Chat Forum
It is currently Wed Nov 13, 2019 1:38 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 64 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 9:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15793
The latest ignored law by all the refs and TJ’s is the offside line.
Arguably this is the most important law.

As it stands, as long as everybody not in a ruck stands (in unison) a half a metre to a metre ahead of the hind foot, at best everybody gets warned to get back but just ignores it and worst, it’s nit even commented on.

Every team is going to test his much they can get away with but it seems so obvious at the moment that there needs to be a need of a reminder from the top down.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 9:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11760
Weren’t they changed from TJs to ARs to give them more responsibilities.

Honest question, what are they allowed to call on?

They only ever seem to do touch line, and foul play. Never see them raising a flag for offside, forward pass. Can they?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 10:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15793
I’m assuming they can tell the ref anything they want in his earpiece and he can choose to use it or not.

I think the issue is the usual “keep the game flowing” nonsense that refs don’t want to be seen to be “whistle happy” etc.

Players will adjust eventually if they get penalised enough.
Things settle down afterwards back to how it used to be.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 10:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8167
materiality, empathy, ball in play/being recycled, clear and obvious and I find it hard to believe that 1) the game is being ruined as a result, 2) it's as bad as you claim and 3) it's not being penalised


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 10:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6032
They can't even determine a straight feed to the scrum right in front of them what makes you think that they can see a straight line across the pitch?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 10:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15793
Hong Kong wrote:
materiality, empathy, ball in play/being recycled, clear and obvious and I find it hard to believe that 1) the game is being ruined as a result, 2) it's as bad as you claim and 3) it's not being penalised


Clearly, you are not alone amongst your colleagues but I disagree.
The game is suffering bsy from a lack of space.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 11:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9320
Location: Texas
Yourmother wrote:
Never see them raising a flag for offside, forward pass. Can they?
I expect they might if they weren’t wired to talk directly to the refs. You would have heard refs say “Call from the sideline” or the commentators point out the same?

You’ll see them put their hands to the chest from time to time to speak up.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 11:46 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 4:58 pm
Posts: 18554
It’ll probably be the hot topic for RWC, refs will clamp down on it for 2 rounds and then forget it again, just hope they tell the teams the AR’s are going to police and it’s actually enforced


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 11:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 9:10 pm
Posts: 3481
It's impossible in real time for the ref to assess ruck after ruck, phase after phase where the actual hind most foot is. The Underhill non try v NZ proved this. It took several minutes and replays to establish it and even then there was much debate after it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 1:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1061
Clive Simms wrote:
It's impossible in real time for the ref to assess ruck after ruck, phase after phase where the actual hind most foot is. The Underhill non try v NZ proved this. It took several minutes and replays to establish it and even then there was much debate after it.

There are always going to be marginal offsides missed or onsides wrongly penalised. That's not the issue. The issue is refs are letting blatant offsides 'by a mile' go unpunished atm.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 2:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14157
Location: We'll Never Forget You Geordan D'Arcy
All sides are doing it. But England aren't even being subtle about it. They're tunneling under it and popping up two yards offside, with time to clamber out of the hole, clear the clags of mud from around their studs before trundling off in the general direction of the oppo receivers. Frigging comical.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 2:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14157
Location: We'll Never Forget You Geordan D'Arcy
We're also at a point where underage sides might as well go down the route of training props to throw the ball into lineouts because specialist hookers are no longer needed. Just pack down with three props.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 2:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 23627
Flametop wrote:
Hong Kong wrote:
materiality, empathy, ball in play/being recycled, clear and obvious and I find it hard to believe that 1) the game is being ruined as a result, 2) it's as bad as you claim and 3) it's not being penalised


Clearly, you are not alone amongst your colleagues but I disagree.
The game is suffering bsy from a lack of space.


The lack of space yesterday was mostly due to either team putting numbers into the ruck. No coincidence all the Trys came after set pieces. A lineout from England and 2 scrums from Wales.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 3:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17926
Location: Centre of the Universe
pigaaaa wrote:
Clive Simms wrote:
It's impossible in real time for the ref to assess ruck after ruck, phase after phase where the actual hind most foot is. The Underhill non try v NZ proved this. It took several minutes and replays to establish it and even then there was much debate after it.

There are always going to be marginal offsides missed or onsides wrongly penalised. That's not the issue. The issue is refs are letting blatant offsides 'by a mile' go unpunished atm.


Agreed. It's entirely possible for an AR to stand level with the back of the ruck and look for 'daylight' between the pile of bodies and the feet of the defenders. Even if you're going to allow them to be level, there seems to be someone at most phases who's stood in no man's land and/or jumps up early.

I don't like the 'materiality' excuse in these cases, because seeing defenders stood where they are and knowing that pens aren't really going to come for the marginal jump aheads causes attackers to lie a bit deeper and rely mostly on one-out crash balls because playing deep is too risky.

... not to mention all the shenanigans allowed (hands in, laying on that requires a more difficult and sometimes illegal cleanout just to shift a prone body, etc.) at the breakdown that slows down recycling, allows defenders time to get set up in their dodgy positions, and be more than ready to rush at attackers.

It's entire 'material' to the decisions made between phases, and has largely contributed to stifling attacking play, more kicks, and favouring set piece and penalties rather than open rugby.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 6:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3005
One of the easiest aspects of the game to police - whether or not a ball is thrown in straight to a lineout - seems to be heading in the same direction as the scrum feed. I've lost count of the times I've seen squint balls ignored by referees. How long before the hooker will throw directly to the scrum halves and the need for tall athletic forwards is gone? Comparing the lineout to the scrummage suggests that is the way the game will go (much to its detriment as a fair contest in the air is a thing of beauty and skill).

And yes, I was a lineout jumper in the days before I would struggle to get a sheet of paper under my feet if I jumped.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 6:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:34 am
Posts: 17057
Fenman wrote:
One of the easiest aspects of the game to police - whether or not a ball is thrown in straight to a lineout - seems to be heading in the same direction as the scrum feed. I've lost count of the times I've seen squint balls ignored by referees. How long before the hooker will throw directly to the scrum halves and the need for tall athletic forwards is gone? Comparing the lineout to the scrummage suggests that is the way the game will go (much to its detriment as a fair contest in the air is a thing of beauty and skill).

And yes, I was a lineout jumper in the days before I would struggle to get a sheet of paper under my feet if I jumped.

This was policed to the law 3/4 yrs ago and it resulted in many infringements. Too many for WR's liking. All the sudden it was totally ignored. IMO it was just causing too many stoppages.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 6:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 18842
Yet another FT ref whinging thread. He's as bad as C69 now.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 6:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2018 11:18 pm
Posts: 906
The offside thing really annoys me. World Rugby bangs on about trying to make the game more open, with more running rugby to make it more attractive, but the one thing that really closes the game down is allowing players to break the offside line in defence.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 7:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15793
Uncle Fester wrote:
Yet another FT ref whinging thread. He's as bad as C69 now.


Where’s my apology you cûnt.

:lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 10:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15636
Hong Kong wrote:
materiality, empathy, ball in play/being recycled, clear and obvious and I find it hard to believe that 1) the game is being ruined as a result, 2) it's as bad as you claim and 3) it's not being penalised


Assuming that the OP is not talking about returning or back-pedalling defenders, but an organised defence. In which case, those are BS with respect to a straight a out call as to whether the defenders over the line formed by the hindmost, or not call. For instance, The materiality is varied depending on how the team in possession reacts to having the attacking options cut down or snuffed out, so don't even go there trying to assess that, just call it for what is it, a disruptive illegal tactic, and penalise it for pity's sake.

It is ruining the game and has been for years along with blockers and dummy runners.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 10:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15636
Clive Simms wrote:
It's impossible in real time for the ref to assess ruck after ruck, phase after phase where the actual hind most foot is. The Underhill non try v NZ proved this. It took several minutes and replays to establish it and even then there was much debate after it.


I don't think that was the issue at all. It was quite obvious early on that it was off-side. The TMO and ref were being very cautious as recognition of the importance of the moment. Some churlish people might characterise the repeated reviews as a vain hope in finding a different outcome than the patently obvious one, which somewhat fuelled the subsequent debate.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 10:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 18044
Location: End of the road, turn right and first house on the left
The other point to note is that the starting point is from when the ball exits the set play - not when a one-eyed fan looks (or when the TV angle alters so that you can see more of the field).

If there was doubt (and remember there are rarely convenient lines drawn) which way should the ref go?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 10:25 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 22397
With the help of the refs the offside rush defence has become a real weapon in preventing opposition backlines from getting going this season


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 10:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 18184
I made the point on another thread t'other day that the only way we're ever going to reasonably fix this is by linking the GPS trackers they've all got in the back of their jersey's to a computer system that tracks positions relative to ruck positions.

Having said that, players are so bloody quick these days, and are primed for rush defences, that I'd bet if you did the proper analysis on all the "He was definitely offside" situations, most would probably turn out to be marginal (which is why I also suggested that we ought to move the offside line back 1 metre as well).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 11:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1486
Ted. wrote:
Hong Kong wrote:
materiality, empathy, ball in play/being recycled, clear and obvious and I find it hard to believe that 1) the game is being ruined as a result, 2) it's as bad as you claim and 3) it's not being penalised


Assuming that the OP is not talking about returning or back-pedalling defenders, but an organised defence. In which case, those are BS with respect to a straight a out call as to whether the defenders over the line formed by the hindmost, or not call. For instance, The materiality is varied depending on how the team in possession reacts to having the attacking options cut down or snuffed out, so don't even go there trying to assess that, just call it for what is it, a disruptive illegal tactic, and penalise it for pity's sake.

It is ruining the game and has been for years along with blockers and dummy runners.


:thumbup:
My sentiments exactly , frequently stated here and always dismissed/attacked by the 'bored ref'.
I'd add jumping across the line at lineout[ offside play] and the great abomination of the game , Rolling Mauls.

The protocols between AR's & Refs are not clearly defined or laid out.
It appears as though the ref can , at his discretion , designate total control/surveillance of the Offside Line to the ARs but it is at his/her discretion and nobody but the Refereeing panel are aware of the protocol for any particular match.

In this day & age , not good enough IMO.

Technology could assist greatly but the public reaction to frequently flawed TMO intervention has peeved a significant number of the paying public , so reluctance to venture further down the technological game control is understandably on the back burner.

My contention goes further , the possibility of Rugby refs influencing game results by discretionary application of the breakdown laws,offside line , advantage etc has not gone unnoticed by the gambling industry and it is they who stand to lose most by the introduction of more technolgy.

Bad for business, won't happen.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 25, 2019 12:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2015 12:58 am
Posts: 2426
Location: P-town
Come on Chaps be fair without blatantly playing offside the NH sides wouldn't have a shitshow of winning the world cup. Like my old coach used to say, if one team is frequently breaking the rules and getting away with it, copy them! Chances are the ref is not actually biased just hopeless. This is what pissed me off the most about the Lions/ABs. The ABs didn't adapt at all. You must play the ref as much as the other team.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 25, 2019 12:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3202
redderneck wrote:
We're also at a point where underage sides might as well go down the route of training props to throw the ball into lineouts because specialist hookers are no longer needed. Just pack down with three props.


Don't disagree - I think most teams should have capable lineout throwers in more than one position (prop, hooker, non-jumping loose-forward - going the old winger route might not work so well in the modern game though). Hookers should be being moulded as either an extra prop (emphasis on scrumaging) or an extra big-bodied loose-forward (emphasis on the break down/open field play). Having the option of picking both for "horses for courses" approach would be great best depth - if you're worried about scrum-time or think it will be a key-edge, take the extra prop, otherwise go for the extra loose-forward (most likely a blindside type build, allowing a bit more scope for two fetchers). Potentially allows for a slightly more flexible bench as well, if you don't need a dedicated backup lineout thrower.

Unless the engagement is completely changed back to how it was (which won't be happening for safety/making the game shit reasons), straight scrum-feeds are simply not feasible in the modern game and won't be coming back.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 25, 2019 12:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 18044
Location: End of the road, turn right and first house on the left
Quote:
The protocols between AR's & Refs are not clearly defined or laid out.


I bet they are in the pre-game meetings. Touch judges couldn't adjudicate that back in my day (but this subject was always brought up at half time if they saw a problem) but they can now and I bet it it is well covered.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 25, 2019 12:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6849
Location: Madrid
Kahu wrote:
Come on Chaps be fair without blatantly playing offside the NH sides wouldn't have a shitshow of winning the world cup. Like my old coach used to say, if one team is frequently breaking the rules and getting away with it, copy them! Chances are the ref is not actually biased just hopeless. This is what pissed me off the most about the Lions/ABs. The ABs didn't adapt at all. You must play the ref as much as the other team.


It's brilliant isn't it? Watching the home nations have a go about the offside line now :lol: :lol: I saw English posters bitching about Wales killing and slowing down their ball, comedy gold.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 25, 2019 12:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15636
Demilich wrote:
redderneck wrote:
We're also at a point where underage sides might as well go down the route of training props to throw the ball into lineouts because specialist hookers are no longer needed. Just pack down with three props.


Don't disagree - I think most teams should have capable lineout throwers in more than one position (prop, hooker, non-jumping loose-forward - going the old winger route might not work so well in the modern game though). Hookers should be being moulded as either an extra prop (emphasis on scrumaging) or an extra big-bodied loose-forward (emphasis on the break down/open field play). Having the option of picking both for "horses for courses" approach would be great best depth - if you're worried about scrum-time or think it will be a key-edge, take the extra prop, otherwise go for the extra loose-forward (most likely a blindside type build, allowing a bit more scope for two fetchers). Potentially allows for a slightly more flexible bench as well, if you don't need a dedicated backup lineout thrower.

Unless the engagement is completely changed back to how it was (which won't be happening for safety/making the game shit reasons), straight scrum-feeds are simply not feasible in the modern game and won't be coming back.


And lose a couple of players to create the perfect game?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 25, 2019 12:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3202
Ted. wrote:
Demilich wrote:
redderneck wrote:
We're also at a point where underage sides might as well go down the route of training props to throw the ball into lineouts because specialist hookers are no longer needed. Just pack down with three props.


Don't disagree - I think most teams should have capable lineout throwers in more than one position (prop, hooker, non-jumping loose-forward - going the old winger route might not work so well in the modern game though). Hookers should be being moulded as either an extra prop (emphasis on scrumaging) or an extra big-bodied loose-forward (emphasis on the break down/open field play). Having the option of picking both for "horses for courses" approach would be great best depth - if you're worried about scrum-time or think it will be a key-edge, take the extra prop, otherwise go for the extra loose-forward (most likely a blindside type build, allowing a bit more scope for two fetchers). Potentially allows for a slightly more flexible bench as well, if you don't need a dedicated backup lineout thrower.

Unless the engagement is completely changed back to how it was (which won't be happening for safety/making the game shit reasons), straight scrum-feeds are simply not feasible in the modern game and won't be coming back.


And lose a couple of players to create the perfect game?


Nope, that's actually BoB's suggestion (not making that up either). :lol:

Not suggesting any changes to the rules or interpretations - just makes sense that a hooker is a slightly less specialised position, now that hooking isn't actually necessary. Already seeing a lot more emphasis on open field ability for hookers.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 25, 2019 2:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15636
Demilich wrote:
Ted. wrote:
Demilich wrote:
redderneck wrote:
We're also at a point where underage sides might as well go down the route of training props to throw the ball into lineouts because specialist hookers are no longer needed. Just pack down with three props.


Don't disagree - I think most teams should have capable lineout throwers in more than one position (prop, hooker, non-jumping loose-forward - going the old winger route might not work so well in the modern game though). Hookers should be being moulded as either an extra prop (emphasis on scrumaging) or an extra big-bodied loose-forward (emphasis on the break down/open field play). Having the option of picking both for "horses for courses" approach would be great best depth - if you're worried about scrum-time or think it will be a key-edge, take the extra prop, otherwise go for the extra loose-forward (most likely a blindside type build, allowing a bit more scope for two fetchers). Potentially allows for a slightly more flexible bench as well, if you don't need a dedicated backup lineout thrower.

Unless the engagement is completely changed back to how it was (which won't be happening for safety/making the game shit reasons), straight scrum-feeds are simply not feasible in the modern game and won't be coming back.


And lose a couple of players to create the perfect game?


Nope, that's actually BoB's suggestion (not making that up either). :lol:

Not suggesting any changes to the rules or interpretations - just makes sense that a hooker is a slightly less specialised position, now that hooking isn't actually necessary. Already seeing a lot more emphasis on open field ability for hookers.


:thumbup:

Although, as suggested up page, I like the idea of retaining the requirement for differing body shapes for the various rugby positions, especially in the forwards.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 25, 2019 2:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 31876
Location: in transit
https://newsthump.com/2015/09/18/dull-m ... nderstand/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 25, 2019 3:09 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2398
Location: Middle of nowhere, just off the A420. .
redderneck wrote:
We're also at a point where underage sides might as well go down the route of training props to throw the ball into lineouts because specialist hookers are no longer needed. Just pack down with three props.


There's no rule (as far as I know), as to who throws the ball in, years ago it was the fly half..


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 25, 2019 4:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2018 4:41 am
Posts: 1474
TB63 wrote:
redderneck wrote:
We're also at a point where underage sides might as well go down the route of training props to throw the ball into lineouts because specialist hookers are no longer needed. Just pack down with three props.


There's no rule (as far as I know), as to who throws the ball in, years ago it was the fly half..

Wingers when I started - the Boyce brothers popularised the overhead spiral throw.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 4:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1486
Enzedder wrote:
Quote:
The protocols between AR's & Refs are not clearly defined or laid out.


I bet they are in the pre-game meetings. Touch judges couldn't adjudicate that back in my day (but this subject was always brought up at half time if they saw a problem) but they can now and I bet it it is well covered.


My point is they are not formal , ie written.

There are plenty of examples where AR's call the offside line but there are also just as many if not more when it is apparent they do not.

The match referee decides, not the rule book.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 4:51 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1486
guy smiley wrote:
https://newsthump.com/2015/09/18/dull-middle-class-men-to-spend-six-weeks-boring-on-about-sport-they-dont-understand/

:nod:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 7:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8167
grouch wrote:
Enzedder wrote:
Quote:
The protocols between AR's & Refs are not clearly defined or laid out.


I bet they are in the pre-game meetings. Touch judges couldn't adjudicate that back in my day (but this subject was always brought up at half time if they saw a problem) but they can now and I bet it it is well covered.


My point is they are not formal , ie written.

There are plenty of examples where AR's call the offside line but there are also just as many if not more when it is apparent they do not.

The match referee decides, not the rule book.

the law book is already abused enough as being too difficult, too complex, too confusing, blah blah blah... WTF would you want to add to that 'misery' by including a section on what the ARs should do?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 7:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11760
I think by formalised he doesn’t mean change to the law book but a WR clarification/emphasis that ARs should be pulling up offsides.

Even in chavball they manage this.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2019 7:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8167
not sure what clarification or interpretation WR can give to help. The ARs are there as their name suggests to assist the ref. The ref is in charge of the game and, as Enz referred to earlier, he will brief the ARs on exactly what he wants and I'm pretty confident, most refs will only ask for the clear and obvious. Which takes us back to my original point - I'm not convinced the game is such a perilous state and that so many C&O offsides are being missed


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 64 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: assfly, Beaver_Shark, Big Nipper, BlackMac, Blake, BokJock, danny_fitz, DOB, Fangle, Flyin Ryan, Fritz Lung, Google Adsense [Bot], Gospel, Grouchmonkey, hermie, inactionman, Jensrsa, Keith, La soule, Leffe, Mog The Almighty, Monk Zombie, Mr Fedora, Mr. Very Popular, nardol, Nolanator, Rinkals, ruckinhell, Sandstorm, Standoffski, Sydvicious, tabascoboy, themaddog, UncleFB, unseenwork and 1 guest


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

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group