England vs All Blacks
-
@booboo said in England vs All Blacks:
@pakman said in England vs All Blacks:
@stargazer said in England vs All Blacks:
Amazing that there was a big article in today's Times (London) that offside adjudged when half touches ball. It stated that at that point Lawes was onside. Then Ofa steps forward (but articles says too late to matter). The above implies that so long as Ofa's foot outstretched before TJP picked up the ball Lawes was obliged to back-peddle, which he did not. In other words Ofa's step was decisive?
Immediately wrong. When the halfback lifts the ball.
Yes, I assume it was this article re-reported on Stuff. I stopped reading when i got to "when half touches ball" which is only 3 paragraphs in.
It has actually been quite interesting reading the laws clarification the last few days on tackle rule v ruck rule differences. I have actually learnt something as I didn't really need to take notice of the Italy v England outcomes.
But 4 days later, for a printed article from an ex-professional ref to have such a glaring mistake which makes the next 1000 odd words written pointless ... is just amazing. The mistake above is unrelated to those changes.
@rapido given you had our 'premier' commetator, former AB halfback Marshall saying he was ok cos TJ had his hands on the ball, it kinda sums things up perfectly.
Isnt that the same guy they went to for comment on another controversial call earlier this year?
-
Watching it now. It's a misjudged kick with Barrett trying to get just a bit too much ground with not enough distance.
The player just jumps out of play and throws it back according to law 18.2c
@gt12 said in England vs All Blacks:
Watching it now. It's a misjudged kick with Barrett trying to get just a bit too much ground with not enough distance.
The player just jumps out of play and throws it back according to law 18.2c
I have definitely seen it ruled the other way a lot in recent times, to the point that I also thought the law had changed. As usual there is not a lot of consistency in what appear to be pretty straightforward laws.
-
@gt12 said in England vs All Blacks:
Watching it now. It's a misjudged kick with Barrett trying to get just a bit too much ground with not enough distance.
The player just jumps out of play and throws it back according to law 18.2c
I have definitely seen it ruled the other way a lot in recent times, to the point that I also thought the law had changed. As usual there is not a lot of consistency in what appear to be pretty straightforward laws.
For all I know the guidelines were revised! But according to the info my handy iPhone rugby laws app, he’s played according to them.
Where’s @Damo - he’s good for these questions.
-
@gt12 I'm happy with the call, much easier for the touchies to see and rewards great skill from the player who managed to keep it in. Just consistency...
-
For all I know the guidelines were revised! But according to the info my handy iPhone rugby laws app, he’s played according to them.
Where’s @Damo - he’s good for these questions.
@gt12 said in England vs All Blacks:
But according to the info my handy iPhone rugby laws app, he’s played according to them.
Cheers for mentioning the app, I have downloaded and will now be slightly more informed when ranting away on here (usually I'm searching on the web as I always forget to bookmark the laws.
-
@gt12 said in England vs All Blacks:
But according to the info my handy iPhone rugby laws app, he’s played according to them.
Cheers for mentioning the app, I have downloaded and will now be slightly more informed when ranting away on here (usually I'm searching on the web as I always forget to bookmark the laws.
-
@rapido given you had our 'premier' commetator, former AB halfback Marshall saying he was ok cos TJ had his hands on the ball, it kinda sums things up perfectly.
Isnt that the same guy they went to for comment on another controversial call earlier this year?
@taniwharugby said in England vs All Blacks:
@rapido given you had our 'premier' commetator, former AB halfback Marshall saying he was ok cos TJ had his hands on the ball, it kinda sums things up perfectly.
Isnt that the same guy they went to for comment on another controversial call earlier this year?
Yes, I'm forgiving of people who made a mistake immediately or punters venting within the first 24 hours etc.
It's the 4 days later, after social media and the interweb has been flooded by complaints and people correcting others where parts of their complaints went wrong. That I can't believe a printed article is produced by an ex-ref with such a glaring mistake.
But on your point re: Marshall. The comments men should just stop trying to be instant law gurus. Just explain (if needed) why the ref or TMO have come to a certain conclusion, not whether that conclusion is right or wrong.
-
@gt12 here we go, appears it was changed last year to allow players to jump from the field of play and knock the ball back in.
But in another change, a player could jump from the field of play and knock the ball back after it has crossed the line. Such a player can also catch the ball after it has crossed the touchline and throw it back infield, often over the shoulder. This includes cases where the ball has crossed the touch-in-goal line as well.https://www.nzherald.co.nz/wanganui-chronicle/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503424&objectid=11825043
-
For all I know the guidelines were revised! But according to the info my handy iPhone rugby laws app, he’s played according to them.
Where’s @Damo - he’s good for these questions.
@gt12 said in England vs All Blacks:
For all I know the guidelines were revised! But according to the info my handy iPhone rugby laws app, he’s played according to them.
Where’s @Damo - he’s good for these questions.
As stated below they changed the laws last year in one if the most needed law changes.
It is a lot simpler now. Ball is out if it touches a ground, player or something touching the.ground over the sideline (except that a player can't jump from in touch to knock it in).
-
On the plus side many of us on here have been pissed of about NH view on a ball being out and the mucking around if it (Conor Murray is superb at it).
So it’s nice to see a NH team lose partially related to it.
@majorrage said in England vs All Blacks:
On the plus side many of us on here have been pissed of about NH view on a ball being out and the mucking around if it (Conor Murray is superb at it).
It was getting absurd at one stage where halfbacks would move the ball back along the ground with their hands. Now they have to use their feet.
-
@majorrage said in England vs All Blacks:
On the plus side many of us on here have been pissed of about NH view on a ball being out and the mucking around if it (Conor Murray is superb at it).
It was getting absurd at one stage where halfbacks would move the ball back along the ground with their hands. Now they have to use their feet.
@bovidae said in England vs All Blacks:
@majorrage said in England vs All Blacks:
On the plus side many of us on here have been pissed of about NH view on a ball being out and the mucking around if it (Conor Murray is superb at it).
It was getting absurd at one stage where halfbacks would move the ball back along the ground with their hands. Now they have to use their feet.
It still is absurd. Seriously the last guy in the ruck is at full stretch with his fingertip on the next blokes arse, and his leg as far back as is physically possible. There is a mere shoelace which is "keeping it in the ruck", when the ball is about 2 metres behind where the action is.
Not even exaggerating!
-
@bovidae said in England vs All Blacks:
@majorrage said in England vs All Blacks:
On the plus side many of us on here have been pissed of about NH view on a ball being out and the mucking around if it (Conor Murray is superb at it).
It was getting absurd at one stage where halfbacks would move the ball back along the ground with their hands. Now they have to use their feet.
It still is absurd. Seriously the last guy in the ruck is at full stretch with his fingertip on the next blokes arse, and his leg as far back as is physically possible. There is a mere shoelace which is "keeping it in the ruck", when the ball is about 2 metres behind where the action is.
Not even exaggerating!
-
@bovidae said in England vs All Blacks:
@majorrage said in England vs All Blacks:
On the plus side many of us on here have been pissed of about NH view on a ball being out and the mucking around if it (Conor Murray is superb at it).
It was getting absurd at one stage where halfbacks would move the ball back along the ground with their hands. Now they have to use their feet.
It still is absurd. Seriously the last guy in the ruck is at full stretch with his fingertip on the next blokes arse, and his leg as far back as is physically possible. There is a mere shoelace which is "keeping it in the ruck", when the ball is about 2 metres behind where the action is.
Not even exaggerating!
@majorrage said in England vs All Blacks:
@bovidae said in England vs All Blacks:
@majorrage said in England vs All Blacks:
On the plus side many of us on here have been pissed of about NH view on a ball being out and the mucking around if it (Conor Murray is superb at it).
It was getting absurd at one stage where halfbacks would move the ball back along the ground with their hands. Now they have to use their feet.
It still is absurd. Seriously the last guy in the ruck is at full stretch with his fingertip on the next blokes arse, and his leg as far back as is physically possible. There is a mere shoelace which is "keeping it in the ruck", when the ball is about 2 metres behind where the action is.
Not even exaggerating!
Was it Andre Watson who said 'if a bird can shit on it, it is out'?
Obviously finding the right balance of law interpretation to create flow in the game (protect the halfback enough that the ball can be used by the attacking side) and stop sides taking the piss (as described above) still isn't right.
The issue has only been made worse by the unnecessary change to offside after England complained about Italy making them look silly. -
@majorrage said in England vs All Blacks:
@bovidae said in England vs All Blacks:
@majorrage said in England vs All Blacks:
On the plus side many of us on here have been pissed of about NH view on a ball being out and the mucking around if it (Conor Murray is superb at it).
It was getting absurd at one stage where halfbacks would move the ball back along the ground with their hands. Now they have to use their feet.
It still is absurd. Seriously the last guy in the ruck is at full stretch with his fingertip on the next blokes arse, and his leg as far back as is physically possible. There is a mere shoelace which is "keeping it in the ruck", when the ball is about 2 metres behind where the action is.
Not even exaggerating!
Was it Andre Watson who said 'if a bird can shit on it, it is out'?
Obviously finding the right balance of law interpretation to create flow in the game (protect the halfback enough that the ball can be used by the attacking side) and stop sides taking the piss (as described above) still isn't right.
The issue has only been made worse by the unnecessary change to offside after England complained about Italy making them look silly.@crucial said in England vs All Blacks:
@majorrage said in England vs All Blacks:
@bovidae said in England vs All Blacks:
@majorrage said in England vs All Blacks:
On the plus side many of us on here have been pissed of about NH view on a ball being out and the mucking around if it (Conor Murray is superb at it).
It was getting absurd at one stage where halfbacks would move the ball back along the ground with their hands. Now they have to use their feet.
It still is absurd. Seriously the last guy in the ruck is at full stretch with his fingertip on the next blokes arse, and his leg as far back as is physically possible. There is a mere shoelace which is "keeping it in the ruck", when the ball is about 2 metres behind where the action is.
Not even exaggerating!
Was it Andre Watson who said 'if a bird can shit on it, it is out'?
That's been the prescribed "definition" for at least 20 years. I don't think Andre can claim that one!
-
@majorrage said in England vs All Blacks:
@bovidae said in England vs All Blacks:
@majorrage said in England vs All Blacks:
On the plus side many of us on here have been pissed of about NH view on a ball being out and the mucking around if it (Conor Murray is superb at it).
It was getting absurd at one stage where halfbacks would move the ball back along the ground with their hands. Now they have to use their feet.
It still is absurd. Seriously the last guy in the ruck is at full stretch with his fingertip on the next blokes arse, and his leg as far back as is physically possible. There is a mere shoelace which is "keeping it in the ruck", when the ball is about 2 metres behind where the action is.
Not even exaggerating!
Was it Andre Watson who said 'if a bird can shit on it, it is out'?
Obviously finding the right balance of law interpretation to create flow in the game (protect the halfback enough that the ball can be used by the attacking side) and stop sides taking the piss (as described above) still isn't right.
The issue has only been made worse by the unnecessary change to offside after England complained about Italy making them look silly.@crucial said in England vs All Blacks:
Was it Andre Watson who said 'if a bird can shit on it, it is out'?
Jonathan Kaplan.
-
@crucial said in England vs All Blacks:
Was it Andre Watson who said 'if a bird can shit on it, it is out'?
Jonathan Kaplan.
@billy-webb said in England vs All Blacks:
@crucial said in England vs All Blacks:
Was it Andre Watson who said 'if a bird can shit on it, it is out'?
Jonathan Kaplan.
Kaplan. The bloke who last half the worlds credibility as a ref (not I), and then the other half once he set himself up on twitter (including I).
I used to read it religiously, as I thought he was a good ref. Until I noticed a pattern which means he just became a fan.
