UnderGround Forums
 

RugbyGround >> Explain these laws to me


4/2/09 3:34 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
seg
63 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 3/28/05
Posts: 8440
 
 I'm in the States and have never played rugby nor seen a live match.  However, I love the game and have taught myself most of the rules by watching recorded games and rewinding penalty calls by the ref until I figure out what he is calling. 

I struggle with the following rules:

Line outs:  I know they got rid of the "numbers" penatly recently and I believe a side can now have as many players in the line out as it chooses.  But, what does it mean when the ref calls "line out over" or something similar, and how does he know when the lineout is over?  I know that the players that were not part of the lineout have to stay out of the play until "lineout's over", but can someone expand further on this area of the game?

Touching a ball that has been knocked on:  If a player is in front of a player on his own team and is the first player to touch a ball that has been knocked on by one of his teammates this is a penalty.  I beleive it is a full penalty, as opposed to a free kick.  This happens often by total accident.  It seems the penalty should be a short arm.  A full penalty seems too harsh for an accidental touching.  Anyone agree?

Rolling maul:  You used to not be able to pull down the maul.  Now the maul can be pulled down.  Why did they change this rule, and under what circumstances can a maul be pulled down (i.e., does it have to be pulled down from the front, etc.)?

4/3/09 6:11 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
fingers 'n' teeth
54 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 10052

Line outs:  I know they got rid of the "numbers" penatly recently and I believe a side can now have as many players in the line out as it chooses.  But, what does it mean when the ref calls "line out over" or something similar, and how does he know when the lineout is over?  I know that the players that were not part of the lineout have to stay out of the play until "lineout's over", but can someone expand further on this area of the game?


the lineout ends when the ball or a player carrying the ball leaves the lineout (gets closer that 5 yards to teh touch line, further in field than 15 yards from the touchline, breaks the gainline or the ball is passed backwards to other team mates).

If a ruck or maul is formed at the lineout the lineout ends when all the feet of those involved in the ruck move beyond the line of touch (the imaginary line where the ball was thrown in).


Touching a ball that has been knocked on:  If a player is in front of a player on his own team and is the first player to touch a ball that has been knocked on by one of his teammates this is a penalty.  I beleive it is a full penalty, as opposed to a free kick.  This happens often by total accident.  It seems the penalty should be a short arm.  A full penalty seems too harsh for an accidental touching.  Anyone agree?


Rugby works on a 1st offense most of the time. If a player knocks the ball forward, its a knock on. If a team mate who was infront of him picks up the ball he is offside but the ref would probably just blow up for the knock-on rather than a penalty for offside.

If a teammate kicks the ball forward and his teammate is infront of him and fields the ball, its a penatly. Accidental offside is usually a scrum but i don't think refs give players the benefit of the doubt much.

Rolling maul:  You used to not be able to pull down the maul.  Now the maul can be pulled down.  Why did they change this rule, and under what circumstances can a maul be pulled down (i.e., does it have to be pulled down from the front, etc.)?



This is one of the new ELVs (experimental law variations). It was brought in because the consensus is that the maul is a boring strategy that slows games down and makes rugby a crap spectacle.

To pull a maul down you have to be onside (enter at teh 'gate') and on your feet. How you do it after that is arbitary.

As a point to note, when you couldn't pull down the Maul it had the effect of sucking in all the opponents forwards in an effort to stop the rolling maul. This sucked in defenders and gave teh backs more room for the 1 on 1 contests they like to have to score.
so whether this rule benefits the game is highly debatable.

Dropping mauls remains a dangerous persuit and this rule basically prevents the Maul being a valid strat.
4/4/09 2:09 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
seg
63 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 3/28/05
Posts: 8473

Thanks.  I'm a proponent of a more wide open game, but I also always like the rolling maul.  As I recall, England used it to great effect in their World Cup run a few years ago.

4/10/09 7:41 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
droc
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 9650
Red Devil Shop, Official Fedor Gear
I hate the pulling down of mauls, it's a great strategic move and a show of strength.

DROC
4/10/09 9:38 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
nathan@aristeia
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/12/02
Posts: 6988
Pulling down the maul is going to ruin the sport. If you want to watch League rugby then watch league. Rucks will be next!!
5/22/09 9:41 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Spartan1017
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/19/09
Posts: 187
nathan@aristeia - Pulling down the maul is going to ruin the sport. If you want to watch League rugby then watch league. Rucks will be next!!
better not mess with the rucks.  

PS. never liked being in a maul that is brought down but, its not as bad as a collapsing scrum, but still its not fun at all.
 

Reply Post

You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.