Defensive offside line at a 5m lineout

[ChrisR]

Sorry about the redundancy of my post above. Hadn't read pages 2 & 3.

However, it strikes me that "goal line" and "in goal" are misnomers. To score a "goal" the ball must be kicked through the "goal posts".

"try line" and "try zone" would be more accurate terms even tho they offend tradition.

 

[Browner]

. To the best of my knowledge, neither is "jackler", "high tackle", "kill the ball", "fend" or perhaps other terms in common use.

Dangerous tackles (high tackles)
February 2011
Memorandum
The specific provisions of Law 10.4(e) in relation to High Tackles are as follows:

Hand-off: An action taken by a ball carrier to fend off an opponent by using the palm of the hand.

 

[Browner]

.... and gives an unprofessional impression.

Should Professional expectations be adjusted to match Volunteer remuneration , or vice versa ? :horse: - Discuss !

 

[Ian_Cook]

Sorry about the redundancy of my post above. Hadn't read pages 2 & 3.

However, it strikes me that "goal line" and "in goal" are misnomers. To score a "goal" the ball must be kicked through the "goal posts".

"try line" and "try zone" would be more accurate terms even tho they offend tradition.

Well, at one time (and definitely within my living memory) a "goal" was what we now call a converted try.

Here is the scoreboard from the 1953 Wales v All Blacks match at Cardiff Arms Park

Remember, a try was worth 3 points then, a goal (converted try) was worth 5.

Wales' 13 points came from 3 goals, that is 2 converted tries and 1 penalty goal
NZ's 8 points came from 2 goals, that is 1 converted try and 1 penalty goal

Here's another one. Wales v France in 1966

Wales have 9 points, 3 of those points came from the "try" which leaves 6, so their "goals" must have been either penalty goals or dropped goals.

France have 8 points, 3 of those points came from the "try" which leaves 5, so their "goal" must have been a converted try.

I'm not sure when this means of declaring the score was dropped. Maybe OB will know?

 

[ChrisR]

Ian, where and how do you find this stuff.

Wales ahead of the All Blacks! Fifty years later they did it again!

 

[Ian_Cook]

Ian, where and how do you find this stuff.

Wales ahead of the All Blacks! Fifty years later they did it again!

Wales won that match in 1953. Its the last time they beat us!

I have an extensive collection of books about Rugby Union which is where I find quite a bit of historical stuff like this, but in this case, I found what I needed online. Its just a matter knowing what to look for. British Pathe has a LOT of old news footage available online and among that footage are many short highlights packages of rugby matches going back to the 1950's and before. I remember from my youth that these packages often showed brief shots of the scoreboard (easier than putting post process graphics in the film), so it was only a matter of looking through a few short videos to find what I was looking for.

That British Pathe archive is a treasure trove of historical sports footage. I bet if you searched long enough, you could find footage of Prince Oboloensky's famous brace of tries (one on the right wing and then one on the left) for England v the All Blacks back in 1936 (see, the Poms were poaching players from other countries even back then! :biggrin

 

[Simon Thomas]

OB may correct me but I thought the original only way to score in rugby was a goal reflecting the same roots as the round ball game.
The try was merely used as a way of earning the right to go for a goal.

 

[Browner]

I bet if you searched long enough, you could find footage of Prince Oboloensky's famous brace of tries (one on the right wing and then one on the left) for England v the All Blacks back in 1936 (see, the Poms were poaching players from other countries even back then!:biggrin: )

A political assylum refuge baby arriving in a new country and then playing for the new country as an adult is a world away from Top NZ private schools sending bursars holding cheque books across to Pacific island junior rugby tournaments recruiting for their school playing squads !

You dont need all blacked out glasses to see the benefits of this targetted 'approach'.

 

[The Fat]

OB may correct me but I thought the original only way to score in rugby was a goal reflecting the same roots as the round ball game.
The try was merely used as a way of earning the right to go for a goal.

That was my understanding as well.
The origin of the term "Try" was the result of getting the ball over your opposition's goal line (worth no points) which then allowed that team to "try" to score points by kicking the goal.

 

[Pegleg]

OB may correct me but I thought the original only way to score in rugby was a goal reflecting the same roots as the round ball game.
The try was merely used as a way of earning the right to go for a goal.

You are correct. That is why you "convert" a try into a goal. Any number of goals defeated any number of tries.

 

[RobLev]

A political assylum refuge baby arriving in a new country and then playing for the new country as an adult is a world away from Top NZ private schools sending bursars holding cheque books across to Pacific island junior rugby tournaments recruiting for their school playing squads !

You dont need all blacked out glasses to see the benefits of this targetted 'approach'.

Give it a rest, Browner - please. If the fruits of such poaching (if it existed in an organised manner) regularly reached the All Black side, then you might have a point - but it isn't so you don't. All you're doing is inciting a flame-war.

As for Ian's comment - I took it as provocatively humorous. I don't see your response in the same light.

On the other hand, you may say you don't care about my opinion on the matter. Fair enough.

 

[Browner]

As for Ian's comment - I took it as provocatively humorous. I don't see your response in the same light.

On the other hand, you may say you don't care about my opinion on the matter. Fair enough.

Of course Roblev, feel free to scribe your comment then merely invite me to ignore as often as you llike, that's cute, thanks anyway dear chap.:biggrin:

One mans 'research library' is sometimes re-labelled anothers 'troll' resource, seemingly dependant on the preference of the journalist angle, hmmnn, interesting.

In the case of the post I commented about, the post invited a response did it not?? if a response wasnt sought ( then why would anyone otherwise regurgitate a relatively recent forum topic???? the subject that hadnt been previously mentioned in this thread) , strange really , but then I'm not able to close down threads that head in a direction that i dont agree with & neither, I suspect, can you.:shrug:

Humour, oh yes, that is something that is personal to both deliverer & listener, my humour bone recognises both, but again thanks clarifying that ours don't align exactly.

But just so that we're clear, no one has ever disputed the 'bursary pursuit' of young PI players, crikey some French clubs are still at it ! as did one famous English Club 7/8 years ago! , I merely pointed out the clear difference between that activity and the (controversial at the time) selection of PrincyBoy & I believe that the 'poaching insulation' was inaccurate as suggested by the earlier poster, albeit with a nice grinny face thingy alongside, & I merely said so.

Anyway, any current rugby Law discussion going on? :biggrin:

 

[Phil E]

This thread has gone totally off topic and I am going to lock it before it has any chance whatsoever to get out of hand.

If Taff would like to continue the conversation on his OP, he can start a new thread. This one is over.