wixfjord wrote: ↑February 28th, 2021, 11:26 am
I do think we'll see Ciano start against England though.
Kilcoyne's scrummaging is more hit and miss and he's a penalty machine at times. Might be more impactful for him to come from the bench.
Healy isn’t going to be the force of nature that he once was. Those days are gone. But could he adapt for the last few years? He once put on weight and then struggled with his mobility because of it. Now, his game is moving away from that dynamism, so I’m thinking at this stage he could just focus on the basics. I’m not sure we have an out and out loosehead ready to scrum at his level, so could he act as Heinke van der Merve to one or two of these younger looseheads?
I can’t take the outrage over the quick Welsh penalty seriously. Tactical takeaway - from now on the captain has to run along the line of defenders like William Wallace in braveheart . They gave away the penalties , they turned their backs, they sauntered and dandered. And then it happened again with the Hardy try. It’s a problem for us because England were probably the better side, and they’ll hardly make same mistakes again, but the scoreboard in a game is important like.
Huh? It wasn’t just a quick penalty, the ref had told Farrell to have a word with his players and the water carriers were still on the pitch.
There was a lot of incredibly bad officiating yesterday. I think it’d be a bigger deal during a normal season but everything feels watered down now. Individually they should still all be in trouble though.
Ah I know it is arguable but I just thought it was hilarious.
The forward/backwards one: I remember O’Driscoll trying that fake pass that goes forward but he regathers. Am open to correction, but It’s my understanding that should be blown, though it wasn’t in his case. I also mind Joe Schmidt giving off about a knock on that actually came off the chest on a crash ball. He was technically correct, but like it’s rare that they aren’t given as knock-ons.
Personally I think it’s fair enough to let the Welsh one go if the player gets it backward before it touches anyone or the ground. That does often happen and let go, just with the foot it generally doesn’t. Part of LRZ’s reaction could be that it went accidentally backward rather than him doing something good. So he was lucky on a few counts!
LeRouxIsPHat wrote: ↑February 28th, 2021, 2:20 pm
If the ref tells you you’ve time to talk to the players then there’s no way play should be restarted until everyone is ready.
I’m hoping World Rugby clarify the knock on during the week. It looks wrong but I can’t actually decipher the law.
Hardy’s try was just very quick by him IMO. Daly made a terrible call to cornerflag when the threat was in the middle but other than that I thought he was just too quick, hard for other players to get back quickly enough.
Hardy's try was great.
This is not a criticism of you LRIP, but I don't see that there is anything to clarify from World Rugby other than the ref team made a bad error. LRZ attempts to catch the ball but knocks it towards the opposition dead-ball line and doesn't regather it. In every game of rugby I have ever played or seen played, that is a knock on. It doesn't matter that he has run past it by the time it hits him again, it's the direction the ball has travelled in and his failure to regather it.
Everybody who has ever played rugby has attempted to [and sometimes succeeded in] kicking at a ball they've knocked on before it hits the deck. And even if you have connected with it, the ref has called you back for a knock-on.
I can’t link it at the moment but at the end of the law it says something about hitting the ground or another player for it to be a knock on but it’s not clear (to me at least) if those two elements are always taken into account or if it can be knocked on before those things come into play.
Not being funny Hugo but it’s not just me who’s unsure, the officials gave it, the pundits on BBC seemed torn, and most fans (and RZ) seem to think it was a knock on. So I think World rugby should just make a statement saying “this is why the officials were right/wrong”. To me it didn’t seem like the officials knew the law which is why they kept looking at it even though the angles all showed the same thing.
I think they’ve made clarifications before (with the forward pass/momentum issue) so they could do so again without much hassle.
Fair enough! I went and looked it up myself after reading what you had written.
"Knock-on: When a player loses possession of the ball and it goes forward*, or when a player hits the ball forward with the hand or arm, or when the ball hits the hand or arm and goes forward, and the ball touches the ground or another player before the original player can catch it." [source: https://www.world.rugby/the-game/laws/d ... laws_let11 ]
*defined as the opposition's dead ball line
As they do in NRL decisions:
Did the ball hit the hand or arm? Yes
Did the ball travel forward [towards the opposition dead-ball line]: Yes
Did the ball touch the ground or another player before the original player could catch it? Yes. He never regained possession.
LeRouxIsPHat wrote: ↑February 28th, 2021, 3:58 pm
I can’t link it at the moment but at the end of the law it says something about hitting the ground or another player for it to be a knock on but it’s not clear (to me at least) if those two elements are always taken into account or if it can be knocked on before those things come into play.
Not being funny Hugo but it’s not just me who’s unsure, the officials gave it, the pundits on BBC seemed torn, and most fans (and RZ) seem to think it was a knock on. So I think World rugby should just make a statement saying “this is why the officials were right/wrong”. To me it didn’t seem like the officials knew the law which is why they kept looking at it even though the angles all showed the same thing.
I think they’ve made clarifications before (with the forward pass/momentum issue) so they could do so again without much hassle.
They simplified the law book a couple of years ago (and the law is now as you say) in part in order to remove unnecessary complexity. However it also introduced a lot of vagueness.
Under the laws as currently written and interpreted literally, the try was good, there was no knockon. It highlights again an issue with the game at the moment. Theres a lot of stuff that people 'know' are laws, like knockons, control, downward pressure, jumping out of a tackle, that aren't mentioned at all or only mentioned in passing in the law book and guidelines. World Rugby need to do one of two things. Either say "If its not in the current rulebook and guidelines on the world rugby site, then its not in the laws". or they need to re-introduce the more complex law book which covered each law in more depth
I've been a fan of Nigel's refereeing for a long time, but he does tend to referee on feels and not on the laws - and he got exposed on this quite badly on twitter last weekend when a barrister took him to the woodshed on jumping out of the tackle
This is not a criticism of you LRIP, but I don't see that there is anything to clarify from World Rugby other than the ref team made a bad error. LRZ attempts to catch the ball but knocks it towards the opposition dead-ball line and doesn't regather it. In every game of rugby I have ever played or seen played, that is a knock on. It doesn't matter that he has run past it by the time it hits him again, it's the direction the ball has travelled in and his failure to regather it.
Everybody who has ever played rugby has attempted to [and sometimes succeeded in] kicking at a ball they've knocked on before it hits the deck. And even if you have connected with it, the ref has called you back for a knock-on.
I can’t link it at the moment but at the end of the law it says something about hitting the ground or another player for it to be a knock on but it’s not clear (to me at least) if those two elements are always taken into account or if it can be knocked on before those things come into play.
Not being funny Hugo but it’s not just me who’s unsure, the officials gave it, the pundits on BBC seemed torn, and most fans (and RZ) seem to think it was a knock on. So I think World rugby should just make a statement saying “this is why the officials were right/wrong”. To me it didn’t seem like the officials knew the law which is why they kept looking at it even though the angles all showed the same thing.
I think they’ve made clarifications before (with the forward pass/momentum issue) so they could do so again without much hassle.
Fair enough! I went and looked it up myself after reading what you had written.
"Knock-on: When a player loses possession of the ball and it goes forward*, or when a player hits the ball forward with the hand or arm, or when the ball hits the hand or arm and goes forward, and the ball touches the ground or another player before the original player can catch it." [source: https://www.world.rugby/the-game/laws/d ... laws_let11 ]
*defined as the opposition's dead ball line
As they do in NRL decisions:
Did the ball hit the hand or arm? Yes
Did the ball travel forward [towards the opposition dead-ball line]: Yes
Did the ball touch the ground or another player before the original player could catch it? Yes. He never regained possession.
I've been a fan of Nigel's refereeing for a long time, but he does tend to referee on feels and not on the laws - and he got exposed on this quite badly on twitter last weekend when a barrister took him to the woodshed on jumping out of the tackle
Agree with you 100%. He was the best ref to watch when you were a neutral, but he could be quite frustrating if it was a game your team were involved in.
With regards to your comments on the laws of the game, Steve Hansen was a big proponent of getting rid of a lot of laws [source: https://www.the42.ie/steve-hansen-borin ... 5-Mar2015/ ]. In my opinion, World Rugby could do an awful lot worse than to employ him to revise the laws [as a research project].
Just to clarify, I really haven’t been arguing for or against it being a knock on!
From Owens’ explanation there I think the important bit might actually be that the TMO said that the ball didn’t go forward. Now maybe that’s a language issue but it would explain why they watched so many replays if the f%~k up was that he thought the ball went straight down before hitting the calf as opposed to forward. That makes sense to me if it was the case but I’m not convinced that that’s actually how they arrived at the decision.
I think the only thing that’s clear is that I’m right to want WR to offer a clarification
Great to finally have a win in the 6 nations. Hopefully it is not the last one for this season.
Some great displays from a fair few players.
Of course Beirne had another great game, and did CJ, Henshaw and Keenan, but for me that was one of Ringrose’s best games in green.
In the first 2 games the ball seemed to die when it got to him, with him looking for contact at every opportunity, but yesterday he seemed to play a lot more heads up rugby, and for me he was the motm.
The selections for the next 2 games will be interesting, especially the makeup of the backrow.
Just because a post upsets you, that doesn’t mean that it is wrong. People have different views in all aspects of life, this is a key ingredient to an interesting conversation.
I've been a fan of Nigel's refereeing for a long time, but he does tend to referee on feels and not on the laws - and he got exposed on this quite badly on twitter last weekend when a barrister took him to the woodshed on jumping out of the tackle
For more casual fans he called a lot of things that felt right or in the 'spirit of rugby'. This was often his own interpretation of things which he could get away with. He also had fleeting periods of calling 'going again in the tackle' penalties for a game then forgetting about calling it for months.
As Hugo said grand as a neutral but fairly infuriating when he invented infringements/justifications against your team.
This is not a criticism of you LRIP, but I don't see that there is anything to clarify from World Rugby other than the ref team made a bad error. LRZ attempts to catch the ball but knocks it towards the opposition dead-ball line and doesn't regather it. In every game of rugby I have ever played or seen played, that is a knock on. It doesn't matter that he has run past it by the time it hits him again, it's the direction the ball has travelled in and his failure to regather it.
Everybody who has ever played rugby has attempted to [and sometimes succeeded in] kicking at a ball they've knocked on before it hits the deck. And even if you have connected with it, the ref has called you back for a knock-on.
I can’t link it at the moment but at the end of the law it says something about hitting the ground or another player for it to be a knock on but it’s not clear (to me at least) if those two elements are always taken into account or if it can be knocked on before those things come into play.
Not being funny Hugo but it’s not just me who’s unsure, the officials gave it, the pundits on BBC seemed torn, and most fans (and RZ) seem to think it was a knock on. So I think World rugby should just make a statement saying “this is why the officials were right/wrong”. To me it didn’t seem like the officials knew the law which is why they kept looking at it even though the angles all showed the same thing.
I think they’ve made clarifications before (with the forward pass/momentum issue) so they could do so again without much hassle.
Fair enough! I went and looked it up myself after reading what you had written.
"Knock-on: When a player loses possession of the ball and it goes forward*, or when a player hits the ball forward with the hand or arm, or when the ball hits the hand or arm and goes forward, and the ball touches the ground or another player before the original player can catch it." [source: https://www.world.rugby/the-game/laws/d ... laws_let11 ]
*defined as the opposition's dead ball line
As they do in NRL decisions:
Did the ball hit the hand or arm? Yes
Did the ball travel forward [towards the opposition dead-ball line]: Yes
Did the ball touch the ground or another player before the original player could catch it? Yes. He never regained possession.
I dunno. Seems like a bit of a grey area to me. I think the fact that there's debate about it means the officials who have to make a relatively quick decision shouldn't get too much stick.
You could run through that set of checks and come up with "knock-on" if someone managed to bat the ball back before it hit the ground/another player after initially losing control forward.
I always thought a knock on was when you lost it forward and didn't manage to do something to rescue the situation (bat it back, kick it, catch it) before it touched the ground or another player. I always assumed those dropped catches where the ball actually came off a leg last technically weren't kock ons. But, I dunno, maybe I've had it wrong.
23 players retained by Ireland for a two day mini-camp later this week, Ryan Baird amongst them.
Early days, but looks like Farrell might continue with the Hendo-Ryan-Beirne combination for the Scotland game, with Baird on the bench.
Galtie's story about leaving French Camp before the Italian match doesn't ring true, unless he didn't supply a Test in the subsequent fortnight. Possibly "taking one for the team".
Very stupid and French Health Minister could withdraw French team from 6 Nations as a result.
On the first Welsh try, reminds me a bit of the Ireland-SA match in Lansdowne maybe 20 years or so ago.
Ireland camped on SA line, SA giving away multiple penos, ref tells John Smit to go and talk to his players, Smit does so, ROG immediately takes quick tap penalty to himself and scoots over the line, try given, Saffers understandably went ballistic
brenno wrote: ↑March 1st, 2021, 4:18 pm
On the first Welsh try, reminds me a bit of the Ireland-SA match in Lansdowne maybe 20 years or so ago.
Ireland camped on SA line, SA giving away multiple penos, ref tells John Smit to go and talk to his players, Smit does so, ROG immediately takes quick tap penalty to himself and scoots over the line, try given, Saffers understandably went ballistic
Similar to that one (2005 I think) except the ref never called time off in that case. In this case, time was called off and hence why it's such a big failure by the ref.
wixfjord wrote: ↑March 1st, 2021, 4:10 pm
Baird kept in squad and Ruddock released is a good pointer that it'll be the following for Scotland imo. It's what I would go for too personally.
Ryan Henderson
Beirne Connors Stander
Baird
Conan
Quite probably but very harsh on Rhys - not really sure what he has to do to force his way in. There are some faces like him, Cooney, McCloskey, Sean Cronin that just don't seem to fit.
wixfjord wrote: ↑March 1st, 2021, 4:10 pm
Baird kept in squad and Ruddock released is a good pointer that it'll be the following for Scotland imo. It's what I would go for too personally.
Ryan Henderson
Beirne Connors Stander
Baird
Conan
Quite probably but very harsh on Rhys - not really sure what he has to do to force his way in. There are some faces like him, Cooney, McCloskey, Sean Cronin that just don't seem to fit.
It is, but then where do you fit him in?
Beirne, Hendo and Ryan have to start.
Baird covers 6 from bench and Conan is probably a more impactful 8.
Anyone know if there’s any chat about there being Ireland games this summer?
There must be scope for some kind of tournament alongside the Lions.
A development tournament could be amazing for us considering the number of young guys that could benefit. Kelleher, TOT, Baird, Penny, Casey, Harry Byrne, Baloucoune etc etc
. They gave away the penalties , they turned their backs, they sauntered and dandered. And then it happened again with the Hardy try. It’s a problem for us because England were probably the better side, and they’ll hardly make same mistakes again, but the scoreboard in a game is important like.
. They gave away the penalties , they turned their backs, they sauntered and dandered. And then it happened again with the Hardy try. It’s a problem for us because England were probably the better side, and they’ll hardly make same mistakes again, but the scoreboard in a game is important like.
