How to stop a maul without a card

[didds]

collapsing a maul close to one's own line is an immediate YC - for dangerous play AIUI.

So instead of doing that, might running round the back and grabbing the ball (ie offside) and preventing the BC for taking it further forward not be a YC ? As that isn't dangerous ?

asking for a friend... ;-)

(of course my understandings above may be totally fallacious! )

 

[DocP]

I don't think the YC is for dangerous play, as a YC isn't always given when a maul is collapsed elsewhere on the field. It is normally given for a cynical act preventing a try scoring oppertunity. So in that regard, coming around offside close to the tryline would be the same outcome. A deliberate illegal act to thwart a try.

 

[didds]

I don't think the YC is for dangerous play, as a YC isn't always given when a maul is collapsed elsewhere on the field. It is normally given for a cynical act preventing a try scoring oppertunity. So in that regard, coming around offside close to the tryline would be the same outcome. A deliberate illegal act to thwart a try.

Thanks for that clarification that its not about danger, but about cycical play preventing opportunities etc.
And its clearly only opportunities, not probables, as a PT is available for that naturally.


so, picking an example at random ... what about coming offside at a ruck < 5m from the line and grabbing the scrumhalf as he grabs the ball to prevent the pass away? Is that not "a cynical act preventing a try scoring oppertunity" worthy therefore of a card?

 

[BikingBud]

I don't think the YC is for dangerous play, as a YC isn't always given when a maul is collapsed elsewhere on the field. It is normally given for a cynical act preventing a try scoring oppertunity. So in that regard, coming around offside close to the tryline would be the same outcome. A deliberate illegal act to thwart a try.

A la Dan Biggar yesterday?

 

[Phil E]

Thanks for that clarification that its not about danger, but about cycical play preventing opportunities etc.
And its clearly only opportunities, not probables, as a PT is available for that naturally.


so, picking an example at random ... what about coming offside at a ruck < 5m from the line and grabbing the scrumhalf as he grabs the ball to prevent the pass away? Is that not "a cynical act preventing a try scoring oppertunity" worthy therefore of a card?

Possibly...

Your questions can't be answered with absolutes, there are so many other variables.

 

[didds]

I would interested in hearing of such variables

Cos frankly, Im struggling to understand the difference

 

[Phil E]

I would interested in hearing of such variables

Cos frankly, Im struggling to understand the difference

Was it cynical, or did the player genuinely think the ball was out?
Was it just bad timing?
Had the ball been lifted?
Did the SH do anything to make him think it was out?
What's the temperament of the game?
Has this happened before in this game?
Was there really a try scoring opportunity on?
Have any warning been given?

Yes it might be a card, but it might not be.

 

[SimonSmith]

Was it cynical, or did the player genuinely think the ball was out?
Was it just bad timing?
Had the ball been lifted?
Did the SH do anything to make him think it was out?
What's the temperament of the game?
Has this happened before in this game?
Was there really a try scoring opportunity on?
Have any warning been given?

Yes it might be a card, but it might not be.

5m from the line? In order:
Don't care
Don't care
If the s/half faked, PK him
Don't care
Don't care
Might care
Don't care

In what Didds outlined, 99/100 the card is coming out.

 

[Balones]

I could add being accidentally knocked into an offside position by an arriving teammate. Who deserves the card? First offence in game.

 

[didds]

Was it cynical, or did the player genuinely think the ball was out?

so intent is a consideration?

Was it just bad timing?

something here about nothing happens at these levels that is accidental ? ;-)

Had the ball been lifted?

irrelevant if the tackler is offside to start with

Did the SH do anything to make him think it was out?

like a dummy pass? whiich is illegal and penalisable - but isnt PKd so presumably not.

What's the temperament of the game?

good natured

Has this happened before in this game?

well the reverse question could be asked about the maul collapse - with the answer no

Was there really a try scoring opportunity on?

enough of one. reverse question again

Have any warning been given?

not at that juncture. ditto the maul collapse.


for a specific example... watch the 2nd half of W v F.
I aks here cos Im being beseiged by chums asking me as their guru (!!) WTF was going on. Im trying to get my head round it all to explain to them ... cos I cant either. TBH I had considered most if not all of the above.

I've had chums that don't follow rugby saying to me what's the point of watching the rest of the RWC if the decision making (across the board - nobody specific [1] ) is so inconsistent or even non sensical. As a global showcase WR is in a tricky spot after the first weekend....

Personally I gave up trying to make sense of this stuff yonks ago.. they all make it up as they go along basically, while having no even vaguely universal understanding of their own laws, regs and rules.

[1] twitter generally is far more direct...

 

[tim White]

The team deserve the card, pick the player who made contact -assuming same scenario.

 

[didds]

not sure if you emant the collapse or the offside Tim?

And it doesnt explain why the offisde wasn't cardable.

 

[Phil E]

In what Didds outlined, 99/100 the card is coming out.

You are probably correct, but my point is, if a coach asks me before a game, "if they do this is it a yellow card", my answer is going to "maybe". No way am I painting myself into the proverbial corner by saying yes 100%.

I've had chums that don't follow rugby saying to me what's the point of watching the rest of the RWC if the decision making (across the board - nobody specific [1] ) is so inconsistent or even non sensical. As a global showcase WR is in a tricky spot after the first weekend....

The laws of rugby are not black and white, they are very grey. This gives the referee latitude to use the laws to enable a game of rugby to break out, hence SEL. Without this latitude games would be a penalty fest and no one would enjoy them. Problem is at the top end of the game everyone is shouting for consistency and absolutes. You can't have it both ways.

 

[didds]

so the answer really is that RU is NOT the global game WR is trying to sell it as, and has a limited appeal. Which is absolutely fair enough. But then lets not try and pretend its anything but what is in effect, an old boys/girls club based on people from within the game already (players and ex players basically)

 

[SimonSmith]

You are probably correct, but my point is, if a coach asks me before a game, "if they do this is it a yellow card", my answer is going to "maybe". No way am I painting myself into the proverbial corner by saying yes 100%.

"I'll have to wait to see how it unfolds in front of me"

 

[Stu10]

collapsing a maul close to one's own line is an immediate YC

Is this correct? As a less experienced ref, I'd like to come back to this and get confirmation/guidance from you all. Also, might you take a more lenient approach at level 11 vs higher levels?

 

[didds]

Is this correct? As a less experienced ref, I'd like to come back to this and get confirmation/guidance from you all. Also, might you take a more lenient approach at level 11 vs higher levels?

as per my other linein the OP

"(of course my understandings above may be totally fallacious! )"


DocP in #2 explains my previous understanding was indeed fallacious.

So basically we have situations where one action is an immediate YC whereas a comparable action at the other end of the field ... isn't. Both in a position of "a cynical act preventing a try scoring oppertunity."

They just make it up as they go along basically.

 

[Stu10]

DocP pointed out that a collapsed maul is not always card while giving play in the middle of the field as an example. However, is a collapsed maul 5m from the try line always a YC?

I do agree the Fiji v Wales made a mockery of fairness in the red zone, but ignoring that game, how should I manage my games in this regard?

 

[DocP]

DocP pointed out that a collapsed maul is not always card while giving play in the middle of the field as an example. However, is a collapsed maul 5m from the try line always a YC?

If the maul is motoring towards the try line with a basic probably try being scored then it will be a YC and PT.

If the maul is stationary, lets say from a lineout on the 5m, and a defender pulls it down then it will be the same protocal as normal. It is a standard penalty but are they on a warning for repeated infringements in the red zone etc. So not 100% a YC

 

[didds]

If the maul is motoring towards the try line with a basic probably try being scored then it will be a YC and PT.

If the maul is stationary, lets say from a lineout on the 5m, and a defender pulls it down then it will be the same protocal as normal. It is a standard penalty but are they on a warning for repeated infringements in the red zone etc. So not 100% a YC

were Fiji on a warning does anybody know at the time it happened to them v Wales? (2nd half)