RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2)
-
@The-Irishman said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
@nzzp said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
@Darren said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
I don't think we would ever lose a game on purpose, or hold back too much and not win, but that was an interesting read. I was wondering why that maul made so much ground.
I think that's exactly what they did last year. In fairness, they could have won that game in Dublin, but for some dropped balls and a screamer of a try from Ireland (arguably with a fair bit of luck, too).
If you show your hand too early, yo uget smoked. We have kept our powder dry so far, and dishing it out now in the Cup. Great to see!
Christ the arrogance!
I don't see the arrogance there. He raises some good points
-
@jegga am wondering if Stephen Jones was right about Kiwis and irony ...
-
@booboo slap yourself man, even on the rare occasion he might be right or close to right, you just quietly nod to yourself and move on, never, NEVER do you utter that shit out loud.
-
Hey, I could be wrong. He might mean it. He is Irish ...
-
@taniwharugby said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
@booboo slap yourself man, even on the rare occasion he might be right or close to right, you just quietly nod to yourself and move on, never, NEVER do you utter that shit out loud.
Speaking of which Woodward was in Stuff today talking about how to beat the abs. The guy who in the space of 12 months turned rampaging 3 and 2 point victories against us into 30 point losses isn't perhaps the oracle I'd be turning to.
-
-
-
@Billy-Tell said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
One of those laws that is never ever enforced...unless it's to prevent Grant Fox scoring his first ever international try. I find it incredible that international touch judges don't seem to care...laws should be simplified to remove it from the law book, since it's never applied.
Nah that's fine. So long as some part of the feet are out then there's no issue.
-
@Damo said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
@Billy-Tell said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
One of those laws that is never ever enforced...unless it's to prevent Grant Fox scoring his first ever international try. I find it incredible that international touch judges don't seem to care...laws should be simplified to remove it from the law book, since it's never applied.
Nah that's fine. So long as some part of the feet are out then there's no issue.
Something changed?
My earlier post:
On the line is out in rugby, so a hooker standing on it is fine (some Chiefs joke available there).The actual law:
"The player throwing in the ball stands on the mark of touch with both feet outside the field of play. The thrower must not step into the field of play until the ball has been thrown. Sanction: Option of lineout or scrum." -
@Snowy said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
@Damo said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
@Billy-Tell said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
One of those laws that is never ever enforced...unless it's to prevent Grant Fox scoring his first ever international try. I find it incredible that international touch judges don't seem to care...laws should be simplified to remove it from the law book, since it's never applied.
Nah that's fine. So long as some part of the feet are out then there's no issue.
Something changed?
My earlier post:
On the line is out in rugby, so a hooker standing on it is fine (some Chiefs joke available there).The actual law:
"The player throwing in the ball stands on the mark of touch with both feet outside the field of play. The thrower must not step into the field of play until the ball has been thrown. Sanction: Option of lineout or scrum."The touchline is out. If he's touching the line then he's in touch. Therefore if a player is touching the line he has not stepped into the field of play.
This line is well established to be fair. The AR's aren't "missing" anything. It's been considered and is reffed consistently.
-
@Damo said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
@Billy-Tell said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
One of those laws that is never ever enforced...unless it's to prevent Grant Fox scoring his first ever international try. I find it incredible that international touch judges don't seem to care...laws should be simplified to remove it from the law book, since it's never applied.
Nah that's fine. So long as some part of the feet are out then there's no issue.
Have they (e.g., world Rugby) looked at the feet when the ball is let go? Unless he throws flat footed, I can't see how he would still have some part out while actually throwing.?
-
-
@Snowy said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
@Damo Gotcha. So in fact all they have to do is have a bit of each foot on a blade of white grass.
That’s consistent though, yes? If a foot touching a blade of white grass is sufficient to have a try ruled out then it’s also sufficient to qualify as out at a lineout.
-
@JC said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
@Snowy said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
@Damo Gotcha. So in fact all they have to do is have a bit of each foot on a blade of white grass.
That’s consistent though, yes? If a foot touching a blade of white grass is sufficient to have a try ruled out then it’s also sufficient to qualify as out at a lineout.
Yes. I thought that was what he was saying and what I meant by gotcha was, I understand what was meant. I wasn't arguing the point. The wording of the law could be a little clearer but we're used to that.
-
@Snowy said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
@JC said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
@Snowy said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
@Damo Gotcha. So in fact all they have to do is have a bit of each foot on a blade of white grass.
That’s consistent though, yes? If a foot touching a blade of white grass is sufficient to have a try ruled out then it’s also sufficient to qualify as out at a lineout.
Yes. I thought that was what he was saying and what I meant by gotcha was, I understand what was meant. I wasn't arguing the point. The wording of the law could be a little clearer but we're used to that.
Yeah, I knew that Snowy. I was just throwing in my superfluous 2c, not disagreeing with you.
-
@Damo said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
@Snowy said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
@Damo said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
@Billy-Tell said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
One of those laws that is never ever enforced...unless it's to prevent Grant Fox scoring his first ever international try. I find it incredible that international touch judges don't seem to care...laws should be simplified to remove it from the law book, since it's never applied.
Nah that's fine. So long as some part of the feet are out then there's no issue.
Something changed?
My earlier post:
On the line is out in rugby, so a hooker standing on it is fine (some Chiefs joke available there).The actual law:
"The player throwing in the ball stands on the mark of touch with both feet outside the field of play. The thrower must not step into the field of play until the ball has been thrown. Sanction: Option of lineout or scrum."The touchline is out. If he's touching the line then he's in touch. Therefore if a player is touching the line he has not stepped into the field of play.
This line is well established to be fair. The AR's aren't "missing" anything. It's been considered and is reffed consistently.
Are you a ref? Or a self-appointed expert? He’s in the field of play. There are diagrams on the world rugby site.
