Fdk, deliberate pass into an opponent (?)

[Decorily]

If he was trying not to interfere with play, he would he lying down, and all would be OK

Until a 'could be' reciever intentionally runs towards where he is and accidentally trips over him!!

 

[crossref]

Until a 'could be' reciever intentionally runs towards where he is and accidentally trips over him!!

Which is actually more likely now (in England) because the RFU changed the law so that is now illegal for the would be receiver to jump over him !

 

[Decorily]

Which is actually more likely now (in England) because the RFU changed the law so that is now illegal for the would be receiver to jump over him !

What do you mean?

 

[crossref]

What do you mean?

RFU 2023 variations

9.11.(a) Players must not do anything that is reckless or dangerous to others including leading with the head, shoulder, elbow or forearm, or jumping into, or over a tackler an opponent.

 

[Rich_NL]

I think its this really, for me. Its the message it sends - BOK did nothing about it at all. It had to be a PK against blue or some sanction against FdK for deliberately playing the ball INTO another player. Im pretty darned sure if UI had thrown the ball at an oppnent Id have been PKd albeit that is now fading into a disatant memory when i pulled my boots on!

There's no law against playing the ball into an opponent, it's usually disadvantage enough to have to play on.

Unless you pull out 9.7.c, leading the MO to think the opponent has committed an infringement. But that would be a controversial interpretation...

 

[Rich_NL]

for me: being anywhere that cuts down the meaningful options available to the SH is interfering with the play.

That doesn't help if you consider "throwing the ball at the opponent to milk a penalty" to be a meaningful option. Which is what the whole discussion is about.

 

[crossref]

That doesn't help if you consider "throwing the ball at the opponent to milk a penalty" to be a meaningful option. Which is what the whole discussion is about.

See my framework in #35
If the opponent is NOT committing an offence, that is an attempt to deceive the ref, that's bad

If the opponent IS committing an offence, then probably best to sanction the actual offence (while having a word).

 

[Rich_NL]

I disagree with that interpretation of attempting to deceive the ref, as I said earlier. And from a management point of view, the SH looks bad if you play on, you might look bad if you ping on an unusual interpretation of the law.

World Rugby Admit To Five Huge Refereeing Errors In France - South Africa Quarter-Final | Balls.ie

World Rugby have reviewed the World Cup quarter-final between France and South Africa, and have listed five huge refereeing errors.

www.balls.ie

Not sure how trustworthy the source, but seems WR review agrees Woki should have been penalised.

 

[Dixpat]

I disagree with that interpretation of attempting to deceive the ref, as I said earlier. And from a management point of view, the SH looks bad if you play on, you might look bad if you ping on an unusual interpretation of the law.

World Rugby Admit To Five Huge Refereeing Errors In France - South Africa Quarter-Final | Balls.ie

World Rugby have reviewed the World Cup quarter-final between France and South Africa, and have listed five huge refereeing errors.

www.balls.ie

Not sure how trustworthy the source, but seems WR review agrees Woki should have been penalised.

Yet after the review they awarded BOK the semi!!

How credible is the story

According to World Rugby South Africa should also have been awarded a penalty for an infringement from Cameron Woki late in the game - an incident which saw France given the penalty when O'Keefe deemed that Faf de Klerk had purposely thrown the ball into Woki to milk a penalty.

as BOK called a scrum not a penalty

Has anyone seen any vision to support the following

South Africa winger Cheslin Kolbe was widely praised for a game changing conversion charge down Thomas Ramos, but this turned out to be one of the calls that was listed as a mistake in the review from World Rugby.

 

[Dickie E]

Has anyone seen any vision to support the following

South Africa winger Cheslin Kolbe was widely praised for a game changing conversion charge down Thomas Ramos, but this turned out to be one of the calls that was listed as a mistake in the review from World Rugby.

Kolbe started his run early:

World Rugby: Kolbe's block illegal

World Rugby has reportedly identified Springbok wing Cheslin Kolbe's block of France fullback Thomas Ramos' conversion as one of five major errors made by referee Ben O'Keeffe in the World Cup quarter-final.

www.sarugbymag.co.za

 

[belladonna]

Has anyone seen any vision to support the following

South Africa winger Cheslin Kolbe was widely praised for a game changing conversion charge down Thomas Ramos, but this turned out to be one of the calls that was listed as a mistake in the review from World Rugby.

It was in the video I shared of the "French Perspective", but sadly now taken down due to a copyright claim by WR. Thanks, Bill

The charge down looked about 8 or 10 steps ahead of any movement by Ramos tbf.

 

[Balones]

Re a charge down. So much seems to depend on what is interpreted as a move to kick. Is it very simply a step forward? We see kickers step back, go up on their toes, step sideways and even some ‘stuttering’ on the spot. If something of this nature depends on an interpretation from a referee, either there needs to be clearer guidance on the matter for some degree of consistency or perhaps it’s necessary to ban the ‘charge’ to make it absolutely clear for everyone.

 

[Dickie E]

This clarification looked to address this issue:

Law Clarifications | World Rugby Laws

Clarifications in law for the game of rugby union, as requested by unions or individuals.

www.world.rugby

 

[crossref]

It was in the video I shared of the "French Perspective", but sadly now taken down due to a copyright claim by WR. Thanks, Bill
.

WR have spent so much time and effort during the RWC discouraging people from discussing the RWC

 

[crossref]

This clarification looked to address this issue:

Law Clarifications | World Rugby Laws

Clarifications in law for the game of rugby union, as requested by unions or individuals.

www.world.rugby

It wasn't all that helpful, was it

 

[Dickie E]

It wasn't all that helpful, was it

I read it to mean any movement is a commencement to approach

 

[BikingBud]

This clarification looked to address this issue:

Law Clarifications | World Rugby Laws

Clarifications in law for the game of rugby union, as requested by unions or individuals.

www.world.rugby

The kicker was static for a few seconds and then moved backwards before coming forwards, all kickers will have differing set points. But if they need those extra couple of steps, seconds, why not start there?

 

[crossref]

I read it to mean any movement is a commencement to approach

I think it must be only the movement of the feet that counts

Perhaps it's the action of lifting a foot from the floor

 

[belladonna]

In this case, Ramos was stock still when Kolbe took off like a rocket. Kolbe had clearly taken a number of strides before Ramos moved an inch. Shame the video isn't available

 

[didds]

I read it to mean any movement is a commencement to approach

Like tossing a blade of grass into the air to gauge the wind? Or scratching one's head?