Annoyance over forward passes

Forum to discuss everything that is Tigers related

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

JP14
Super User
Super User
Posts: 7484
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 7:37 am

Annoyance over forward passes

Post by JP14 »

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.
Formerly of Burbaaage (not Inkleh), now up north at uni
JP14
Super User
Super User
Posts: 7484
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 7:37 am

Re: Annoyance over forward passes

Post by JP14 »

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...
Formerly of Burbaaage (not Inkleh), now up north at uni
Big Dai
Super User
Super User
Posts: 6044
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 6:04 pm
Location: Abergavenny

Re: Annoyance over forward passes

Post by Big Dai »

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
Silver Member
Silver Member
Posts: 637
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 10:23 am
Location: UK

Re: Annoyance over forward passes

Post by daktari »

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: 3887
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 8:54 pm

Re: Annoyance over forward passes

Post by Tiglon »

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
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1216
Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:07 pm
Location: The bagging area (unexpectedly)

Re: Annoyance over forward passes

Post by Crofty »

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...

I know you don't like it when I boo him but how else will he know he's wrong?

non possumus capere
Wayne Richardson Fan Club
Super User
Super User
Posts: 3838
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 11:53 am
Location: The Salt Mines

Re: Annoyance over forward passes

Post by Wayne Richardson Fan Club »

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: 7484
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 7:37 am

Re: Annoyance over forward passes

Post by JP14 »

Or just look at the footage, as Austin said it was clear enough.
Formerly of Burbaaage (not Inkleh), now up north at uni
JP14
Super User
Super User
Posts: 7484
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 7:37 am

Re: Annoyance over forward passes

Post by JP14 »

I reckon this is the broadcasters encouraging flowing rugby...
Formerly of Burbaaage (not Inkleh), now up north at uni
jgriffin
Super User
Super User
Posts: 8074
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 5:49 pm
Location: On the edge of oblivion

Re: Annoyance over forward passes

Post by jgriffin »

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
Super User
Super User
Posts: 3013
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2010 6:36 am
Location: Haute-Garonne

Re: Annoyance over forward passes

Post by Robespierre »

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 excretia
JP14
Super User
Super User
Posts: 7484
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 7:37 am

Re: Annoyance over forward passes

Post by JP14 »

Agreed with the above, if all the laws were applied properly players would no longer be lazy.
Formerly of Burbaaage (not Inkleh), now up north at uni
Tiglon
Super User
Super User
Posts: 3887
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 8:54 pm

Re: Annoyance over forward passes

Post by Tiglon »

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: 8074
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 5:49 pm
Location: On the edge of oblivion

Re: Annoyance over forward passes

Post by jgriffin »

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
Super User
Super User
Posts: 2887
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2017 1:01 pm
Location: Over The Hills & Far Away

Re: Annoyance over forward passes

Post by kk20gb30 »

Laws of the game need to applied , simple as that...
Seemingly heading rapidly toward senility .....Not long or far to go now , in fact, getting worse daily.....
Post Reply