Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2
-
@Crucial said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@antipodean said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@Crucial said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@bayimports said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
interesting not everyone agrees on this interpretation either, plenty here think TJ got this one right..
Ref totally got this wrong.
McCloskey is offside at the ruck as he is ahead of the last feet. As an offside player he cannot play at TJP. End of.
Looks like McCloskey is part of the ruck and still on his feet as per the law. How is he offside?
Has a foot ahead of his own player on the ground. Just as someone not in the ruck has to be beind that player so does he.
Nonsense. He just has to join from behind their offside line.
I get what you're trying to say, but that's for people who aren't part of the ruck. The law is clear on that.
-
@Rapido said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
I don't know if Kinsella is right, I don't care enough to find out because that law will probably change again as soon as I learn it. When I last followed the game closely, that would have been a penalty (not that I agreed with that law).
I also, don't agree with Crucial's take above. He looks in the ruck, so offside/last feet is irrelevant. I also don't want to research this. If I am wrong, then that law is an ass.
My high-level (state-of-the-game) take. Why would you want to discourage defensive forwards committing to rucks? Therefore, why on earth would you ever want any laws, that prohibits or discourages what he is doing, or trying to do.
Simply because the game still has to be playable. If every player on their feet in a ruck is onside then the game would be even more of a shambles. These laws are there to create separation at a breakdown so the ball can get back in play.
Note: If I am wrong it would only be because there is no Irish player on the ground at that ruck. If that is the case then he is not offside. -
@antipodean said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@Crucial said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@antipodean said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@Crucial said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@bayimports said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
interesting not everyone agrees on this interpretation either, plenty here think TJ got this one right..
Ref totally got this wrong.
McCloskey is offside at the ruck as he is ahead of the last feet. As an offside player he cannot play at TJP. End of.
Looks like McCloskey is part of the ruck and still on his feet as per the law. How is he offside?
Has a foot ahead of his own player on the ground. Just as someone not in the ruck has to be beind that player so does he.
Nonsense. He just has to join from behind their offside line.
If he plays at the ball or player than he has come from an onside position. Is that so difficult to understand? If so then the game truly is fucked.
-
@Crucial said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@Rapido said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
I don't know if Kinsella is right, I don't care enough to find out because that law will probably change again as soon as I learn it. When I last followed the game closely, that would have been a penalty (not that I agreed with that law).
I also, don't agree with Crucial's take above. He looks in the ruck, so offside/last feet is irrelevant. I also don't want to research this. If I am wrong, then that law is an ass.
My high-level (state-of-the-game) take. Why would you want to discourage defensive forwards committing to rucks? Therefore, why on earth would you ever want any laws, that prohibits or discourages what he is doing, or trying to do.
Simply because the game still has to be playable. If every player on their feet in a ruck is onside then the game would be even more of a shambles. These laws are there to create separation at a breakdown so the ball can get back in play.
Note: If I am wrong it would only be because there is no Irish player on the ground at that ruck. If that is the case then he is not offside.You don't need a player on the ground to form a ruck.
-
@Crucial said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@antipodean said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@Crucial said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@antipodean said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@Crucial said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@bayimports said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
interesting not everyone agrees on this interpretation either, plenty here think TJ got this one right..
Ref totally got this wrong.
McCloskey is offside at the ruck as he is ahead of the last feet. As an offside player he cannot play at TJP. End of.
Looks like McCloskey is part of the ruck and still on his feet as per the law. How is he offside?
Has a foot ahead of his own player on the ground. Just as someone not in the ruck has to be beind that player so does he.
Nonsense. He just has to join from behind their offside line.
If he plays at the ball or player than he has come from an onside position. Is that so difficult to understand?
Show me the law that says he can't play at the player as a member of that ruck.
-
The near-side Irish pillar is a foot offside anyway.
-
@antipodean said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@Crucial said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@Rapido said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
I don't know if Kinsella is right, I don't care enough to find out because that law will probably change again as soon as I learn it. When I last followed the game closely, that would have been a penalty (not that I agreed with that law).
I also, don't agree with Crucial's take above. He looks in the ruck, so offside/last feet is irrelevant. I also don't want to research this. If I am wrong, then that law is an ass.
My high-level (state-of-the-game) take. Why would you want to discourage defensive forwards committing to rucks? Therefore, why on earth would you ever want any laws, that prohibits or discourages what he is doing, or trying to do.
Simply because the game still has to be playable. If every player on their feet in a ruck is onside then the game would be even more of a shambles. These laws are there to create separation at a breakdown so the ball can get back in play.
Note: If I am wrong it would only be because there is no Irish player on the ground at that ruck. If that is the case then he is not offside.You don't need a player on the ground to form a ruck.
No you don't.
What I am saying is that if there is a player on the ground in that ruck then McCloskey's foot is in front of that player which makes him 'offside at the ruck (as part of it). I am assuming that is the case as he wasn't the tackler.
Being 'offside at the ruck' is not an offence unless you take part in play before either putting yourself back onside or someone else putting you onside. TJs actions did not put him onside. -
@Crucial said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@Rapido said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
I don't know if Kinsella is right, I don't care enough to find out because that law will probably change again as soon as I learn it. When I last followed the game closely, that would have been a penalty (not that I agreed with that law).
I also, don't agree with Crucial's take above. He looks in the ruck, so offside/last feet is irrelevant. I also don't want to research this. If I am wrong, then that law is an ass.
My high-level (state-of-the-game) take. Why would you want to discourage defensive forwards committing to rucks? Therefore, why on earth would you ever want any laws, that prohibits or discourages what he is doing, or trying to do.
Simply because the game still has to be playable. If every player on their feet in a ruck is onside then the game would be even more of a shambles. These laws are there to create separation at a breakdown so the ball can get back in play.
Note: If I am wrong it would only be because there is no Irish player on the ground at that ruck. If that is the case then he is not offside.The bolded part is head-explosion gif for a casual fan. As a detached fan, I'm like reading that a few times going hmmm
This is not a current laws argument I am now switching context to ... more an overall 'philsosphy' - But the halfback should be protected by his own forwards, not the referee or a law with as many confusing permutations as suggested here.
Need to slim down those roided freaks by making them chase rucks side-to-side on a 70m wide pitch. Not spread out coz' there's no point contesting or risk punishment for entering from an 85 degrees angle. etc
-
@Crucial said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@antipodean said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@Crucial said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@Rapido said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
I don't know if Kinsella is right, I don't care enough to find out because that law will probably change again as soon as I learn it. When I last followed the game closely, that would have been a penalty (not that I agreed with that law).
I also, don't agree with Crucial's take above. He looks in the ruck, so offside/last feet is irrelevant. I also don't want to research this. If I am wrong, then that law is an ass.
My high-level (state-of-the-game) take. Why would you want to discourage defensive forwards committing to rucks? Therefore, why on earth would you ever want any laws, that prohibits or discourages what he is doing, or trying to do.
Simply because the game still has to be playable. If every player on their feet in a ruck is onside then the game would be even more of a shambles. These laws are there to create separation at a breakdown so the ball can get back in play.
Note: If I am wrong it would only be because there is no Irish player on the ground at that ruck. If that is the case then he is not offside.You don't need a player on the ground to form a ruck.
No you don't.
What I am saying is that if there is a player on the ground in that ruck then McCloskey's foot is in front of that player which makes him 'offside at the ruck (as part of it). I am assuming that is the case as he wasn't the tackler.
Being 'offside at the ruck' is not an offence unless you take part in play before either putting yourself back onside or someone else putting you onside. TJs actions did not put him onside.He's not offside - he's part of the ruck. The offside line is for people not part of the ruck.
-
It's clear to me WR should employ me as their one and only TMO. Also referee coach.
-
@antipodean said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@Crucial said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@antipodean said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@Crucial said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@antipodean said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@Crucial said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@bayimports said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
interesting not everyone agrees on this interpretation either, plenty here think TJ got this one right..
Ref totally got this wrong.
McCloskey is offside at the ruck as he is ahead of the last feet. As an offside player he cannot play at TJP. End of.
Looks like McCloskey is part of the ruck and still on his feet as per the law. How is he offside?
Has a foot ahead of his own player on the ground. Just as someone not in the ruck has to be beind that player so does he.
Nonsense. He just has to join from behind their offside line.
If he plays at the ball or player than he has come from an onside position. Is that so difficult to understand?
Show me the law that says he can't play at the player as a member of that ruck.
It's a combo of two laws.
Offside at a ruck
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.
Retiring from a ruck, maul, scrum or lineout
A player who is offside at a ruck, maul, scrum or lineout remains offside, even after the ruck, maul, scrum or lineout has ended.
The player can be put onside only if:
That player immediately retires behind the applicable offside line; or
An opposition player carries the ball five metres in any direction; or
An opposition player kicks the ball.
An offside player may be penalised if that player:
Fails to retire without undue delay and benefits from being put onside in a more advantageous position; orInterferes with play; or
Moves towards the ball.
Sanction: Penalty. -
@antipodean said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@Crucial said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@antipodean said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@Crucial said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
@Rapido said in Māori All Blacks v Ireland 2:
I don't know if Kinsella is right, I don't care enough to find out because that law will probably change again as soon as I learn it. When I last followed the game closely, that would have been a penalty (not that I agreed with that law).
I also, don't agree with Crucial's take above. He looks in the ruck, so offside/last feet is irrelevant. I also don't want to research this. If I am wrong, then that law is an ass.
My high-level (state-of-the-game) take. Why would you want to discourage defensive forwards committing to rucks? Therefore, why on earth would you ever want any laws, that prohibits or discourages what he is doing, or trying to do.
Simply because the game still has to be playable. If every player on their feet in a ruck is onside then the game would be even more of a shambles. These laws are there to create separation at a breakdown so the ball can get back in play.
Note: If I am wrong it would only be because there is no Irish player on the ground at that ruck. If that is the case then he is not offside.You don't need a player on the ground to form a ruck.
No you don't.
What I am saying is that if there is a player on the ground in that ruck then McCloskey's foot is in front of that player which makes him 'offside at the ruck (as part of it). I am assuming that is the case as he wasn't the tackler.
Being 'offside at the ruck' is not an offence unless you take part in play before either putting yourself back onside or someone else putting you onside. TJs actions did not put him onside.He's not offside - he's part of the ruck. The offside line is for people not part of the ruck.
Show me the law that says that.
-
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.
-
-
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?
-
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
-
@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:
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.
-
@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.
