Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | ... | 168 | 169 | 170 | 171 | 172 | 173 | 174 | 175 | 176 | 177 | 178 | 179 | 180 | 181 | 182 | 183 | 184 | 185 | 186 | 187 | 188 | ... | 202
Mad Scientist
17752 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2180

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1816125 9-Jul-2017 08:57
Send private message quote this post

to the clever lawyers of the game - "accidental offside": what is the correct ruling?


10542 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1747

Trusted

  Reply # 1816128 9-Jul-2017 09:06
Send private message quote this post

Batman:

 

to the clever lawyers of the game - "accidental offside": what is the correct ruling?

 

 

11.6 Accidental offside

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)

 

 

 

When an offside player cannot avoid being touched by the ball or by a team-mate carrying it, the player is accidentally offside. If the player’s team gains no advantage from this, play continues. If the player’s team gains an advantage, a scrum is formed with the opposing team throwing in the ball.

 

 

(b)

 

 

 

When a player hands the ball to a team-mate in front of the first player, the receiver is offside. Unless the receiver is considered to be intentionally offside (in which case a penalty kick is awarded), the receiver is accidentally offside and a scrum is formed with the opposing team throwing in the ball.

 

 

 

 


 
 
 
 


3093 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 447

Subscriber

  Reply # 1816133 9-Jul-2017 09:15
Send private message quote this post

Batman:

to the clever lawyers of the game - "accidental offside": what is the correct ruling?



Depends whether you consider the Lions number 3 to have played at the ball. It hit his chest and he initially started to wrap his arms around it, then realising his mistake, moved his arms out of the way. In the process though he moved the ball away from the advancing All Blacks players. So, it is open to interpretation whether he played at it, or it (accidentally) bounced off him. In the rules (part 11 I think), one is a penalty, one is a scrum. My money is on the latter (Poite was correct)
As I said in my previous post, Poite's biggest sin was blowing the whistle straight away rather than playing advantage, which was very definitely in the AB's favour, and indicated to me a Ref that is barely keeping up with the game.




Areas of Geek interest: Home Theatre, HTPC, Android Tablets & Phones, iProducts.

Mad Scientist
17752 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2180

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1816134 9-Jul-2017 09:18
Send private message quote this post

Dingbatt:
Batman:

 

to the clever lawyers of the game - "accidental offside": what is the correct ruling?

 



Depends whether you consider the Lions number 3 to have played at the ball. It hit his chest and he initially started to wrap his arms around it, then realising his mistake, moved his arms out of the way. In the process though he moved the ball away from the advancing All Blacks players. So, it is open to interpretation whether he played at it, or it (accidentally) bounced off him. In the rules (part 11 I think), one is a penalty, one is a scrum.
As I said in my previous post, Poite's biggest sin was blowing the whistle straight away rather than playing advantage, which was very definitely in the AB's favour, and indicated to me a Ref that is barely keeping up with the game.

 

To me it doesn't matter what the initial ruling is, if he changes his mind quickly and he is correct, it's fine.

 

Obviously if he changes his mind while BB is lining up to take the kick that's not cool. Or if he changes from a correct to a wrong ruling that's worse.


3093 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 447

Subscriber

  Reply # 1816135 9-Jul-2017 09:22
Send private message quote this post

Batman:

To me it doesn't matter what the initial ruling is, if he changes his mind quickly and he is correct, it's fine.


Obviously if he changes his mind while BB is lining up to take the kick that's not cool. Or if he changes from a correct to a wrong ruling that's worse.



But it does matter that the initial ruling stopped play instead of allowing advantage. I apologise, I was editing my post when you replied. I believe ultimately, that the scrum was (probably) correct.




Areas of Geek interest: Home Theatre, HTPC, Android Tablets & Phones, iProducts.

Mad Scientist
17752 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2180

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1816141 9-Jul-2017 09:37
Send private message quote this post

Dingbatt:
Batman:

 

To me it doesn't matter what the initial ruling is, if he changes his mind quickly and he is correct, it's fine.

 

 

 

Obviously if he changes his mind while BB is lining up to take the kick that's not cool. Or if he changes from a correct to a wrong ruling that's worse.

 



But it does matter that the initial ruling stopped play instead of allowing advantage. I apologise, I was editing my post when you replied. I believe ultimately, that the scrum was (probably) correct.

 

Ah my bad. I forgot that the AB was just about through to getting that historic try. Yes that's true, he was wrong to stop play. I've moved on since about 9.30pm last night hence I didn't recall. I'm still sulking over something that happened at the Tour de France.


10542 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1747

Trusted

  Reply # 1816142 9-Jul-2017 09:41
Send private message quote this post

Looks like the whole issue should not have happened and Kieran should have been penalised instead

 

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/international/94537872/lions-tour-jonathan-kaplan-agrees-with-warren-gatland-but-questions-ludicrous-ref

 

 


10542 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1747

Trusted

  Reply # 1816144 9-Jul-2017 09:49
Send private message quote this post

End of the day, both teams had opportunities that went begging. Put that down to pressure on themselves, and/or pressure from the opposing side. BIL has been ridiculed all through the series, the drawn series is clearly a fail for the AB's. If the AB's had won by one penalty last night, its still a fail. Although I guess the media would again say its the best team in decades, which I so hate reading. I thought all three games were very close, when you look at lost opportunities, and throwing away penalties. BIL has improved, as you would expect, being a new team thrown together. AB's need to improve if they wish to achieve the results of previous illustrious AB teams. 

 

I see its Argentina, Australia and RSA in August. How are Australia and RSA doing these days? It seems a long while that all the top teams were in tenacious form at similar times. 


903 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 85
Inactive user


  Reply # 1816145 9-Jul-2017 09:53
Send private message quote this post

Dingbatt:
Batman:

to the clever lawyers of the game - "accidental offside": what is the correct ruling?



Depends whether you consider the Lions number 3 to have played at the ball. It hit his chest and he initially started to wrap his arms around it, then realising his mistake, moved his arms out of the way. In the process though he moved the ball away from the advancing All Blacks players. So, it is open to interpretation whether he played at it, or it (accidentally) bounced off him. In the rules (part 11 I think), one is a penalty, one is a scrum. My money is on the latter (Poite was correct)
As I said in my previous post, Poite's biggest sin was blowing the whistle straight away rather than playing advantage, which was very definitely in the AB's favour, and indicated to me a Ref that is barely keeping up with the game.

Agreed that was his biggest error

Mad Scientist
17752 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2180

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1817179 9-Jul-2017 12:04
Send private message quote this post

tdgeek:

 

Looks like the whole issue should not have happened and Kieran should have been penalised instead

 

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/international/94537872/lions-tour-jonathan-kaplan-agrees-with-warren-gatland-but-questions-ludicrous-ref

 

 

 

 

I've deleted the match from mysky. Anyone can confirm? Lol so it's supposed to be 15-15 then.


3093 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 447

Subscriber

  Reply # 1817215 9-Jul-2017 13:19
Send private message quote this post

Reid's challenge in the air was addressed in the same TMO referral as the accidental offside. He was deemed not to have infringed. All Kaplan piping up proves is that there is too much left to the Ref's interpretation of the rules.

Things I would like to see changed in the rules, some of which were highlighted by this series;

Players who endanger themselves by falling into, or jumping up, when about to be tackled, should be sanctioned, or at the least, should be used in mitigation for the punishment meted out to the tackler.
Rolling mauls should be banned as an abomination of the rule whereby supporting players are not allowed to be in front of the ball carrier or obstruct defenders reaching the ball carrier. It is not American Football.
Loosehead props should be allowed to place their hand on the ground to stabilize that side of the scrum. IMO this would lead to less collapses, less resets. There is probably some good front row reason it's not done, I wouldn't know, I never played in the front row.
Team captains should get one referral to the TMO per half. There are numerous examples of off the ball play by both sides that made a material difference to the game.
If a player that is making every effort to clear the ruck, is pinned by the opposition and not allowed to get clear, it should not be a penalty.
'Taking a dive' should receive sanction, as should milking a penalty.

I don't know whether Reid's bang on the head affected his judgement, but his holding back of Farrell (I think) right in front of the Ref, that led to Daly's 55m penalty changed the momentum of the game. I think I got that right, I too have wiped the recording of the game.




Areas of Geek interest: Home Theatre, HTPC, Android Tablets & Phones, iProducts.

Mad Scientist
17752 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2180

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1817285 9-Jul-2017 14:57
Send private message quote this post

Dingbatt: Reid's challenge in the air was addressed in the same TMO referral as the accidental offside. He was deemed not to have infringed. All Kaplan piping up proves is that there is too much left to the Ref's interpretation of the rules.

Things I would like to see changed in the rules, some of which were highlighted by this series;

Players who endanger themselves by falling into, or jumping up, when about to be tackled, should be sanctioned, or at the least, should be used in mitigation for the punishment meted out to the tackler.
Rolling mauls should be banned as an abomination of the rule whereby supporting players are not allowed to be in front of the ball carrier or obstruct defenders reaching the ball carrier. It is not American Football.
Loosehead props should be allowed to place their hand on the ground to stabilize that side of the scrum. IMO this would lead to less collapses, less resets. There is probably some good front row reason it's not done, I wouldn't know, I never played in the front row.
Team captains should get one referral to the TMO per half. There are numerous examples of off the ball play by both sides that made a material difference to the game.
If a player that is making every effort to clear the ruck, is pinned by the opposition and not allowed to get clear, it should not be a penalty.
'Taking a dive' should receive sanction, as should milking a penalty.

I don't know whether Reid's bang on the head affected his judgement, but his holding back of Farrell (I think) right in front of the Ref, that led to Daly's 55m penalty changed the momentum of the game. I think I got that right, I too have wiped the recording of the game.

 

Haha they all have bangs to their heads, so their judgement are always affected :)


10542 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1747

Trusted

  Reply # 1817423 9-Jul-2017 18:18
Send private message quote this post

What irritates me is the penalty scrum. AB's had a scrum. Commentators, said lets go for a penalty scrum. It happened. What about playing the game, tries, conversions??? Or maybe we scrap tries and just play for penalties??  1 for a try, 1 for a conversion, 5 for a penalty. Half glass empty stuff. 


Mad Scientist
17752 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2180

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1817426 9-Jul-2017 18:29
Send private message quote this post

Scrum penalty.

 

I don't think you can "go for a scrum penalty". If you dominate the scrum and the other guys collapse the scrum you get a penalty. It's not up to you to dominate or to collapse the scrum but technically it's caused by the other team. 

 

You also can't half dominate the scrum. If the scrum is even, you risk collapsing it conceding a penalty. Might as well push as hard as you can and see what happens. Though I am told the tighthead prop [and sometimes the loosie also] has semi legal (could well be illegal) tricks on how to make the other guy cry and collapse.


3093 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 447

Subscriber

  Reply # 1817452 9-Jul-2017 19:39
Send private message quote this post

tdgeek:

What irritates me is the penalty scrum. AB's had a scrum. Commentators, said lets go for a penalty scrum. It happened. What about playing the game, tries, conversions??? Or maybe we scrap tries and just play for penalties??  1 for a try, 1 for a conversion, 5 for a penalty. Half glass empty stuff. 



Ironically, as I understand the history of the game, a try, grounding the ball over the line, was rewarded by a 'try' at kicking a goal.




Areas of Geek interest: Home Theatre, HTPC, Android Tablets & Phones, iProducts.

1 | ... | 168 | 169 | 170 | 171 | 172 | 173 | 174 | 175 | 176 | 177 | 178 | 179 | 180 | 181 | 182 | 183 | 184 | 185 | 186 | 187 | 188 | ... | 202
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

New Zealand's IT industry in 2018 and beyond
Posted 22-Jan-2018 12:50


Introducing your new workplace headache: Gen Z
Posted 22-Jan-2018 12:45


Jucy set to introduce electric campervan fleet
Posted 22-Jan-2018 12:41


Hawaiki cable system will be ready for service in June 2018
Posted 22-Jan-2018 12:32


New Zealand hits peak broadband data
Posted 18-Jan-2018 12:21


Amazon Echo devices coming to New Zealand early February 2018
Posted 18-Jan-2018 10:53


$3.74 million for new electric vehicles in New Zealand
Posted 17-Jan-2018 11:27


Nova 2i: Value, not excitement from Huawei
Posted 17-Jan-2018 09:02


Less news in Facebook News Feed revamp
Posted 15-Jan-2018 13:15


Australian Government contract awarded to Datacom Connect
Posted 11-Jan-2018 08:37


Why New Zealand needs a chief technology officer
Posted 6-Jan-2018 13:59


Amazon release Silk Browser and Firefox for Fire TV
Posted 21-Dec-2017 13:42


New Chief Technology Officer role created
Posted 19-Dec-2017 22:18


All I want for Christmas is a new EV
Posted 19-Dec-2017 19:54


How clever is this: AI will create 2.3 million jobs by 2020
Posted 19-Dec-2017 19:52



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.