NH club rugby

Hooroo

@Hooroo think ball boys are different as that's thier role, but yea unsure what the exact rules are.

Not for quick throws they aren't. If they touch it, it can't be used for a quick throw.

taniwharugby

@Hooroo no i mean a ball boy is there to retrieve the ball, I am sure they are told about when they can and cannot touch it , a reserve water carrier, physio should have no business touching it.

Hooroo

@taniwharugby said in NH club rugby:

@Hooroo no i mean a ball boy is there to retrieve the ball, I am sure they are told about when they can and cannot touch it , a reserve water carrier, physio should have no business touching it.

but cool for the oppo bench to if they wish?

taniwharugby

@Hooroo do they not count as reserves?

Hooroo

@taniwharugby said in NH club rugby:

@Hooroo do they not count as reserves?

That's what I'm asking? Is there any rule around it?

taniwharugby

@Hooroo no idea, which was what I posted with the clip saying WR needs to do something

Hooroo

@taniwharugby said in NH club rugby:

@Hooroo no idea, which was what I posted with the clip saying WR needs to do something

From some of the over-reaction on here, I first thought someone died or even cheated but I can't tell if that has happened

taniwharugby

@Hooroo well a player can get penalised for taking the ball and not giving to the opposition the opportunity for a quick play, so I'd like to think someone not actually playing has even less right to touch it

Duluth

There was a game a few years ago where there was two incidents in one match. A staff member did it first and got a warning.
An injured player did it the second time and got a red card

The injured player part is interesting because he's not an active player

I had a skim through the rugbyrefs forum and it seems all the ref can do is remove the staff from the playing area for the cheating.
There was debate over if they could also penalise the team.

In this weekends incident the staff member was removed from the playing area. However the penalty (and YC) went against the player for the reaction

taniwharugby

@Duluth said in NH club rugby:

However the penalty (and YC) went against the player for the reaction

I can understand that, happens on field if you retaliate too.

Bovidae

The laws around a quick lineout throw seem to only relate to the players' actions, not those people outside the field of play. I agree with @KiwiMurph that WR should clarify that a team's reserve players and support staff are also included in this category.

Hooroo

@Duluth said in NH club rugby:

There was a game a few years ago where there was two incidents in one match. A staff member did it first and got a warning.
An injured player did it the second time and got a red card

The injured player part is interesting because he's not an active player

I had a skim through the rugbyrefs forum and it seems all the ref can do is remove the staff from the playing area for the cheating.
There was debate over if they could also penalise the team.

In this weekends incident the staff member was removed from the playing area. However the penalty (and YC) went against the player for the reaction

So it is fair dinkum cheating then if the refs can do that.

Bones

Why don't they just remove the law requiring the ball to be untouched? As much as I like the quirky ones like that, it's a bit silly.

Catogrande

@Bones said in NH club rugby:

Why don't they just remove the law requiring the ball to be untouched? As much as I like the quirky ones like that, it's a bit silly.

I think it’s supposed to be one of the measures to ensure a quick throw in is with the same ball. Possibly a bit outdated now though.

Bones

@Catogrande said in NH club rugby:

@Bones said in NH club rugby:

Why don't they just remove the law requiring the ball to be untouched? As much as I like the quirky ones like that, it's a bit silly.

I think it’s supposed to be one of the measures to ensure a quick throw in is with the same ball. Possibly a bit outdated now though.

Well if they're serious about speeding up the game so that there's more "excitement", the same ball regulation can fly too.

Catogrande

@Bones said in NH club rugby:

@Catogrande said in NH club rugby:

@Bones said in NH club rugby:

Why don't they just remove the law requiring the ball to be untouched? As much as I like the quirky ones like that, it's a bit silly.

I think it’s supposed to be one of the measures to ensure a quick throw in is with the same ball. Possibly a bit outdated now though.

Well if they're serious about speeding up the game so that there's more "excitement", the same ball regulation can fly too.

Nah, don’t agree with that. Too much licence for off field personnel to interfere. May as well have them on the field. I suppose les of an issue if the line out HAS to be where the ball left the field but I’d rather keep the current flexibility there.

Bones

@Catogrande said in NH club rugby:

Nah, don’t agree with that. Too much licence for off field personnel to interfere. May as well have them on the field.

What do you mean?

Catogrande

@Bones said in NH club rugby:

@Catogrande said in NH club rugby:

Nah, don’t agree with that. Too much licence for off field personnel to interfere. May as well have them on the field.

What do you mean?

OK. One scenario could be that the ball goes off the filed just outside the defending 22, ball ends up 10m further on. Non player sends the different ball to the attacking full back or winger in their own 22 giving a lot of space, without giving the defending side a chance to contest the line out. At least with the same ball there is a better chance to make it contestable.

Bones

@Catogrande said in NH club rugby:

@Bones said in NH club rugby:

@Catogrande said in NH club rugby:

Nah, don’t agree with that. Too much licence for off field personnel to interfere. May as well have them on the field.

What do you mean?

OK. One scenario could be that the ball goes off the filed just outside the defending 22, ball ends up 10m further on. Non player sends the different ball to the attacking full back or winger in their own 22 giving a lot of space, without giving the defending side a chance to contest the line out. At least with the same ball there is a better chance to make it contestable.

Ok can't say I see the issue there at all. If that's such a great tactic why don't teams do it when the ball is in play? How many teams do you see winning a lineout in the opposition half and then hiffing it to their fullback in their own 22 "giving a lot of space"?

Catogrande

@Bones said in NH club rugby:

@Catogrande said in NH club rugby:

@Bones said in NH club rugby:

@Catogrande said in NH club rugby:

Nah, don’t agree with that. Too much licence for off field personnel to interfere. May as well have them on the field.

What do you mean?

OK. One scenario could be that the ball goes off the filed just outside the defending 22, ball ends up 10m further on. Non player sends the different ball to the attacking full back or winger in their own 22 giving a lot of space, without giving the defending side a chance to contest the line out. At least with the same ball there is a better chance to make it contestable.

Ok can't say I see the issue there at all. If that's such a great tactic why don't teams do it when the ball is in play? How many teams do you see winning a lineout in the opposition half and then hiffing it to their fullback in their own 22 "giving a lot of space"?

At my old club, lots of times. Never works out though. Might be to do with lower levels of fitness...

The Silver Fern

NH club rugby