It is currently Sun May 28, 2017 6:00 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Side entry at maul. 
Author Message
Post Side entry at maul.
Chris , one for you, our resident laws expert.
Watched the Otago - Tasman game this weekend and at one maul the ball came out and was just laying there behind the scrum half's feet, Unnoticed by the Tasman players.
Adam Thompson came around and picked up the ball and was at once penalized for side entry, but if the ball is out of the maul, isn't the maul over and side entry shouldn't be a problem. :scratch:


Mon Sep 13, 2010 9:35 pm
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 4:28 pm
Posts: 57599
Location: Sunny Resolven
Post Re: Side entry at maul.
Old Fart wrote:
Chris , one for you, our resident laws expert.
Watched the Otago - Tasman game this weekend and at one maul the ball came out and was just laying there behind the scrum half's feet, Unnoticed by the Tasman players.
Adam Thompson came around and picked up the ball and was at once penalized for side entry, but if the ball is out of the maul, isn't the maul over and side entry shouldn't be a problem. :scratch:



SJ is the laws expert :thumbright:

But, you are right, as long as the start of the forward motiuon of the player was from behind the rearmost feet, and not from the side of the maul. But that would be an offside call, but he might call it as side entry.

_________________
OSPREYS REGIONAL RUGBY - The One true region - SOUTH West is best Boys Butti Innit

Internet Marketing Consultancy - SEO Agony Uncle


Mon Sep 13, 2010 10:55 pm
Profile E-mail
World XV Player
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 7:11 pm
Posts: 5568
Location: Hampshire
Post Re: Side entry at maul.
Who said it was side entry? Ref or commentator? Signal for offside and side entry quite similar and could have been confused. If ball out then maul over and player must come from behind offside line ie back foot

_________________
"The goal of coaching is the goal of good management: to make the most of an organization's valuable resources." -- HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW


Tue Sep 14, 2010 8:39 am
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 4:28 pm
Posts: 57599
Location: Sunny Resolven
Post Re: Side entry at maul.
SJ wrote:
Who said it was side entry? Ref or commentator? Signal for offside and side entry quite similar and could have been confused. If ball out then maul over and player must come from behind offside line ie back foot



That was my thought as well Steve, I have heard commentators call badly in almost every match. Ref signals side entry to ruck, commentator claims it was for going off their feet. I sometimes wonder where they get these guys from or if they actually spend any time learning the signals and more importantly the laws.

In the Blues game on the weekend, the commentator kept harping on about the poor Blues defence for the first try when it was obvious to Stevie Wonder or ray Charles that the ref got in the way and the Blues 6 was prevented from making the tackle (should have pushed the ref into the ball carrier for a scrum but that is another story :) )

_________________
OSPREYS REGIONAL RUGBY - The One true region - SOUTH West is best Boys Butti Innit

Internet Marketing Consultancy - SEO Agony Uncle


Tue Sep 14, 2010 8:46 am
Profile E-mail
Post Re: Side entry at maul.
One mistake on my part, it was a ruck not a maul . I claim senile immunity, sorry.
I thought ref signalled side entry and commentators said same. Thompson was definitely not offside as he was bound to the ruck before he went for the ball.


Tue Sep 14, 2010 4:14 pm
World XV Player
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 7:11 pm
Posts: 5568
Location: Hampshire
Post Re: Side entry at maul.
Old Fart wrote:
One mistake on my part, it was a ruck not a maul . I claim senile immunity, sorry.
I thought ref signalled side entry and commentators said same. Thompson was definitely not offside as he was bound to the ruck before he went for the ball.


Ref probably felt that he had joined the ruck illegally but felt it wasn't material until he then snaffled the ball from an illegal position, would be my guess. ie he joined the ruck in the side but there was no material affect on the ruck or winning the ball but it did become material when he was then close enough to leap on the loose ball. Does that make sense in the context of what you saw?

_________________
"The goal of coaching is the goal of good management: to make the most of an organization's valuable resources." -- HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW


Tue Sep 14, 2010 4:38 pm
Profile
Post Re: Side entry at maul.
Sj, I see what you are saying, but what I wanted to confirm was that if the ball is out, well clear of the ruck, then the ruck situation is no longer in contention, therefore the only way he could have been penalized was for offside, which he clearly wasn't.
Plus the ref was terrible ALL through the game.


Tue Sep 14, 2010 4:48 pm
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 4:28 pm
Posts: 57599
Location: Sunny Resolven
Post Re: Side entry at maul.
No Bri, What SJ is saying is that the guy joined the ruck from the side, but had no material affect on the game UNTIL he moved forward, so the ref could call either offside, or the original offence of coming in from the side.

_________________
OSPREYS REGIONAL RUGBY - The One true region - SOUTH West is best Boys Butti Innit

Internet Marketing Consultancy - SEO Agony Uncle


Tue Sep 14, 2010 8:54 pm
Profile E-mail
Post Re: Side entry at maul.
Chris, Tough to adjudicate. :?
So what we seen is a tough decision any way we go.
I understand now why ex players don't want to be refs. :)


Tue Sep 14, 2010 11:17 pm
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 4:28 pm
Posts: 57599
Location: Sunny Resolven
Post Re: Side entry at maul.
Why tough?

The ref might have said (we shall assume he was wearing 7 ) " get outta there 7, don't go 7 leave it" but 7 ignored and went, so he got pinged.

Not tough at all. people can accidentally infringe, and providing it has no material effect on the game all is well, people misread the ball being out, step forward, realise the mistake and step back etc, I agree though that it is a split second adjudication by the ref on which way to play it.

_________________
OSPREYS REGIONAL RUGBY - The One true region - SOUTH West is best Boys Butti Innit

Internet Marketing Consultancy - SEO Agony Uncle


Tue Sep 14, 2010 11:44 pm
Profile E-mail
Mini Player

Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2014 4:11 pm
Posts: 3
Post Re: Side entry at maul.
On a tangent, but it's a nagging question which I can't find an answer to ... Calling all rugby anoraks! - Why is it not possible to form a maul in Rugby League - Which law, specifically, rules it out of the question ??


Mon Jun 02, 2014 4:48 pm
Profile E-mail
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 4:28 pm
Posts: 57599
Location: Sunny Resolven
Post Re: Side entry at maul.
Frankly My Dear wrote:
On a tangent, but it's a nagging question which I can't find an answer to ... Calling all rugby anoraks! - Why is it not possible to form a maul in Rugby League - Which law, specifically, rules it out of the question ??



The tackle laws prevent a maul being formed. http://www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/rules/o ... laytheball

_________________
OSPREYS REGIONAL RUGBY - The One true region - SOUTH West is best Boys Butti Innit

Internet Marketing Consultancy - SEO Agony Uncle


Mon Jun 02, 2014 5:49 pm
Profile E-mail
Mini Player

Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2014 4:11 pm
Posts: 3
Post Re: Side entry at maul.
All I can see in the link provided is, 'It is illegal to tackle or obstruct a player who is not in possession' - So that one line deals with it? Some clearer definitions would have been nice.


Tue Jun 03, 2014 1:43 pm
Profile E-mail
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 4:28 pm
Posts: 57599
Location: Sunny Resolven
Post Re: Side entry at maul.
Apologies I thought it was covered there.

The answer to your question is that the ball can only be 'ripped' in a one on one situation, also the team mates of player in possession are not allowed to get involved in the tackle area, only the play the ball area after the tackle has been completed.

The two laws above make any sort of mauling illegal.

Hope that helps :thumbright:

_________________
OSPREYS REGIONAL RUGBY - The One true region - SOUTH West is best Boys Butti Innit

Internet Marketing Consultancy - SEO Agony Uncle


Tue Jun 03, 2014 7:58 pm
Profile E-mail
World XV Player
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2011 6:24 pm
Posts: 42791
Location: Llanharan
Post Re: Side entry at maul.
I can still hear a Scottish crowd at Murrayfield baying at the referee for penalising a Scottish flanker for harassing Mike Phillips.

The flanker moved offside, was never onside after that, and then tackled Mike when he moved forward.

Penalty! 3 points.


Wed Jun 04, 2014 8:24 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: