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.
-
@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.
-
@Billy-Tell said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
@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.
He's a ref
-
@booboo said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
@Billy-Tell said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
@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.
He's a ref
At what level? The kids on Saturday or pro? He might be right but I looked and found nothing on any world rugby page that said « not in field of play » includes feet partially in field of play. Stand to be corrected though.
-
@Billy-Tell if your feet are on the line you're out.
-
@Bones said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
@Billy-Tell if your feet are on the line you're out.
Yes for the law in-touch. Does that law apply to the hooker throwing into the line out (where the law states player must be outside of the field of play)?
I imagine this will go nowhere, but I’m not totally convinced damo is correct. Still interpretation and all that.
-
@Billy-Tell well yeah, if your foot is on the line, you're outside the field of play right?
-
@Bones said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
@Billy-Tell well yeah, if your foot is on the line, you're outside the field of play right?
In touch and field of play are separate concepts. You can have one part of your body in the field of play and still be in touch. Howver if you are required to be outside the field of play then no part of your body can be inside the field of play. That's why they use separate terminology.
Just to make it clear, if your foot is on the touch line, but your toes are in and touching the field of play, you are in the field of play for all intent and purposes regarding the legality of a throw-in.
-
@Bones said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
@Billy-Tell well yeah, if your foot is on the line, you're outside the field of play right?
You might be right. I’ve looked at the laws again and it’s not actually clear. Which is ironic given they simplified the wording about 2 years ago. All the diagrams clearly have the hookers with both feet entirely behind the touch line.
-
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.
-
@SynicBast said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
@Bones said in RWC: All Blacks v Ireland (QF2):
@Billy-Tell well yeah, if your foot is on the line, you're outside the field of play right?
In touch and field of play are separate concepts. You can have one part of your body in the field of play and still be in touch. Howver if you are required to be outside the field of play then no part of your body can be inside the field of play. That's why they use separate terminology.
