Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes
-
@canefan Another Explanation I have heard is That is was not a Ruck,As TJ had his hands on the ball so Whitelock as he was not offside could play the ball.He knocked it backwards then TJ knocked the ball into a canes forward who was offside.
The Rule can be interpreted in a lot of ways by the look.
TJ Johnson did a piece on Prime TV explaining this I have seen it but can't upload it comes up as Video unavailable.
I am sure someone on the Fern has seen the video.
I am not saying its 100% accurate just another point of view.. -
@No-Quarter said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:
@Rapido is it not a deliberate knock on? He just slapped it forward to stop TJP from clearing the ball.
i've never seen anyone called for a deliberate knock on EVER when a ball has been hit out of another players hands.
pretty rich from TJ considering trying to hit the ball out of the oppo 9's hands as they attempt to clear the scrum would occur at pretty much every scrum.
whitelock on feet, on side. no problem. you have the ball in your hand, your job to protect it. Ask Jeff Wilson about it..
-
@Chris said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:
@canefan Another Explanation I have heard is That is was not a Ruck,As TJ had his hands on the ball so Whitelock as he was not offside could play the ball.He knocked it backwards then TJ knocked the ball into a canes forward who was offside.
The Rule can be interpreted in a lot of ways by the look.
TJ Johnson did a piece on Prime TV explaining this I have seen it but can't upload it comes up as Video unavailable.
I am sure someone on the Fern has seen the video.
I am not saying its 100% accurate just another point of view..Regardless of the interpretation we should have cleared his butt out of there. Don't leave your fate in the hands of the ref. I used to complain about poor cleaning out from the ABs years ago when the saffas were strong. Can't leave guys like Burger, and this case Whitelock, in arms reach of the ball. Besides, if we'd cleaned up Mo'unga's speculator that ended up a try we wouldn't even be having this discussion
-
@WillieTheWaiter it is ridiculous that a prop hooker or anyone other than the guy with 9 on his back are fair game in that situation
-
@taniwharugby said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:
@WillieTheWaiter it is ridiculous that a prop hooker or anyone other than the guy with 9 on his back are fair game in that situation
At the risk of raking over old coals, isn't it the case that the Laws don't make distinction? I realise that there is an official interpretation which stipulates that the ball is out when halfback picks it.
-
@pakman said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:
@taniwharugby said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:
@WillieTheWaiter it is ridiculous that a prop hooker or anyone other than the guy with 9 on his back are fair game in that situation
At the risk of raking over old coals, isn't it the case that the Laws don't make distinction? I realise that there is an official interpretation which stipulates that the ball is out when halfback picks it.
The real problem is that they'll card you for that shit, even though the laws don't really talk about it
-
@pakman said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:
@taniwharugby said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:
@WillieTheWaiter it is ridiculous that a prop hooker or anyone other than the guy with 9 on his back are fair game in that situation
At the risk of raking over old coals, isn't it the case that the Laws don't make distinction? I realise that there is an official interpretation which stipulates that the ball is out when halfback picks it.
In the modern real world of refereeing.
If you bump the arm of a halfback about to spin it wide and cause him to drop the ball you could get carded, if you bumped the arm of a prop in the same position but about to pick and go - you would get chess pumps from your teammates for forcing a turnover.
Ruby laws should be interpreted and applied that encourage forwards to congregate at a breakdown (IMO);
- The defending team to attempt to win possession and if not then disrupt clean possession.
- The attacking team forwards should need to congregate to ensure possession is maintained and is then clean.
At no point should one of the above actions, performed legally (or even just slightly mis-timed) risk incurring a card because refs don't understand the essence of rugby.
-
@Rapido said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:
@pakman said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:
@taniwharugby said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:
@WillieTheWaiter it is ridiculous that a prop hooker or anyone other than the guy with 9 on his back are fair game in that situation
At the risk of raking over old coals, isn't it the case that the Laws don't make distinction? I realise that there is an official interpretation which stipulates that the ball is out when halfback picks it.
In the modern real world of refereeing.
If you bump the arm of a halfback about to spin it wide and cause him to drop the ball you could get carded, if you bumped the arm of a prop in the same position but about to pick and go - you would get chess pumps from your teammates for forcing a turnover.
Ruby laws should be interpreted and applied that encourage forwards to congregate at a breakdown (IMO);
- The defending team to attempt to win possession and if not then disrupt clean possession.
- The attacking team forwards should need to congregate to ensure possession is maintained and is then clean.
At no point should one of the above actions, performed legally (or even just slightly mis-timed) risk incurring a card because refs don't understand the essence of rugby.
In other words
It ain't tiddlywinks mate!!!
-
@canefan said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:
@Rapido said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:
@pakman said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:
@taniwharugby said in Semi Final 1: Crusaders vs Hurricanes:
@WillieTheWaiter it is ridiculous that a prop hooker or anyone other than the guy with 9 on his back are fair game in that situation
At the risk of raking over old coals, isn't it the case that the Laws don't make distinction? I realise that there is an official interpretation which stipulates that the ball is out when halfback picks it.
In the modern real world of refereeing.
If you bump the arm of a halfback about to spin it wide and cause him to drop the ball you could get carded, if you bumped the arm of a prop in the same position but about to pick and go - you would get chess pumps from your teammates for forcing a turnover.
Ruby laws should be interpreted and applied that encourage forwards to congregate at a breakdown (IMO);
- The defending team to attempt to win possession and if not then disrupt clean possession.
- The attacking team forwards should need to congregate to ensure possession is maintained and is then clean.
At no point should one of the above actions, performed legally (or even just slightly mis-timed) risk incurring a card because refs don't understand the essence of rugby.
In other words
It ain't tiddlywinks mate!!!
Rather it ain't League mate !!!!
What next, illegal strips, and sit in protests blocking Queens Street for a week?
