the tackler getting a card a guy grazing a players head and getting a yellow come on be genuine? Have you ever seen it reffed that harshly.
-
@Bones said in Law trials and changes set for 2017:
@Crucial Yeah, that and I find it a bit sad that video has already been posted twice now, on a board where 7's gets short shrift and is not even considered rugby by some. So next to nobody watched the 7's, yet they're happy to post up a video trying to highlight the shit stuff that happened - and not a highlights video to be found.
I watch 7's and I have never seen it reffed like that for high shots. Guys ducking under tackles and the tackler getting a card a guy grazing a players head and getting a yellow come on be genuine? Have you ever seen it reffed that harshly.
