NatWest 6 Nations 2018 Championship - talking points

[winchesterref]

Are you suggesting that playing advantage without an Advantage Signal or verbalising the same is good practice for a referee at any level , or just his ?

I don't particularly like it, because my opinion is that if you're doing that then the "offence" has had enough of an effect on the game that it should be dealt with in the first place.

The TV is a different world where continuity is king.

 

[L'irlandais]

That does surprise me

The teams had warmed up on opposite ends of the pitch. At which point was the Scottish number 8 supposed to have elbowed White 12. The first contact between them is the England player shoving the big lad out of his way. If he inadvertently got caught by an elbow from there on in, it is his own bloody fault.

 

[ChuckieB]

Just to be a law-geek on that. And to help probationary refs....
Isnt the "scrum from where kicked" option only available if its an offside under 10m law offence ?. And not an option for general "in front of kicker" offside offence ?
Otherwise, yes, any PK or FK may be taken as a scrum instead.

Cheers

Applies to any offside in general play and is a scrum option from where the ball was last played. Kicked, passed or otherwise.

 

[SimonSmith]

I'm not sure how much I care about the tunnel incident if I'm honest.

 

[crossref]

If there was really nothing to it they’d have released the official footage and put things to bed early doors.
He is not trying to catch up with the number 8. He has simply attempted to shove past the guy and not been allowed to be so rude.
Whether he has then taken exception to being put in his place, we won’t know, until somebody leaks the other camera angles and or CCTV

The other long range footage makes more sense now. Online version.
Farrell says he was elbowed before lashing out. Looks like he was the one doing all the initial jostling.
If he has connected with a punch, that’d explain the reluctance to talk about it.

Has it occurred to you that any CCTV footage would be owned by the SRU , so if it is being suppressed, that would presumably be to protect the Scottish players involved . They wouldn't care much about England players being cited , having played them already.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Has it occurred to you that any CCTV footage would be owned by the SRU , so if it is being suppressed, that would presumably be to protect the Scottish players involved . They wouldn't care much about England players being cited , having played them already.

Of course, an English(or indeed a Scot) player could end up being banned, which could help scotland's hopes of possibly winning the 6N. So why would they not care?

WR could also take a dim view if a union refused / could not find the required footage.

 

[crossref]

Well, having Scottish players banned or not banned will clearly make a lot more impact on their 6N campaign than what happens to England .

My expectation is that any footage would be shared , but if turned out that the camera mysteriously failed to record , I'd surmise it was a Scottish player being protected, not an English one

 

[L'irlandais]

Yes it had occured to me. It doesn’t make it right, if it was a Scottish player who threw the punch. It is still bringing the game into disrepute. Given that the citing officer / disciplinary commitee found the French had done no wrong in either of the Paris HIA cases, I don’t have much faith in the process. Expect nothing will come of the enquiry, in the end. The notion that because it was before kick-off, it is little more than a distraction, is not helping Rugby’s image.

 

[Wedgie]

Just to be a law-geek on that. And to help probationary refs....
Isnt the "scrum from where kicked" option only available if its an offside under 10m law offence ?. And not an option for general "in front of kicker" offside offence ?

I think confusion can arise here as the sanctions occur indented under 10.4.c, but there are no sanctions listed for 10.1.a-c or 10.4.a or b) so my reading is that penalty (at place of infringement) or scrum (where last played) apply to all the above

 

[TheBFG]

I think confusion can arise here as the sanctions occur indented under 10.4.c, but there are no sanctions listed for 10.1.a-c or 10.4.a or b) so my reading is that penalty (at place of infringement) or scrum (where last played) apply to all the above

View attachment 3705

This was my original point. I understand that in the elite game most PK in the oppos half is pretty much always 3 pts and they'd rarely take the scrum option, but Sco lack a long distance kicker and as their scrum was more than solid on Sat i think had NO asked they'd have gone with the scrum? Mind you, as an international capt. i'd have thought they'd have asked too?

 

[Pegleg]

Has it occurred to you that any CCTV footage would be owned by the SRU , so if it is being suppressed, that would presumably be to protect the Scottish players involved . They wouldn't care much about England players being cited , having played them already.

The X Files strike again

 

[Pinky]

On another game, did anyone notice WB gave a penalty on the 22 after some after touchdown fracas in the ingoal. His mark for the penalty was in the centre of the 22. Correct place?

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Yes PK where play was due to restart. The restart would have been a 22 drop out.

From law 20 (new book)
Where the PK takes place

While the ball is dead.
- At the point where play would have restarted or, if
that place is on the touchline or within 15 metres
of it, the mark is on the 15-metre line, in line with
that place.
-
If play would have restarted with a 22 drop-out,
the mark is anywhere on the 22-metre line (nonoffending
team decides).

 

[Pinky]

So by law the place is anywhere on the 22 between the 15m lines. Who decides? I would let the kicking team choose and not make them kick from the middle.

 

[ChrisR]

Pinky, why would the place be restricted to "between the 15s"? However, the concept of allowing the mark to be chosen by the non-offending side is a bit odd but consistent 'at the place where the restart would occur'.

 

[crossref]

So by law the place is anywhere on the 22 between the 15m lines. Who decides? I would let the kicking team choose and not make them kick from the middle.

Can they run to the 22m and take a quick tap.
I guess not

 

[Pinky]

Pinky, why would the place be restricted to "between the 15s"? However, the concept of allowing the mark to be chosen by the non-offending side is a bit odd but consistent 'at the place where the restart would occur'.

That's what law 20 - see Marc's post 113 above - says. I suppose its a bit like there are a number of advantages and you offer the non-offending team the choice of the one they prefer?

 

[chbg]

That's what law 20 - see Marc's post 113 above - says. I suppose its a bit like there are a number of advantages and you offer the non-offending team the choice of the one they prefer?

You may wish to read it again:

If play would have restarted with a 22 drop-out, the mark is anywhere on the 22-metre line (non-offending team decides).

 

[Phil E]

Can they run to the 22m and take a quick tap.
I guess not

That would be the wrong type of kick wouldn't it?

 

[crossref]

That would be the wrong type of kick wouldn't it?

I meant if awarded a PK while ball was dead , and the restart is a 22m, so the PK is on the 22m .. can they run and make a quick tap ?
NB the team with the PK might be the attacking team !