Annoyance over forward passes

Forum to discuss everything that is Tigers related

Moderators: Rizzo, Tigerbeat, Tigers Press Office, Tigers Webmaster

JP14
Super User
Super User
Posts: 5785
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 7:37 am
Location: Neverland

Annoyance over forward passes

Post by JP14 » Sun Aug 23, 2020 11:17 am

There was evidence of this versus Bath yesterday but I also noted it watching the highlights of Saracens vs Harlequins that if a player does an inside pass, a tip-on pass or a round-the-defender-offload it doesn't matter the trajectory of said pass and it is play on...

Did I miss a rule change of something?
Last edited by JP14 on Sun Aug 23, 2020 11:19 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Our Greatest Glory Is Not In Never Failing, But In Rising Every Time We Fall" Confucius

JP14
Super User
Super User
Posts: 5785
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 7:37 am
Location: Neverland

Re: Annoyance over forward passes

Post by JP14 » Sun Aug 23, 2020 11:18 am

Forgive my pedantry but it is something that is really grinding my gears recently. Even Austin couldn't believe that a Bath try was given by the TMO...
"Our Greatest Glory Is Not In Never Failing, But In Rising Every Time We Fall" Confucius

Big Dai
Super User
Super User
Posts: 4613
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 6:04 pm
Location: Abergavenny

Re: Annoyance over forward passes

Post by Big Dai » Sun Aug 23, 2020 12:07 pm

JP14 wrote:
Sun Aug 23, 2020 11:18 am
Forgive my pedantry but it is something that is really grinding my gears recently. Even Austin couldn't believe that a Bath try was given by the TMO...
I think its just one of those laws that interferes with the flow of the modern game.

Offside, hookers standing on the pitch to throw in, squint put ins and those forward passes all show a change in emphasis in the game.

It's not pedantry. Just a desire to uphold the laws in my view.
Exile Wigstonite living in Wales.
Poet laureate of the "One Eyed Turk".
Bar stool philosopher in the "Wilted Daffodil"

daktari
Bronze Member
Bronze Member
Posts: 426
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 10:23 am
Location: UK

Re: Annoyance over forward passes

Post by daktari » Sun Aug 23, 2020 1:16 pm

Also, player not bound on at the front a maul ...pretty sure just touching with your finger tips doesn’t count
find a better way of life, http://www.marillion.com

marillion 19, coming ....er not sure..

Tiglon
Super User
Super User
Posts: 2099
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 8:54 pm

Re: Annoyance over forward passes

Post by Tiglon » Sun Aug 23, 2020 1:41 pm

Agreed.

You can add to that almost every law relating to the ruck - routinely ignored.

Either change the laws to reflect the way matches are refereed, or change the way matches are refereed to reflect the laws. It's absolutely bonkers that we seem to have unspoken rules about how the game should be refereed instead of using the written laws.

Crofty
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 342
Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:07 pm
Location: The bagging area (unexpectedly)

Re: Annoyance over forward passes

Post by Crofty » Sun Aug 23, 2020 2:02 pm

I think they are trying to crack down on the ruck in terms of telling referees to referee it more tightly to the laws, hopefully it'll stick a bit better than their attempts to have the scrum refereed to the laws, that was a good six weeks while it lasted...
No, not that one!

Remember, whatever you do to the smallest of the backs you do to his prop, and you can't avoid the rucks and mauls forever...

Wayne Richardson Fan Club
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1666
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 11:53 am
Location: Barrowford, near the Witches

Re: Annoyance over forward passes

Post by Wayne Richardson Fan Club » Sun Aug 23, 2020 3:00 pm

The hookers throwing in is rarely penalised these days, surely the touch judge should be sorting that out, the hole idea is the ball is being put back into play...
The forward pass for the one try was embarrassing, the noise from an even partially full WR would of been deafening...look at the hands that's the give away.
To win is not as important as playing with style!

JP14
Super User
Super User
Posts: 5785
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 7:37 am
Location: Neverland

Re: Annoyance over forward passes

Post by JP14 » Sun Aug 23, 2020 4:09 pm

Or just look at the footage, as Austin said it was clear enough.
"Our Greatest Glory Is Not In Never Failing, But In Rising Every Time We Fall" Confucius

JP14
Super User
Super User
Posts: 5785
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 7:37 am
Location: Neverland

Re: Annoyance over forward passes

Post by JP14 » Sun Aug 23, 2020 4:09 pm

I reckon this is the broadcasters encouraging flowing rugby...
"Our Greatest Glory Is Not In Never Failing, But In Rising Every Time We Fall" Confucius

jgriffin
Super User
Super User
Posts: 7112
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 5:49 pm
Location: On the edge of oblivion

Re: Annoyance over forward passes

Post by jgriffin » Sun Aug 23, 2020 5:50 pm

Go on, add the two clear occasions when a young Tiger went for a ball that was legally in play, both times due to a Bath error in ensuring a back foot in evidence. One led to a penalty, kick to corner, 5m rumble over, try. Or the elbow in the face one Bath forward gave instead of a handoff.
I'm truly sick of this 'flow of play' rowlocks. The Laws are the Laws - apply them.
Leicester Tigers 1995-
Nottingham 1995-2000
Swansea (Whites) 1988-95
A game played on grass in the open air by teams of XV.

Robespierre
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1301
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2010 6:36 am
Location: Haute-Garonne

Re: Annoyance over forward passes

Post by Robespierre » Sun Aug 23, 2020 6:25 pm

jgriffin wrote:
Sun Aug 23, 2020 5:50 pm
Go on, add the two clear occasions when a young Tiger went for a ball that was legally in play, both times due to a Bath error in ensuring a back foot in evidence. One led to a penalty, kick to corner, 5m rumble over, try. Or the elbow in the face one Bath forward gave instead of a handoff.
I'm truly sick of this 'flow of play' rowlocks. The Laws are the Laws - apply them.
Good man, JG!
Semper in excreta

JP14
Super User
Super User
Posts: 5785
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 7:37 am
Location: Neverland

Re: Annoyance over forward passes

Post by JP14 » Sun Aug 23, 2020 7:38 pm

Agreed with the above, if all the laws were applied properly players would no longer be lazy.
"Our Greatest Glory Is Not In Never Failing, But In Rising Every Time We Fall" Confucius

Tiglon
Super User
Super User
Posts: 2099
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 8:54 pm

Re: Annoyance over forward passes

Post by Tiglon » Sun Aug 23, 2020 7:41 pm

Robespierre wrote:
Sun Aug 23, 2020 6:25 pm
jgriffin wrote:
Sun Aug 23, 2020 5:50 pm
Go on, add the two clear occasions when a young Tiger went for a ball that was legally in play, both times due to a Bath error in ensuring a back foot in evidence. One led to a penalty, kick to corner, 5m rumble over, try. Or the elbow in the face one Bath forward gave instead of a handoff.
I'm truly sick of this 'flow of play' rowlocks. The Laws are the Laws - apply them.
Good man, JG!
:smt038

The Thom Smith penalty with the ball judged to be not out of the ruck was ludicrous. The ball rolled out the back, a player who wasn't in the ruck got it between his feet and then joined the ruck. That should be a free kick to Tigers for taking the ball back into the ruck after it was out, after playing advantage and allowing Smith to compete.

I think the other one you're talking about was where the ball was actually behind and to the side of the Bath back foot. How far out does the ball need to be? Refs are just very reluctant to call a ball out of the ruck which actually hinders the flow of play, so even that weak argument doesn't work as an excuse here.

jgriffin
Super User
Super User
Posts: 7112
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 5:49 pm
Location: On the edge of oblivion

Re: Annoyance over forward passes

Post by jgriffin » Sun Aug 23, 2020 9:33 pm

Tiglon wrote:
Sun Aug 23, 2020 7:41 pm
Robespierre wrote:
Sun Aug 23, 2020 6:25 pm
jgriffin wrote:
Sun Aug 23, 2020 5:50 pm
Go on, add the two clear occasions when a young Tiger went for a ball that was legally in play, both times due to a Bath error in ensuring a back foot in evidence. One led to a penalty, kick to corner, 5m rumble over, try. Or the elbow in the face one Bath forward gave instead of a handoff.
I'm truly sick of this 'flow of play' rowlocks. The Laws are the Laws - apply them.
Good man, JG!
:smt038

The Thom Smith penalty with the ball judged to be not out of the ruck was ludicrous. The ball rolled out the back, a player who wasn't in the ruck got it between his feet and then joined the ruck. That should be a free kick to Tigers for taking the ball back into the ruck after it was out, after playing advantage and allowing Smith to compete.

I think the other one you're talking about was where the ball was actually behind and to the side of the Bath back foot. How far out does the ball need to be? Refs are just very reluctant to call a ball out of the ruck which actually hinders the flow of play, so even that weak argument doesn't work as an excuse here.
I think you got them both - the second was Martin I think, where it popped out the back.
Leicester Tigers 1995-
Nottingham 1995-2000
Swansea (Whites) 1988-95
A game played on grass in the open air by teams of XV.

kk20gb30
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 945
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2017 1:01 pm
Location: Over The Hills & Far Away

Re: Annoyance over forward passes

Post by kk20gb30 » Mon Aug 24, 2020 7:55 am

Laws of the game need to applied , simple as that...

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Chobbsy, Google [Bot], Leicestertinytiger, mol2 and 2 guests