Tactical replacement cannot kick at goal !!

[Ciaran Trainor]

even in RFUland: if (for instance) the kicker got taken out injured after a high tackle or other dangerous play - I think most refs would allow the replacement to take the PK, wouldn't we ?

I would and if a team wanted to complain, take it to the competition organisers after the match.

 

[chbg]

The aim is surely to prevent the tactical rolling substitution of bringing on a specialist kicker for a PK, or conversion; and then being able to roll him off again. If it is a forced replacement due to injury, then I don't see why the team should not bring on a replacement kicker, otherwise they are penalised for an injury (or for not having two goal kickers on the field). In that vein, I would 'remember' this Regulation if the original kicker was still on the field.

 

[Phil E]

I have definitely read somewhere that if a player goes off due to foul play or an HIA then the team don't get penalised by lack of subs, or having to lose a man if going uncontested.

I would treat CR's scenario in the same way.

As chbg said, the spirit of this law/reg is to prevent tactical substitutions for kicks, then take him off again until the next kick, American Football style.

 

[Flish]

I have definitely read somewhere that if a player goes off due to foul play or an HIA then the team don't get penalised by lack of subs, or having to lose a man if going uncontested.

I would treat CR's scenario in the same way.

Yup, it’s here https://keepyourbootson.co.uk/england-rugby-front-row-logic-tree/ and I would agree with that premise, In the sense that the kicker has just gone off and no one to take the kick. If he went off 10 mins ago, the replacement kicker’s not up to it and they need this kick to win, not so much

 

[Decorily]

Why treat a " specialist " kicker differently than any other specialist team member ?

 

[didds]

Why treat a " specialist " kicker differently than any other specialist team member ?

becasue you cannot have a full scrum without ST&E players in the front row?

 

[Decorily]

becasue you cannot have a full scrum without ST&E players in the front row?

Lineout jumper, scrum half, hooker at a lineout because the other hooker hasn't hit the target in any previous lineout!!
It doesn’t make sense to me.

 

[Jarrod Burton]

Lineout jumper, scrum half, hooker at a lineout because the other hooker hasn't hit the target in any previous lineout!!
It doesn’t make sense to me.

I guess no times to substitute a FR when scrums were much more dynamic and quickly formed before the modern heavier boys decided we all needed a 30 second rest before every scrum.

 

[Camquin]

Does this date to bloodgate?

 

[crossref]

Does this date to bloodgate?

No, to the introduction of rolling subs and interchanges, which are used in RFU leagues.
Interchanges mean it's feasible to bring on a kicker, he kicks it, and is subbed back off again

(I have never seen this happen or he attempted! But the RFU got worried about the possibility)

 

[Zebra1922]

Lineout jumper, scrum half, hooker at a lineout because the other hooker hasn't hit the target in any previous lineout!!
It doesn’t make sense to me.

Because not being suitably trained in the front row is dangerous. Being a poor thrower or scrum half is not.

 

[Decorily]

Because not being suitably trained in the front row is dangerous. Being a poor thrower or scrum half is not.

No idea what you are referring to. ...I made no mention of FR or scrums!