Silly or Flexible Laws That You Bend or Outright Ignore

[FlipFlop]

If I get an #9 giving me "good advice", I might ignore the flanker release his bind and cream the #9 (even if the ball has already gone)........ :biggrin:

 

[Adam]

I ignore most of them, most of the time. It's called using materiality and contextual judgement. The assessors seem to like it though, especially in Durham.

 

[Simon Thomas]

If I get an #9 giving me "good advice", I might ignore the flanker release his bind and cream the #9 (even if the ball has already gone)........ :biggrin:

Gulp :redface: - that is how scrum halves get provoked into dismissal offences.

 

[Davet]

Originally Posted by TigerCraig In my opinion the "intention to kick" should start when the kicker or captain says "posts sir" or the equivalent. In the benighted colonies where we are not allowed to stop our watches it is a great waster of time

I agree, but there you go.

If the tee is taking an inordinate time, and you are not allowed to stop your watch, what do you?

Hmm, I am of the view that what is really meant here is "If no other indication is made then.... the arrival of the Tee".

If they have indicated poste verbally then I would incline to using that as the start of the minute. And certainly out in the benighted colonies where time is at a premium.

 

[Dixie]

[LAWS]16.4(e) A player must not fall on or over a ball as it is coming out of a ruck.
Sanction: Penalty kick[/LAWS]

I've never understood this law. The iRB site has a video example (http://www.irblaws.com/EN/laws/4/16/149/during-the-match/ruck/other-ruck-offences/#clause_149) but for me, there was no ruck there originally, and if there were it was over by the time the alleged offence occurred. So unless the intent is that there is a period immediately after a ruck when we are in open play but it is illegal to fall on the ball (which the video suggests), then I broadly disregard the law as I don't understand it.

 

[Ian_Cook]

[LAWS]16.4(e) A player must not fall on or over a ball as it is coming out of a ruck.
Sanction: Penalty kick[/LAWS]

I've never understood this law. The iRB site has a video example (http://www.irblaws.com/EN/laws/4/16/149/during-the-match/ruck/other-ruck-offences/#clause_149) but for me, there was no ruck there originally, and if there were it was over by the time the alleged offence occurred. So unless the intent is that there is a period immediately after a ruck when we are in open play but it is illegal to fall on the ball (which the video suggests), then I broadly disregard the law as I don't understand it.

Back in the days when ALL the players in a ruck were ON THEIR FEET, and the ball was won by players raking the ball back WITH THEIR FEET, it was common (illegal) practice for players to deliberately fall on the wrong side of the ruck to prevent or delay the scrumhalf picking up the ball. They might give away a PK doing so, but they succeeded in slowing down quick ruck ball.

Certain players were very good at it but sometimes they would cop a good old-fashioned shoeing when they did so; J.P.R. Williams is one example that immediately comes mind for me.

 

[pwhaling]

I had a discussion with a coach the other day. He wanted me to explain why no one enforced 19.6 'The player must not step into the field of play when the ball is thrown'. He felt that we should be vigilant about a foot on the touch line. He didn't really accept my argument that it's not material, and there was too many other things going on to worry about. The coach's argument was 'it's in the book, so you need to enforce it'. I wasn't getting anywhere, so another senior ref gave the perfect example of perspective:

2.5 AIR PRESSURE AT THE START OF PLAY

65.71-68.75 kilopascals, or 0.67-0.70 kilograms per square centimetre, or 9.5-10.0 lbs per square inch.

Have you ever used a pressure gage to measure air pressure?

 

[OB..]

I had a discussion with a coach the other day. He wanted me to explain why no one enforced 19.6 'The player must not step into the field of play when the ball is thrown'. He felt that we should be vigilant about a foot on the touch line. He didn't really accept my argument that it's not material, and there was too many other things going on to worry about. The coach's argument was 'it's in the book, so you need to enforce it'. I wasn't getting anywhere, so another senior ref gave the perfect example of perspective:

2.5 AIR PRESSURE AT THE START OF PLAY

65.71-68.75 kilopascals, or 0.67-0.70 kilograms per square centimetre, or 9.5-10.0 lbs per square inch.

Have you ever used a pressure gage to measure air pressure?

You could have said:

(a) he is wrong. It is often penalised when a player steps clearly into the field of play, particularly at a QTI.

(b) there are two different definitions in the laws. Which one is he using? (Then leave him to find them!)

 

[jdeagro]

I had a discussion with a coach the other day. He wanted me to explain why no one enforced 19.6 'The player must not step into the field of play when the ball is thrown'. He felt that we should be vigilant about a foot on the touch line. He didn't really accept my argument that it's not material, and there was too many other things going on to worry about. The coach's argument was 'it's in the book, so you need to enforce it'. I wasn't getting anywhere, so another senior ref gave the perfect example of perspective:

2.5 AIR PRESSURE AT THE START OF PLAY

65.71-68.75 kilopascals, or 0.67-0.70 kilograms per square centimetre, or 9.5-10.0 lbs per square inch.

Have you ever used a pressure gage to measure air pressure?

I actually always wondered this myself, more specifically at how much it is enforced because I've never seen it pinged. I thought I read somewhere that if their is an AR, he is suppose to keep his flag up if such an infringement occurs? Being a new ref. myself and starting out doing some AR work, I was particularly curious if it's something I should look for at lineouts? >.>

 

[Bryan]

With my game manager hat on anything that results in a FK is either:

1. A failure of my management process due to not managing it effectively before it became material
2. A failure in the player's ability to follow through on any management cues by yours truly
3. A way, early in the game, to clean up sh!t that could get messy around a set-piece (read: early engagement, early shove, or gap closing, to name a few).

God help the poor referee that is giving FKs at a 5m scrum at the 79th minute with 2 points in the game...

 

[Drift]

With my game manager hat on anything that results in a FK is either:

1. A failure of my management process due to not managing it effectively before it became material
2. A failure in the player's ability to follow through on any management cues by yours truly
3. A way, early in the game, to clean up sh!t that could get messy around a set-piece (read: early engagement, early shove, or gap closing, to name a few).

God help the poor referee that is giving FKs at a 5m scrum at the 79th minute with 2 points in the game...

I've done that, for no touch at scrum time. The scrums had been perfect all day and then in the 2nd last scrum of the day one of the props didn't touch so I FK'd him.

 

[Bryan]

I've done that, for no touch at scrum time. The scrums had been perfect all day and then in the 2nd last scrum of the day one of the props didn't touch so I FK'd him.

Seriously?

 

[Drift]

Seriously?

I am unsure of where your confusion is coming from.

 

[Dickie E]

Bryan is suggesting that to award a FK in the red zone at a critical time in the game for an infringement like prop failing to touch shoulder may be a bit jobsworth.

 

[Drift]

Bryan is suggesting that to award a FK in the red zone at a critical time in the game for an infringement like prop failing to touch shoulder may be a bit jobsworth.

Probably, but I don't mind coping a bit of flack for it. Also it was the attacking team who didn't touch.

 

[didds]

With my game manager hat on anything that results in a FK is either:

2. A failure in the player's ability to follow through on any management cues by yours truly

...

God help the poor referee that is giving FKs at a 5m scrum at the 79th minute with 2 points in the game...

I think you've answered your own point Bryan really.

didds

 

[didds]

another system created dual posting. Managed to get in and edit it before my 48 nano-second edit window closed

Simon - if its any help it occurred at circa 0818 05/04/2012 (for logs checking) and prior to it happening as I posted (quick post) I got the window about leaving a page with unposted material (or somesuch) which i clicked through on.

didds

 

[didds]

so for those that woul;dn';t ping a non-touch in the 79th minute in the red zone...

* would you have FK'd iof it was on half way?
* would you have Fk'd a non-touch in the red zone in the 2nd minute? 60th minute?

didds

 

[FlipFlop]

so for those that woul;dn';t ping a non-touch in the 79th minute in the red zone...

* would you have FK'd iof it was on half way?
* would you have Fk'd a non-touch in the red zone in the 2nd minute? 60th minute?

didds

first time in a game? NEVER FK it.

Blow whistle. Remind props of obligation. Reset scrum.

 

[Dixie]

I actually always wondered this myself, more specifically at how much it is enforced because I've never seen it pinged. I thought I read somewhere that if their is an AR, he is suppose to keep his flag up if such an infringement occurs? Being a new ref. myself and starting out doing some AR work, I was particularly curious if it's something I should look for at lineouts? >.>

Jon, your post seems to have got(ten) lost in the Free Kick issue, so let me put in my own view and see whether others disagree.

We are all clear that the line is outside the field of play. Consequently, a hooker is allowed to have his toes on the line. Should we get picky if his front two studs on the right boot are in the field of play? If not, what about the front four? Eventually, you ask yourself why the law is there. Its purpose is to prevent the thrower-in from gaining an improper advantage by having to throw less than than the full 5m. Centimeters don't make much difference in that equation, but a full step might well. For me, anyone with any part of his front foot on the line is fine. If he's overstepped by a tiny amount that might be enough to lead a cricket umpire to call No Ball, I'm still not worried. If the heel of his front foot is 6" over the line, I may well call it back and tell him to keep his front foot out of the field of play. If he does it gain, I'll FK as he's clearly trying to gain some sort of advantage - even if it's just by pushing my buttons to see how far I can be pushed.