Where the 2018 Law Book is actually different from 2017

[Dickie E]

Messy.

the words "dog" and "breakfast" come to mind

 

[crossref]

Thanks Balones
That one I imagine is a mistake by the authors, rather than deliberate. I wonder whether
1 if world rugby have any process for finding these errors , other than reading my table
2 if they have noticed that one in time to fix it in the 2019 book, which must be in production by now

Will add to the table

 

[chbg]

Where does the receiver stand at a lineout?

One of our local society observers noted a ref penalising the receiver for standing more than 2M away because he reckoned law 18.16 applies because it says ‘Free Kick’ as the sanction, not realising that perhaps it refers to having two receivers only. Or does it? Messy.

One would hope that a referee applying that logic would manage the out-of-position receiver before the line-out started.

 

[Balones]

One would hope that a referee applying that logic would manage the out-of-position receiver before the line-out started.

Apparently he had been warned because what you say was my first position. The referee was thinking he could penalise for delaying the lineout as well.

We are referring here to a new’ish’ referee, as you can probably work out.

 

[Rich_NL]

I can't find the old laws, but 18.28 - didn't using the outside arm used to be a PK?

 

[crossref]

.

We are referring here to a new’ish’ referee, as you can probably work out.

You seem to be saying that being inexperienced he is foolishly believing that the 2018 Law Book contains the actual law .

I think he is actually correct , the 2018 Law Book does contain the current law , and you should not longer be referimg to old 2017 Laws (except perhaps where the 2018 book is ambiguous)

Indeed how can he even find out what the old Law Book says, it's no longer on line

 

[crossref]

I can't find the old laws, but 18.28 - didn't using the outside arm used to be a PK?

No the 2017 Law was the same
[LAWS]Catching or deflecting. When jumping for the ball , a player must use either both hands or
the inside arm to try to catch or deflect the ball. The jumper must not use the outside arm
alone to try to catch or deflect the ball. If the jumper has both hands above the head either
hand may be used to play the ball.
Sanction: Free Kick on the 15-metre line [/LAWS]

I agree that intuitively it feels like it should be a PK , as it's a safety Law

 

[crossref]

Updated the table.

- receiver must stand exactly 2m back

- gate opened wider

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UzYvtcl03eG7xN13VCwboOyfC0yATNdxgQ7_N1slxEc/edit?usp=sharing

spotted any more ? Let me know

 

[crossref]

Added another one to the table (will we ever stop finding them)

New Law 14.11 setting out how a tackle ends

[LAWS]14.11 The tackle ends when :
a. A ruck is formed.
b. A player on their feet from either team gains possession of the ball and moves
away or passes or kicks the ball.
c. The ball leaves the tackle area.
d. The ball is unplayable. If there is doubt about which player did not conform to law,
the referee orders a scrum. The throw is taken by the team moving forward prior
to the stoppage or, if no team was moving forward, by the attacking team.[/LAWS]

This Law was not in the 2017 Law Book, which didn't set out how a tackle ends (before we had offside lines at a tackle, it wasn't really important)

 

[Balones]

You seem to be saying that being inexperienced he is foolishly believing that the 2018 Law Book contains the actual law .

I think he is actually correct , the 2018 Law Book does contain the current law , and you should not longer be referimg to old 2017 Laws (except perhaps where the 2018 book is ambiguous)

Indeed how can he even find out what the old Law Book says, it's no longer on line

Sorry. Just caught up with this. Been busy.
Just to explain.
I was trying to say exactly what you have said but with fewer words in relation to being a 'newish' ref.

 

[crossref]

Updated the table AGAIN (who would have thought we'd still be finding differences in December?)

New Law 2018/7.3.e

[LAWS]Advantage must not be applied and the referee must blow the whistle immediately when:
a The ball or a player in possession of the ball, touches the referee and an advantage is gained by either side.
b The ball comes out of either end of the tunnel at a scrum.
c A scrum is wheeled through more than 90 degrees.
d A player in a scrum is lifted or forced upwards so that the player is no longer in contact with the ground.
e A quick throw, free-kick or penalty is taken incorrectly.
f The ball is made dead.
g It would be dangerous to let play continue.
h It is suspected that a player is seriously injured.[/LAWS]

ie, back in 2017 this scenario would have been treated the same as this one

 

[menace]

Updated the table AGAIN (who would have thought we'd still be finding differences in December?)

New Law 2018/7.3.e

[LAWS]Advantage must not be applied and the referee must blow the whistle immediately when:
a The ball or a player in possession of the ball, touches the referee and an advantage is gained by either side.
b The ball comes out of either end of the tunnel at a scrum.
c A scrum is wheeled through more than 90 degrees.
d A player in a scrum is lifted or forced upwards so that the player is no longer in contact with the ground.
e A quick throw, free-kick or penalty is taken incorrectly.
f The ball is made dead.
g It would be dangerous to let play continue.
h It is suspected that a player is seriously injured.[/LAWS]

ie, back in 2017 this scenario would have been treated the same as this one

I think youll find g and h were also not part of 2017 advantage law.

I find h most peculiar...is it saying that you can't play advantage when someone in seriously injured only when resulting directly from an infringement?
But you can play on if someone is seriously injured not resulting from an infringement?

I just dont know how to interpret that really??:shrug::shrug::shrug:

What I do know - even though it isnt 'law' is that If i suspect someone needs urgent medical attention then im stopping the game anyway (law or no law)
(But a grazed knee or twisted ankle in the backplay then i may not stop the game).

 

[crossref]

Yes , I noticed that g and h were new , but like you I consider them meaningless

At ANY stage of phase of the game, the referee should stop the game if it would be dangerous or someone was seriously injured. It's nothing to do with whether you happen to be playing advantage or not

Those two items belong on Law6 Mode of Play

Except they deleted Law 6 !

 

[menace]

Yes , I noticed that g and h were new , but like you I consider them meaningless

At ANY stage of phase of the game, the referee should stop the game if it would be dangerous or someone was seriously injured. It's nothing to do with whether you happen to be playing advantage or not

Those two items belong on Law6 Mode of Play

Except they deleted Law 6 !

Agree

Then they dont make sense in the advantage law....unless.someone can enlighten me on the logic.

 

[OB..]

Those two items belong on Law6 Mode of Play

Except they deleted Law 6 !

It was Law 7.

 

[crossref]

So - the publication of the 2019 Law Book brings to an end the 2017 v 2018 Law Book discussion.

With just one exception, all of the changes introduced in the 2018 Law Book have been carried forward into 2019.

There was one correction made:the insertion of
[LAWS] 18.25 Opposition players must not block the throw. Sanction: Free-kick.[/LAWS]
missing in 2018, present in 2019


So the Laws of Rugby must be as written in the current, 2019 Law Book.
No one can possibly claim that, as we enter 2019, we should still be reffing to the 2017 Law Book... or can they?


Here's a link to the table, one last time
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UzYvtcl03eG7xN13VCwboOyfC0yATNdxgQ7_N1slxEc/edit?usp=sharing

 

[Marc Wakeham]

From a reply in the "[Law] MARK - Is this a valid mark ?" thread:

[RFU][FONT=&quot]As you indicate the law books have been simplified and content reduced, but the substance of the laws have not changed. However that does leave a few challenges around interpretation.[/FONT][/RFU]


Perhaps that will clarify for some RFU referees. NO CHANGES just a few challenges around interpretation.

An admission that the job was a job badly done. Perhaps WR need to do the job again!

 

[crossref]

It means "yes, the Law changed, but don't make me actually say that"

I think we are seeing a pattern .. the establishment are happy to explain what the Law is .. now in 2019 .. but don't want to get drawn into comparisons with the 2017 book.

Which I think is fair enough. Who cares, now, what the old Law Book said. It's the 2019 Laws that are important

 

[Marc Wakeham]

It means "yes, the Law changed, but don't make me actually say that"

I think we are seeing a pattern .. the establishment are happy to explain what the Law is .. now in 2019 .. but don't want to get drawn into comparisons with the 2017 book.

Which I think is fair enough. Who cares, now, what the old Law Book said. It's the 2019 Laws that are important

That is your interpretation. Not fact.

 

[crossref]

For anyone who is still interested in the 2017 Laws I recently made two additions to the table:

- a mark no longer requires a clean catch

- no longer any sanction for failing to take a tap PK properly (bouncing on your boot etc). This used to be a scrum to the oppo, but now it means the PK hasn't been taken and the game wasn't restarted .. take it again.

Details in the table if interested.
The first one I never noticed until the recent thread. The second w all noticed ages ago , I am sure , but somehow never added to the table.

Someone not from this site emailed me and pointed out the omission.. the table is becoming a meme! Well nearly

I wasn't going to bother posting further updates , let the thread lie now I.. but since the thread has been bounced , no harm in it.