RugbyRebels

Banquo wrote:the ball is often out of the ruck when players get penalised, imo as soon as the 9/'dummy half' touches it, its fair game for the defence.

Mikey Brown wrote:I also like the thing where a team is running pick and goes, you have the carrier literally resting with both hands and all his weight on the ball, waiting for someone to edge offside and be told to retreat, then can simply flop forwards onto the floor. Now that’s what I call rugby.

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:the ball is often out of the ruck when players get penalised, imo as soon as the 9/'dummy half' touches it, its fair game for the defence.

My assumption in advance is that's too harsh a standard, however if they're not willing to state the ball is available much faster and insist it be played much faster it could for my money then be looked at

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:the ball is often out of the ruck when players get penalised, imo as soon as the 9/'dummy half' touches it, its fair game for the defence.

My assumption in advance is that's too harsh a standard, however if they're not willing to state the ball is available much faster and insist it be played much faster it could for my money then be looked at

why is that too harsh a standard.....are you being typical '9' about this

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:the ball is often out of the ruck when players get penalised, imo as soon as the 9/'dummy half' touches it, its fair game for the defence.

My assumption in advance is that's too harsh a standard, however if they're not willing to state the ball is available much faster and insist it be played much faster it could for my money then be looked at

why is that too harsh a standard.....are you being typical '9' about this

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
My assumption in advance is that's too harsh a standard, however if they're not willing to state the ball is available much faster and insist it be played much faster it could for my money then be looked at

why is that too harsh a standard.....are you being typical '9' about this

In part yes, but sometimes the ball really isn't available to play just because you've touched it. So I'd prefer my change in the first instance between what we have now and your more radical change, but if the alternative is the status quo I'd prefer seeing how your suggestion goes

Your suggestion is going to impact carrier, tackler and anyone coming into the ruck affecting presentation

Would you also say and hands in the ruck means the ball is played?

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: why is that too harsh a standard.....are you being typical '9' about this

In part yes, but sometimes the ball really isn't available to play just because you've touched it. So I'd prefer my change in the first instance between what we have now and your more radical change, but if the alternative is the status quo I'd prefer seeing how your suggestion goes

Your suggestion is going to impact carrier, tackler and anyone coming into the ruck affecting presentation

Would you also say and hands in the ruck means the ball is played?

Not sure I understand what you mean by your last sentence?

I guess there is the point that sometimes a 9 has to dig the ball out himself, and could be scragged as he/she is doing so.....

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Digby wrote:
In part yes, but sometimes the ball really isn't available to play just because you've touched it. So I'd prefer my change in the first instance between what we have now and your more radical change, but if the alternative is the status quo I'd prefer seeing how your suggestion goes

Your suggestion is going to impact carrier, tackler and anyone coming into the ruck affecting presentation

Would you also say and hands in the ruck means the ball is played?

Not sure I understand what you mean by your last sentence?

I guess there is the point that sometimes a 9 has to dig the ball out himself, and could be scragged as he/she is doing so.....

If the 9 going digging for the ball is taken as ball being played would anyone's hands on the ball mean the ball is available to contest?

Yes we're not supposed to see hands being used in the ruck but in practice it's often needed to keep the game moving

Cameo wrote:While we are having a moan, what about advantage nowadays. Some ref seem to think it goes on until a side scores or wins another penalty. Several times recently I have seen refs have to runs back from almost the 22 back beyond the half way line to come back for a penalty.

I get that a penalty is very valuable but it is dull watching so much rugby where only one side can really gain. You are left wondering whether it is even worth trying to win the ball back.

Haven't thought this through but how about a 5 phase limit (on top of existing measures of advantage). No need to kick it away first phase every time like wales the other week but you cant have a free attack for two minutes. If you would rather the penalty just say or drop the ball

Danno wrote:

Cameo wrote:While we are having a moan, what about advantage nowadays. Some ref seem to think it goes on until a side scores or wins another penalty. Several times recently I have seen refs have to runs back from almost the 22 back beyond the half way line to come back for a penalty.

I get that a penalty is very valuable but it is dull watching so much rugby where only one side can really gain. You are left wondering whether it is even worth trying to win the ball back.

Haven't thought this through but how about a 5 phase limit (on top of existing measures of advantage). No need to kick it away first phase every time like wales the other week but you cant have a free attack for two minutes. If you would rather the penalty just say or drop the ball

Could be worth a topic of its own. Nigel Owens had a bit to say about this on a recent Brian Moore podcast, I found it interesting.

fivepointer wrote:I actually believe the quality of reffing now is the highest it has ever been. The guys at the top level are generally very good. Goodness knows it is a fiendishly difficult job that is impossible to be anything like 100% accurate. You will always get close calls and highly marginal decisions.
My real gripe is when easy fixes are ignored. The caterpillar could be easily dealt with and backfoot offside - which is seldom picked up - could be easily policed by the assistants. Why isnt it?
Another current bugbear is players going off their feet and sealing the ball at a breakdown. Again this isnt the hardest thing to spot and penalise, but it seems to never get picked up.
And yet an arm on an opponent at a line out is spotted and every scrum that goes down, backwards or wheels results in a penalty, when its not at all obvious who is the offender.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:Alain Rolland is obviously doing a superb job.