2018 Law Exam (warning ..Spoilers )

[crossref]

The 2018 Law Exam is up , and will be interesting to work through . We may get some insight into the minds of the Law Authors

I started at random with Mauls and found this one interesting

[LAWS]5 If the ball is dropped to the ground in a maul, the Laws of the ruck must be applied. True or false[/LAWS]

Correct Answer : True

I think that is correct but I think when we have discussed this before not everyone agrees with this

The Law reference is to the definition of a ruck

 

[crossref]

Also this one seems inconsistent with the 2018 Laws

[LAWS]7 The No. 8, who usually pushes on both locks, decides to push on a lock and a flanker. Is this allowed?[/LAWS]
Answer Yes

But

[LAWS]When both teams have 15 players, eight players from each team bind together in formation as outlined in the diagram.[/LAWS]

 

[crossref]

Here's another (perhaps each one should have its own thread ?)

[LAWS]6 A defender carrying the ball is tackled near the goal-line. The ball is released and rolls back into in-goal. Another defender lying on the ground reaches out and grounds the ball. What should the referee rule?
5 metre scrum, attacking team throw-in
5 metre scrum, defending team throw-in[/LAWS]
Answer A

I think that was correct in 2017 but in 2018 the answer should be PK to attackers because of the new law in 2018
[LAWS]A player on the ground without the ball is out of the game and must:
Allow opponents who are not on the ground to play or gain possession of the ball.
Not play the ball.
Not tackle or attempt to tackle an opponent.[/LAWS]

 

[Thunderhorse1986]

Here's another (perhaps each one should have its own thread ?)

[LAWS]6 A defender carrying the ball is tackled near the goal-line. The ball is released and rolls back into in-goal. Another defender lying on the ground reaches out and grounds the ball. What should the referee rule?
5 metre scrum, attacking team throw-in
5 metre scrum, defending team throw-in[/LAWS]
Answer A

I think that was correct in 2017 but in 2018 the answer should be PK to attackers because of the new law in 2018
[LAWS]A player on the ground without the ball is out of the game and must:
Allow opponents who are not on the ground to play or gain possession of the ball.
Not play the ball.
Not tackle or attempt to tackle an opponent.[/LAWS]

Maybe pernickety but is "ground the ball" the same as "play the ball"? I guess by making it dead they are potentially stopping opponents who are not on the ground from playing the ball. In which case you might be in PT territory. Awarding the latter could make for an "interesting" post-match discussion.

 

[crossref]

Seems to me it's definitely a PK

Whether it's a PT would depend on what other players (on their feet) were near the ball
If the closest legal player is an attacker it's a PT as well

This goes to my point about why law difference need to be highlight so that (for instance) people writing Law Quizzes are aware of them

 

[Pinky]

The 2018 Law Exam is up , and will be interesting to work through . We may get some insight into the minds of the Law Authors

I started at random with Mauls and found this one interesting

[LAWS]5 If the ball is dropped to the ground in a maul, the Laws of the ruck must be applied. True or false[/LAWS]

Correct Answer : True

I think that is correct but I think when we have discussed this before not everyone agrees with this

The Law reference is to the definition of a ruck

This is also a valid end to a maul, so that is why it becomes a ruck as the definition of a ruck is then met.

 

[Pinky]

Here's another (perhaps each one should have its own thread ?)

[LAWS]6 A defender carrying the ball is tackled near the goal-line. The ball is released and rolls back into in-goal. Another defender lying on the ground reaches out and grounds the ball. What should the referee rule?
5 metre scrum, attacking team throw-in
5 metre scrum, defending team throw-in[/LAWS]
Answer A

I think that was correct in 2017 but in 2018 the answer should be PK to attackers because of the new law in 2018
[LAWS]A player on the ground without the ball is out of the game and must:
Allow opponents who are not on the ground to play or gain possession of the ball.
Not play the ball.
Not tackle or attempt to tackle an opponent.[/LAWS]

I think there is a permission for players off their feet to ground the ball in-goal

 

[Camquin]

Why should the people writing the law quizzes be aware of them, when the people writing the laws were unaware they had made changes.

The old law quizzes are actually a great resource for testing the law book (unless you are deliberately changing the law).
One thing the law writers should do is get someone with the no knowledge but the new law book to work through the law quizzes and see if they can complete them. Then fix the law book until they can.

 

[ChuckieB]

I think there is a permission for players off their feet to ground the ball in-goal

once that ball goes over the plane of the goal line, there is much more scope for grounding the ball any which way, or so I heave been led to believe.

Most pertinent example for me was NO permitting CM's try in last years six nation's when he had determined that as the ball had broken the plane he was allowed to seek to ground the ball even though he had gone off his feet on top of a pile of players and then used his feet to propel himself forward for the second and successful attempt.

 

[crossref]

I think there is a permission for players off their feet to ground the ball in-goal

No. I think you are thinking of players in touch , who are allowed to ground a loose ball in in goal

Also, it wasnt needed before because there was no particular prohibition on a player on the ground playing the ball. That's new in 2018 Laws (and one of the more important differences I think, as this scenario illustrates)

 

[didds]

Also, it wasnt needed before because there was no particular prohibition on a player on the ground playing the ball. That's new in 2018 Laws (and one of the more important differences I think, as this scenario illustrates)

This being a 2018 law that hasn't changed since 2017 of course according to WR...

didds

 

[crossref]

Of course. and in this instance there is certainly a view that the 2018 Law is how it should have been reffed in 2017 . A view not shared by me, or by the authors of the quiz , it seems

But let's not argue about how the 2017 Law should have been interpreted, it's the Law now that matters and it's now very clear

 

[didds]

well it is except of course referees have the choice of two law books that are current, with different interpretations for some things.

Ive still not seen anything from WR saying "the 23018 book takes precedence" - because WR still AIUI maintain "there are no differences".

So the same dichotomy still exists.

didds

 

[crossref]

well it is except of course referees have the choice of two law books that are current, with different interpretations for some things.

Ive still not seen anything from WR saying "the 23018 book takes precedence" - because WR still AIUI maintain "there are no differences".

So the same dichotomy still exists.

didds

in this particular instance the 2017 book is ambiguous - but the 2018 book has a specific Law which settled the ambiguity.

I don't see how anyone could continue to prefer their old interpretation that is out of line with how the ambiguity is settled.

I have certainly changed how I ref this, immediately I saw the 2018 Book.

 

[crossref]

Here's anther problem - the Laws Quiz doesn't reflect the Global Law Trials

[LAWS]8 The blue player with one foot on the touchline and one foot in the field of play catches the ball on the full from a kick by an opponent who was outside their 22 metre area. What is the correct decision?[/LAWS]

To answer this you need to know whether the ball crossed the plane of touch or not.

From the description of where the feet are, it probably didn't cross the plane - if so the answer would be lineout to red, where it was caught and taken into touch by blue

The answer given doesn't reference the Plane, and says the correct answer is a lineout to blue team, in line with where the kick was taken.

IE they are using the Laws prior to the GLT.
ie they are using the 2018 Law Book without realizing that it doesn't include the GLTs ... a trap that WR has set for every unwitting ref until the end of the year.

:sad:

 

[didds]

I don't see how anyone could continue to prefer their old interpretation that is out of line with how the ambiguity is settled.

Oh indeed.

Things is, when told by WR "there are no changes" there are undoubtedly _some_ blowers of whistles out there that haven't then checked the 2018 book. Because "they are no changes" etc to bother reading about allegedly.

didds

 

[crossref]

I don't think this Exam is very good at all -- here's another mistake

4 A player who has both feet off the ground may make a mark. True or false?
Answer - False

OOPS - my mistake - the answer given is TRUE (correct)

(that was really weird, did I imagine it, or could the answer have possibly been changed in the last ten minutes?)

 

[didds]

exactly CR.

Hence why I said above (?) recently, WR alleges to have committees including senior refs and coaches and others pouring over this stuff for months. Then they release rubbish that this site spots within hours if not minutes.

Either the people on that alleged committee are not fit for purpose, or its a fabrication. There can be no other explanation.

didds

 

[DocY]

WR alleges to have committees including senior refs

Does anyone actually know of any senior refs who were involved? I've spoken to a couple and they not only weren't involved (though I wouldn't have expected one of them to be) but didn't know who was involved.

TBH, I wouldn't be surprised if it was a particular, now retired, senior ref's pet project done without a lot of scrutiny.

 

[didds]

to be fair it may have been my inference that they were "senior" ...

There was a quote somebody had found way back when this was all announced as to whom would be on the committee/panel.

didds