Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2
-
this is rugby's fucking problem, this shitshow right here
I played or coached senior rugby for 20+ years. I've captained. I've watched. I consider myself to have a decent understanding of the law book
And yet i cannot categorically answer any of these questions.
Not only that, i've been to world rugby's website and re-read the (i think) applicable laws, and i STILL can't answer that.
Crucial there is no law that says the offside line is for those not part of the ruck. but guess what? there isn't a law saying it isn't as well.
Fuck, even the offside line at the ruck is ambiguous. Look at that, the term is "ruck participant", that could very easily link to the only players mentioned, those on their feet bound to other players. If you are on teh ground, are you not considered a participant? And therefore do not set the offside line? dunno, the law does not say.
it's like every single law or decision is grey. No one person seems to be able to state exactly where the law says what you are talking about. If i can't understand it, as long time, heavily involved participant, what hope the casual viewer?
-
this is rugby's fucking problem, this shitshow right here
I played or coached senior rugby for 20+ years. I've captained. I've watched. I consider myself to have a decent understanding of the law book
And yet i cannot categorically answer any of these questions.
Not only that, i've been to world rugby's website and re-read the (i think) applicable laws, and i STILL can't answer that.
Crucial there is no law that says the offside line is for those not part of the ruck. but guess what? there isn't a law saying it isn't as well.
Fuck, even the offside line at the ruck is ambiguous. Look at that, the term is "ruck participant", that could very easily link to the only players mentioned, those on their feet bound to other players. If you are on teh ground, are you not considered a participant? And therefore do not set the offside line? dunno, the law does not say.
it's like every single law or decision is grey. No one person seems to be able to state exactly where the law says what you are talking about. If i can't understand it, as long time, heavily involved participant, what hope the casual viewer?
@mariner4life so from Mcloskies position, as part of a ruck, he is allowed to attack the player, but not the ball, cos ruck?
For him to touch the ball, he needs to go back behind the hindmost foot and then go for the ball, without using his hands, cos ruck?
I was thinking the exact same thing following this little back and forth...thinking yeah I agree, no wait, you have a point, oh wait :exploding_head:
-
@mariner4life so from Mcloskies position, as part of a ruck, he is allowed to attack the player, but not the ball, cos ruck?
For him to touch the ball, he needs to go back behind the hindmost foot and then go for the ball, without using his hands, cos ruck?
I was thinking the exact same thing following this little back and forth...thinking yeah I agree, no wait, you have a point, oh wait :exploding_head:
@taniwharugby touch the halfback before he picks up the ball? penalty.
FWIW i always thought that if you were in the ruck you were "onside" and therefore this play was all good once TJP picks up the ball.
But as i said, i wouldn't be surprised to find out i was wrong.
-
this is rugby's fucking problem, this shitshow right here
I played or coached senior rugby for 20+ years. I've captained. I've watched. I consider myself to have a decent understanding of the law book
And yet i cannot categorically answer any of these questions.
Not only that, i've been to world rugby's website and re-read the (i think) applicable laws, and i STILL can't answer that.
Crucial there is no law that says the offside line is for those not part of the ruck. but guess what? there isn't a law saying it isn't as well.
Fuck, even the offside line at the ruck is ambiguous. Look at that, the term is "ruck participant", that could very easily link to the only players mentioned, those on their feet bound to other players. If you are on teh ground, are you not considered a participant? And therefore do not set the offside line? dunno, the law does not say.
it's like every single law or decision is grey. No one person seems to be able to state exactly where the law says what you are talking about. If i can't understand it, as long time, heavily involved participant, what hope the casual viewer?
@mariner4life said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
this is rugby's fucking problem, this shitshow right here
I played or coached senior rugby for 20+ years. I've captained. I've watched. I consider myself to have a decent understanding of the law book
And yet i cannot categorically answer any of these questions.
Not only that, i've been to world rugby's website and re-read the (i think) applicable laws, and i STILL can't answer that.
Crucial there is no law that says the offside line is for those not part of the ruck. but guess what? there isn't a law saying it isn't as well.
Fuck, even the offside line at the ruck is ambiguous. Look at that, the term is "ruck participant", that could very easily link to the only players mentioned, those on their feet bound to other players. If you are on teh ground, are you not considered a participant? And therefore do not set the offside line? dunno, the law does not say.
it's like every single law or decision is grey. No one person seems to be able to state exactly where the law says what you are talking about. If i can't understand it, as long time, heavily involved participant, what hope the casual viewer?
I asked my mate who is a ref about this, he said on a group thread of 10+ refs they can't reach a consensus.
-
I am completely ignorant, but if he was onside, why would it be OK for him to play the man but not play at the ball?
@Crazy-Horse said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
I am completely ignorant, but if he was onside, why would it be OK for him to play the man but not play at the ball?
Agreed. It appears to be a confusion from the inability to play the ball in the ruck, but once TJP clears the ruck, that not no longer applies.
-
@mariner4life said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
this is rugby's fucking problem, this shitshow right here
I played or coached senior rugby for 20+ years. I've captained. I've watched. I consider myself to have a decent understanding of the law book
And yet i cannot categorically answer any of these questions.
Not only that, i've been to world rugby's website and re-read the (i think) applicable laws, and i STILL can't answer that.
Crucial there is no law that says the offside line is for those not part of the ruck. but guess what? there isn't a law saying it isn't as well.
Fuck, even the offside line at the ruck is ambiguous. Look at that, the term is "ruck participant", that could very easily link to the only players mentioned, those on their feet bound to other players. If you are on teh ground, are you not considered a participant? And therefore do not set the offside line? dunno, the law does not say.
it's like every single law or decision is grey. No one person seems to be able to state exactly where the law says what you are talking about. If i can't understand it, as long time, heavily involved participant, what hope the casual viewer?
I asked my mate who is a ref about this, he said on a group thread of 10+ refs they can't reach a consensus.
@Nepia said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@mariner4life said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
this is rugby's fucking problem, this shitshow right here
I played or coached senior rugby for 20+ years. I've captained. I've watched. I consider myself to have a decent understanding of the law book
And yet i cannot categorically answer any of these questions.
Not only that, i've been to world rugby's website and re-read the (i think) applicable laws, and i STILL can't answer that.
Crucial there is no law that says the offside line is for those not part of the ruck. but guess what? there isn't a law saying it isn't as well.
Fuck, even the offside line at the ruck is ambiguous. Look at that, the term is "ruck participant", that could very easily link to the only players mentioned, those on their feet bound to other players. If you are on teh ground, are you not considered a participant? And therefore do not set the offside line? dunno, the law does not say.
it's like every single law or decision is grey. No one person seems to be able to state exactly where the law says what you are talking about. If i can't understand it, as long time, heavily involved participant, what hope the casual viewer?
I asked my mate who is a ref about this, he said on a group thread of 10+ refs they can't reach a consensus.
Houston we have a very big fucking problem
-
@taniwharugby touch the halfback before he picks up the ball? penalty.
FWIW i always thought that if you were in the ruck you were "onside" and therefore this play was all good once TJP picks up the ball.
But as i said, i wouldn't be surprised to find out i was wrong.
@mariner4life said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
touch the halfback before he picks up the ball? penalty.
yeah usually only the guy with 9 on his jersey, someone else steps in to play 9, fair game...but yeah theres that as well.
The other issue with 9s is interpretation as to when they are fair game...I know it used to be hands on, ball is out, you clear quickly, now, so much adjusting goes on at the back, with hands, feet etc, hands on for a second while assessing options....
-
@mariner4life said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
touch the halfback before he picks up the ball? penalty.
yeah usually only the guy with 9 on his jersey, someone else steps in to play 9, fair game...but yeah theres that as well.
The other issue with 9s is interpretation as to when they are fair game...I know it used to be hands on, ball is out, you clear quickly, now, so much adjusting goes on at the back, with hands, feet etc, hands on for a second while assessing options....
@taniwharugby said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@mariner4life said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
touch the halfback before he picks up the ball? penalty.
yeah usually only the guy with 9 on his jersey, someone else steps in to play 9, fair game...but yeah theres that as well.
The other issue with 9s is interpretation as to when they are fair game...I know it used to be hands on, ball is out, you clear quickly, now, so much adjusting goes on at the back, with hands, feet etc, hands on for a second while assessing options....
...and for a while to get around this exact situation being unclear the refs ruled that the ball had to be clear of the ruck not just lifted.
If that ruling is correct then no wonder we see the stupid caterpillars and the halfback rolling the ball back that we all hate.
-
Law 15.4, .5, .6, .8 and .18:
-
Each team has an offside line that runs parallel to the goal line through the hindmost point of any ruck participant. If that point is on or behind the goal line, the offside line for that team is the goal line.
-
An arriving player must be on their feet and join from behind their offside line.
-
A player may join alongside but not in front of the hindmost player.
So that covers establishment of the offside line and how to join the ruck.
- Players must join the ruck or retire behind their offside line immediately.
Join or retire behind the offside line.
- The ruck ends and play continues when the ball leaves the ruck or when the ball in the ruck is on or over the goal line.
Ruck has ended. Offside line no longer exists, hence how defenders may move forward after the ruck has ended.
So Law 10.9 comes into effect.
- A player who is offside at a ruck, maul, scrum or lineout remains offside, even after the ruck, maul, scrum or lineout has ended.
McCloskey is never offside.
@antipodean said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
- A player who is offside at a ruck, maul, scrum or lineout remains offside, even after the ruck, maul, scrum or lineout has ended.
To me the word "at" seems to apply to those not actually participating "in" the ruck ie the defensive line including guard dogs. If you are part of a ruck that you joined from behind the hindmost foot then you cannot be offside provided you are still bound
-
-
@antipodean said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
- A player who is offside at a ruck, maul, scrum or lineout remains offside, even after the ruck, maul, scrum or lineout has ended.
To me the word "at" seems to apply to those not actually participating "in" the ruck ie the defensive line including guard dogs. If you are part of a ruck that you joined from behind the hindmost foot then you cannot be offside provided you are still bound
@Higgins said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@antipodean said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
- A player who is offside at a ruck, maul, scrum or lineout remains offside, even after the ruck, maul, scrum or lineout has ended.
To me the word "at" seems to apply to those not actually participating "in" the ruck ie the defensive line including guard dogs. If you are part of a ruck that you joined from behind the hindmost foot then you cannot be offside provided you are still bound
Agreed - otherwise if a defender on the ground moves backwards, or you fight your way forwards through a ruck, somehow you're now offside. That makes even less sense.
If you join a ruck legally, you're onside. And once that ruck ends, you're onside.
-
@Higgins said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@antipodean said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
- A player who is offside at a ruck, maul, scrum or lineout remains offside, even after the ruck, maul, scrum or lineout has ended.
To me the word "at" seems to apply to those not actually participating "in" the ruck ie the defensive line including guard dogs. If you are part of a ruck that you joined from behind the hindmost foot then you cannot be offside provided you are still bound
Agreed - otherwise if a defender on the ground moves backwards, or you fight your way forwards through a ruck, somehow you're now offside. That makes even less sense.
If you join a ruck legally, you're onside. And once that ruck ends, you're onside.
@antipodean said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
or you fight your way forwards through a ruck, somehow you're now offside
like you can in a maul...
-
Another set of ratings can be found here:
https://www.rugbypass.com/news/maori-all-blacks-player-ratings-vs-ireland-2/
@KiwiMurph said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
Another set of ratings can be found here:
https://www.rugbypass.com/news/maori-all-blacks-player-ratings-vs-ireland-2/
These ratings are better. But still the 2nd 5 and centre score low
-
@antipodean said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
- A player who is offside at a ruck, maul, scrum or lineout remains offside, even after the ruck, maul, scrum or lineout has ended.
To me the word "at" seems to apply to those not actually participating "in" the ruck ie the defensive line including guard dogs. If you are part of a ruck that you joined from behind the hindmost foot then you cannot be offside provided you are still bound
@Higgins said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@antipodean said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
- A player who is offside at a ruck, maul, scrum or lineout remains offside, even after the ruck, maul, scrum or lineout has ended.
To me the word "at" seems to apply to those not actually participating "in" the ruck ie the defensive line including guard dogs. If you are part of a ruck that you joined from behind the hindmost foot then you cannot be offside provided you are still bound
I have no idea on the ruling. I'm just upset those of you who know the rules are just as confused as I am.
But on the English: to me at means connected to, on the spot.
If they meant people not part of the ruck they should have said by, or next to. Not at.
If you are at the hospital you aren't in the building next door. -
@Higgins said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@antipodean said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
- A player who is offside at a ruck, maul, scrum or lineout remains offside, even after the ruck, maul, scrum or lineout has ended.
To me the word "at" seems to apply to those not actually participating "in" the ruck ie the defensive line including guard dogs. If you are part of a ruck that you joined from behind the hindmost foot then you cannot be offside provided you are still bound
I have no idea on the ruling. I'm just upset those of you who know the rules are just as confused as I am.
But on the English: to me at means connected to, on the spot.
If they meant people not part of the ruck they should have said by, or next to. Not at.
If you are at the hospital you aren't in the building next door.@nostrildamus said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@Higgins said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@antipodean said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
- A player who is offside at a ruck, maul, scrum or lineout remains offside, even after the ruck, maul, scrum or lineout has ended.
To me the word "at" seems to apply to those not actually participating "in" the ruck ie the defensive line including guard dogs. If you are part of a ruck that you joined from behind the hindmost foot then you cannot be offside provided you are still bound
I have no idea on the ruling. I'm just upset those of you who know the rules are just as confused as me.
But on the English: to me at means connected to, on the spot.
If they meant people not part of the ruck they should have said by, or next to. Not at.
If you are at the hospital you aren't in the building next door.By at in this instance. They mean - at the time of, not at the place of.
E.g. you are a winger a retreating after a failed kick chase. The kick receipt forms a ruck and you are still retiring 20m offside at the time of the ruck. You are still offside when that ruck finishes and the oppositon pass it to you while you are in their backline.
Rules should be written in language, not English, with a smaller less vague vocabulary. English is great for poetry, terrible for ruby laws ....
-
@nostrildamus said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@Higgins said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@antipodean said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
- A player who is offside at a ruck, maul, scrum or lineout remains offside, even after the ruck, maul, scrum or lineout has ended.
To me the word "at" seems to apply to those not actually participating "in" the ruck ie the defensive line including guard dogs. If you are part of a ruck that you joined from behind the hindmost foot then you cannot be offside provided you are still bound
I have no idea on the ruling. I'm just upset those of you who know the rules are just as confused as me.
But on the English: to me at means connected to, on the spot.
If they meant people not part of the ruck they should have said by, or next to. Not at.
If you are at the hospital you aren't in the building next door.By at in this instance. They mean - at the time of, not at the place of.
E.g. you are a winger a retreating after a failed kick chase. The kick receipt forms a ruck and you are still retiring 20m offside at the time of the ruck. You are still offside when that ruck finishes and the oppositon pass it to you while you are in their backline.
Rules should be written in language, not English, with a smaller less vague vocabulary. English is great for poetry, terrible for ruby laws ....
@Rapido said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@nostrildamus said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@Higgins said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@antipodean said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
- A player who is offside at a ruck, maul, scrum or lineout remains offside, even after the ruck, maul, scrum or lineout has ended.
To me the word "at" seems to apply to those not actually participating "in" the ruck ie the defensive line including guard dogs. If you are part of a ruck that you joined from behind the hindmost foot then you cannot be offside provided you are still bound
I have no idea on the ruling. I'm just upset those of you who know the rules are just as confused as me.
But on the English: to me at means connected to, on the spot.
If they meant people not part of the ruck they should have said by, or next to. Not at.
If you are at the hospital you aren't in the building next door.By at in this instance. They mean - at the time of, not at the place of.
E.g. you are a winger a retreating after a failed kick chase. The kick receipt forms a ruck and you are still retiring 20m offside at the time of the ruck. You are still offside when that ruck finishes and the oppisiton pass it to you while you are in their backline.
Rules should be written in language, not Engliosh, with a smaller less vague vocabulary. English is great for poetry, terrible for ruby laws ....
I see. But it is not exactly intuitive.
-
@nostrildamus said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@Higgins said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@antipodean said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
- A player who is offside at a ruck, maul, scrum or lineout remains offside, even after the ruck, maul, scrum or lineout has ended.
To me the word "at" seems to apply to those not actually participating "in" the ruck ie the defensive line including guard dogs. If you are part of a ruck that you joined from behind the hindmost foot then you cannot be offside provided you are still bound
I have no idea on the ruling. I'm just upset those of you who know the rules are just as confused as me.
But on the English: to me at means connected to, on the spot.
If they meant people not part of the ruck they should have said by, or next to. Not at.
If you are at the hospital you aren't in the building next door.By at in this instance. They mean - at the time of, not at the place of.
E.g. you are a winger a retreating after a failed kick chase. The kick receipt forms a ruck and you are still retiring 20m offside at the time of the ruck. You are still offside when that ruck finishes and the oppositon pass it to you while you are in their backline.
Rules should be written in language, not English, with a smaller less vague vocabulary. English is great for poetry, terrible for ruby laws ....
@Rapido but the off-side line is determined by the place of the ruck, or more importantly, the last foot at the place of the ruck, not at the of time the ruck or the time of the foot being at the back...
So more ambiguity?
-
@Crucial @antipodean this situation is problematic on several fronts because of how other the ruck is officiating more generally.
He joins the ruck from an onside position. He leans on bodies in that ruck so that means he is part of the ruck / off his feet so can’t play the ball. He doesn’t play the ball but makes a play for the halfback in an attempted tackle (there’s no other way to describe that because he isn’t driving over the ball).
In all my knowledge of the game a player needs to come from an onside position to make a tackle in that situation.
-
@Crucial @antipodean this situation is problematic on several fronts because of how other the ruck is officiating more generally.
He joins the ruck from an onside position. He leans on bodies in that ruck so that means he is part of the ruck / off his feet so can’t play the ball. He doesn’t play the ball but makes a play for the halfback in an attempted tackle (there’s no other way to describe that because he isn’t driving over the ball).
In all my knowledge of the game a player needs to come from an onside position to make a tackle in that situation.
@ACT-Crusader said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@Crucial @antipodean this situation is problematic on several fronts because of how other the ruck is officiating more generally.
He joins the ruck from an onside position. He leans on bodies in that ruck so that means he is part of the ruck / off his feet so can’t play the ball. He doesn’t play the ball but makes a play for the halfback in an attempted tackle (there’s no other way to describe that because he isn’t driving over the ball).
In all my knowledge of the game a player needs to come from an onside position to make a tackle in that situation.
I believe I covered that earlier - he's always onside. What I find contentious is the perception he can't play the ball which is out of the ruck.
