[Law] The history of the LoTG (LAW 4 In Particular)

Richard smith


Referees in Scotland
Joined
Feb 7, 2012
Messages
154
Post Likes
10
Current Referee grade:
Level 9
Can any one help me with the above?????????
I have tried contacting the World Rugby Museum at Twickenham to be told they dont have the info I requested and to try World Rugby. I await the reply from World Rugby with interest
 

OB..


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
22,981
Post Likes
1,838
Can any one help me with the above?????????
I have tried contacting the World Rugby Museum at Twickenham to be told they dont have the info I requested and to try World Rugby. I await the reply from World Rugby with interest
The Reference Library at Twickenham has copies of almost all the law books since 1871 and several earlier versions from other sources. Royds, in his History of the Laws, quotes some earlier sources.

All the 1871 Laws said was[LAWS]58. No one wearing projecting nails iron plates or gutta percha on any part of his boots or shoes shall be allowed to play in a match [/LAWS].

Did you have a specific query?
 

Not Kurt Weaver


Referees in America
Joined
Sep 11, 2008
Messages
2,292
Post Likes
159
All the 1871 Laws said was[LAWS]58. No one wearing projecting nails iron plates or gutta percha on any part of his boots or shoes shall be allowed to play in a match [/LAWS].

Did you have a specific query?

the year we lost gutta percha to the safety geeks, the game went downhill at that turning point.
 

Richard smith


Referees in Scotland
Joined
Feb 7, 2012
Messages
154
Post Likes
10
Current Referee grade:
Level 9
Did you have a specific query?
I Do as it happens :biggrin:
Was there ever a time when a single stud at the toe of the boot was legal, and if so, when was it outlawed???????????
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,815
Post Likes
3,153
I get the sense this is not an idle query

There have been a lot of previous discussions here about the single stud .. the search function is your friend ... You are going to find endless discussions about whether the asymmetric offset is important. Or not
WR have basically rolled over and all any studs are legal as long as the manufacturers attest that they are.

You need to look not just at the Law but also the regulations .. Regulation 12 I think it is
 
Last edited:

L'irlandais

, Promises to Referee in France
Joined
May 11, 2010
Messages
4,724
Post Likes
325
Regulation 12 SCHEDULE 2 -SAFETY ASPECTS OF RUGBY BOOT SOLE DESIGN.

Law 4 Player’s clothing

Of you have a gripe about the above regulations, you be better writing to World Rugby directly. Since they don’t take a blind bit of notice of any common sense solutions proposed on RRF. Then again they most likely won’t take a blind bit of notice of any suggestions received thru’ the post either. Do try to use language a 12 year old might understand, as we have reason to believe few adults work for them.

Perhaps we should start sending them postcards with top gripes.
World Rugby. World Rugby House,. 8-10 Pembroke Street Lower,. Dublin 2, Ireland.
 
Last edited:

Taff


Referees in Wales
Joined
Aug 23, 2009
Messages
6,942
Post Likes
383
has anyone come across this and not allowed the wearer to play, Purely on safety grounds
Sorry, but if World Rugby says it's OK (assuming the single toe stud was legal) why would we stop a player from playing? :chin:
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,815
Post Likes
3,153
Sorry, but if World Rugby says it's OK (assuming the single toe stud was legal) why would we stop a player from playing? :chin:

for very many years the IRB/WR regulations explicitly asserted that a single stud was dangerous

then suddenly they didn't

would it be unreasonable for a ref to persist with the view that a single stud is dangerous?
 

Richard smith


Referees in Scotland
Joined
Feb 7, 2012
Messages
154
Post Likes
10
Current Referee grade:
Level 9
for very many years the IRB/WR regulations explicitly asserted that a single stud was dangerous

then suddenly they didn't

would it be unreasonable for a ref to persist with the view that a single stud is dangerous?

I don't believe it would
After all the referee is the sole fact of what is safe etc on the FoP
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,815
Post Likes
3,153
I don't believe it would
After all the referee is the sole fact of what is safe etc on the FoP

this is true. but once WR have said that a single stud is safe, I think you'd need some evidence to declare it dangerous.

Personally : i believe the single stud is unsafe, and back in the day I have forbidden boots on that grounds
But in 2015 but I feel I was explicitly over-ruled by WR .. So now I allow it.
 

Taff


Referees in Wales
Joined
Aug 23, 2009
Messages
6,942
Post Likes
383
for very many years the IRB/WR regulations explicitly asserted that a single stud was dangerous. then suddenly they didn't. would it be unreasonable for a ref to persist with the view that a single stud is dangerous?
Not our decision to make. World Rugby have said they are OK, so they are OK.

Sharp edges from overuse :rolleyes:
In which case they wouldn't be legal; but that applies to any stud not just the single toe stud.

Personally, I don't like them. I loved them when I played, but times and attitudes have changed since then.
 
Last edited:
Top