Things that annoy you about rugby...
-
@majorrage said in Things that annoy you about rugby...:
@damo said in Things that annoy you about rugby...:
I think a half should not end with a held up over the line. They should play the scrum rather than have half time or full time. The ball being held over the goal line is essentially a stalemate causing a break in play because the ball is unplayable. It seems unfair that a half would end on that occurrence
Na - can't agree with that all. It's not so much a stalemate as a brilliant piece of defence. I see it no different as a try saving tackle which puts somebody out in the corner.
Different things. In the example of the try saving tackle the ball has been made dead by the actions of the players. When a ball is called 'held up' it is being made dead by the referee.
In theory you can continue wrestling in a heap over the tryline until exhausted or the ball is grounded. The reason the ref resets the game with a scrum is that otherwise everyone could pile on top from any direction and it becomes a massive mess.What @Damo is saying is that in normal playing time a held up ball is given back to the attacking team for another crack, yet at full-time they lose that advantage which means the refs decision to blow the whistle has a completely different result
-
-
-
@nepia said in Things that annoy you about rugby...:
@crucial I don't think that's a correct interpretation of the held up law, I think if a player is held up over the line then the ball is dead at that point.
Up to the ref when he makes that call though. He can let things go on as long as he wants (unlike when the ball is in touch).
Point is that the outcome is different after the hooter. -
@nepia said in Things that annoy you about rugby...:
@crucial I don't think that's a correct interpretation of the held up law, I think if a player is held up over the line then the ball is dead at that point.
Well it depends on your perspective. You can't have a tackle, ruck or maul over the goal line and anyone is entitled to play the ball from any angle, including players on the ground. Unless the ball is grounded pretty quickly it becomes a free for all which the referee ends by saying the ball is unplayable. The ref could just allow play to continue if he was so inclined, but that would soon get silly.
The point is that the ball hasn't been made dead, the ref has deemed it dead. I think it is unfair on the attacking team in that instance to lose the ball.
-
@crucial I don't agree with your interpretation, according to the law the ref has to blow the whistle when the ball carrier cannot ground or play the ball - I think that's clear 99% and not up to the refs interpretation. I realise we're almost getting into semantics but personally I don't have an issue with it.
"When a player carrying the ball is held up in the in-goal so that the player cannot ground or play the ball, the ball is dead. Play restarts with a five-metre scrum, in line with the place where the player was held up. The attacking team throws in."
-
@damo As in my reply to Crucial, I don't have a problem with it, the attackers made a play, the defenders stopped tham and caused the ball to dead, the hooter went, it's half time.
I can see where you're coming from but yeah, it doesn't annoy me.
-
-
-
@crucial said in Things that annoy you about rugby...:
@majorrage said in Things that annoy you about rugby...:
@damo said in Things that annoy you about rugby...:
I think a half should not end with a held up over the line. They should play the scrum rather than have half time or full time. The ball being held over the goal line is essentially a stalemate causing a break in play because the ball is unplayable. It seems unfair that a half would end on that occurrence
Na - can't agree with that all. It's not so much a stalemate as a brilliant piece of defence. I see it no different as a try saving tackle which puts somebody out in the corner.
Different things. In the example of the try saving tackle the ball has been made dead by the actions of the players. When a ball is called 'held up' it is being made dead by the referee.
In theory you can continue wrestling in a heap over the tryline until exhausted or the ball is grounded. The reason the ref resets the game with a scrum is that otherwise everyone could pile on top from any direction and it becomes a massive mess.What @Damo is saying is that in normal playing time a held up ball is given back to the attacking team for another crack, yet at full-time they lose that advantage which means the refs decision to blow the whistle has a completely different result
I follow what Damo is saying, I just don't agree.
Holding up the ball is either a legitimate defence, or poor execution by the attacking team to get the ball on the ground.
I don't see either of those situations as a stalemate.
-
@nepia said in Things that annoy you about rugby...:
@damo said in Things that annoy you about rugby...:
@nepia That's fair enough. You can't expect everyone to agree on everything every time.
The Star Wars thread would be a page long if we all did.
Don't get me started.
-
@majorrage said in Things that annoy you about rugby...:
@crucial said in Things that annoy you about rugby...:
@majorrage said in Things that annoy you about rugby...:
@damo said in Things that annoy you about rugby...:
I think a half should not end with a held up over the line. They should play the scrum rather than have half time or full time. The ball being held over the goal line is essentially a stalemate causing a break in play because the ball is unplayable. It seems unfair that a half would end on that occurrence
Na - can't agree with that all. It's not so much a stalemate as a brilliant piece of defence. I see it no different as a try saving tackle which puts somebody out in the corner.
Different things. In the example of the try saving tackle the ball has been made dead by the actions of the players. When a ball is called 'held up' it is being made dead by the referee.
In theory you can continue wrestling in a heap over the tryline until exhausted or the ball is grounded. The reason the ref resets the game with a scrum is that otherwise everyone could pile on top from any direction and it becomes a massive mess.What @Damo is saying is that in normal playing time a held up ball is given back to the attacking team for another crack, yet at full-time they lose that advantage which means the refs decision to blow the whistle has a completely different result
I follow what Damo is saying, I just don't agree.
Holding up the ball is either a legitimate defence, or poor execution by the attacking team to get the ball on the ground.
I don't see either of those situations as a stalemate.
Doesn't need to be a stalemate, but it's a clear end of that phase of play.
-
@antipodean said in Things that annoy you about rugby...:
Doesn't need to be a stalemate, but it's a clear end of that phase of play.
Yep, that's the exact discussion.
-
@majorrage said in Things that annoy you about rugby...:
@antipodean said in Things that annoy you about rugby...:
Doesn't need to be a stalemate, but it's a clear end of that phase of play.
Yep, that's the exact discussion.
Ahh, yeah. Hence why I'm saying my position is that with time up, it's not stalemate, it's a clear end of that phase of play. End of play, end of time = game over.
-
@majorrage although sometimes they arent held up, its just the camera cant see through bodies to see the ball grounded...so gets ruled held up.
-
I get annoyed when people refer to rugby as 'code' and when the ball is called the 'pill'.
-
Reviving this thread, because of tackled players rolling like they’re in a washing machine to stop arriving players getting a shot at the ball.
If the tackler has to release the tackled player instantly, it is garbage that they are allowed to then use that to their advantage.
In fact, I want a return to the tackler being allowed to turn their man in the tackle - that was a bloody good way to make rucks competitive. And we desperately need rucks competitive.
-
The Blues....
But a less obvious one would be how long teams are allowed to have maul set up before they have to use it if they aren't going forward. They are allowed to stop twice and refs generally allow them ages before they call each of those 2 "stops". It should either be 1 stop and use it or the refs need to be a lot harsher/quicker on what they determine is a maul 'stopped'. Mauls are way too advantageous for the attacking team.
-
@KiwiMurph mauls are geared for the attacking teams.
How often do you see a guy come through a maul only for the ref to tell him he is off side.
