Do you think this is odd

Questions for the players, the management, the UAFC, the URSC or other supporters... Someone might answer you!! (and pigs might fly)

Moderator: Moderators

cardoc
Novice
Posts: 221
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 4:22 pm

Do you think this is odd

Post by cardoc »

A youtube clip of a try? from the Ospreys v Benneton Treviso

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJg8jj9N9jc
cardoc
Novice
Posts: 221
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 4:22 pm

Re: Do you think this is odd

Post by cardoc »

Q1 Is it permitted for a team to take a throw in from behind there own goal line, the in goal area?

Q2 Had the player, who was credited with the try, his left foot in touch when he caught the ball?
Neill_M
Lord Chancellor
Posts: 8320
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 10:51 am

Re: Do you think this is odd

Post by Neill_M »

cardoc wrote:Q1 Is it permitted for a team to take a throw in from behind there own goal line, the in goal area?

Q2 Had the player, who was credited with the try, his left foot in touch when he caught the ball?
No and Yes. Scrum V took a look at this try and Jiffy Davies was amazed it was given. The guy was in touch but you can't take a line out from the in goal area. They went upstairs, it was the TMO who gave it!
User avatar
Snipe Watson
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 23443
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 6:42 pm

Re: Do you think this is odd

Post by Snipe Watson »

Entirely bizarre.
How wrong can a decision be?
Will this ridiculous decision finally force the authorities to address the woefully inept level of officiating in the Pro12?
User avatar
Snipe Watson
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 23443
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 6:42 pm

Re: Do you think this is odd

Post by Snipe Watson »

LastKnightoftheproms wrote:You boys are all wrong. Dudley is highly thought of.
:duh: forgot that bit..........
User avatar
Rooster
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 40137
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 12:39 am
Location: Chicken coop 17

Re: Do you think this is odd

Post by Rooster »

LastKnightoftheproms wrote:
Snipe Watson wrote:
LastKnightoftheproms wrote:You boys are all wrong. Dudley is highly thought of.
:duh: forgot that bit..........
Ya see? Without me to keep you right....... >EW

Dudley is a fine employee of the IRFU and highly thought of. End of.
Last I heard you had a contract out on Dudley after his feckup with Armagh
“That made me feel very special and underlined to me that Ulster is more than a team, it is a community and a rugby family"
Rory Best
User avatar
Snipe Watson
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 23443
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 6:42 pm

Re: Do you think this is odd

Post by Snipe Watson »

Was he there when Rainey gave Armagh the rounds of the kitchen two weeks ago?
User avatar
ruckover
Lord Chancellor
Posts: 7609
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 1:02 pm
Location: My house

Re: Do you think this is odd

Post by ruckover »

Can't understand that at all.

1. Ben John clearly has his foot in touch when he catches the ball, so it should be a line-out to Treviso.
2. Treviso take their initial line-out from inside the dead ball area. As far as I am aware (but I could easily be wrong) you must take a line-out from within the field of play i.e. not past the try line. So this too is illegal and therefore should have been asked to be retaken from the 5m line.

But for number 1 it definitely should not have been given. Bizarre to say the least.
You haven't seen me at my best yet. Let's be honest, you probably never will.
User avatar
OneMore
Warrior Chief
Posts: 1850
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 3:53 pm

Re: Do you think this is odd

Post by OneMore »

ruckover wrote:Can't understand that at all.

1. Ben John clearly has his foot in touch when he catches the ball, so it should be a line-out to Treviso.
2. Treviso take their initial line-out from inside the dead ball area. As far as I am aware (but I could easily be wrong) you must take a line-out from within the field of play i.e. not past the try line. So this too is illegal and therefore should have been asked to be retaken from the 5m line.

But for number 1 it definitely should not have been given. Bizarre to say the least.
You are correct on number 2.

Rule 19.2 (b) I'd say.
(b)
For a quick throw-in, the player may be anywhere outside the field of play between the place where the ball went into touch and the player’s goal line.
User avatar
Hans Indaruck
Squire
Posts: 616
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 10:22 pm
Location: The Wee North

Re: Do you think this is odd

Post by Hans Indaruck »

OneMore wrote:
ruckover wrote:Can't understand that at all.

1. Ben John clearly has his foot in touch when he catches the ball, so it should be a line-out to Treviso.
2. Treviso take their initial line-out from inside the dead ball area. As far as I am aware (but I could easily be wrong) you must take a line-out from within the field of play i.e. not past the try line. So this too is illegal and therefore should have been asked to be retaken from the 5m line.

But for number 1 it definitely should not have been given. Bizarre to say the least.
You are correct on number 2.

Rule 19.2 (b) I'd say.
(b)
For a quick throw-in, the player may be anywhere outside the field of play between the place where the ball went into touch and the player’s goal line.
The Treviso player can hardly have thrown the ball in 'between' where it went out and his own goal line if he is behind his own goal line!! :shock:

Alsp 19.2(e) applies whereby if the player throws the ball in the direction of the opposition goal line then the quick throw-in is disallowed!! The Treviso player clearly does this.

But the foot in touch is all damning in any event - what was the TJ smoking!! :cowboy:
Hope is not a strategy.
User avatar
BR
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 18579
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 11:12 am
Location: On a roll.

Re: Do you think this is odd

Post by BR »

Hans Indaruck wrote:
OneMore wrote:
ruckover wrote:Can't understand that at all.

1. Ben John clearly has his foot in touch when he catches the ball, so it should be a line-out to Treviso.
2. Treviso take their initial line-out from inside the dead ball area. As far as I am aware (but I could easily be wrong) you must take a line-out from within the field of play i.e. not past the try line. So this too is illegal and therefore should have been asked to be retaken from the 5m line.

But for number 1 it definitely should not have been given. Bizarre to say the least.
You are correct on number 2.

Rule 19.2 (b) I'd say.
(b)
For a quick throw-in, the player may be anywhere outside the field of play between the place where the ball went into touch and the player’s goal line.
The Treviso player can hardly have thrown the ball in 'between' where it went out and his own goal line if he is behind his own goal line!! :shock:

Alsp 19.2(e) applies whereby if the player throws the ball in the direction of the opposition goal line then the quick throw-in is disallowed!! The Treviso player clearly does this.

But the foot in touch is all damning in any event - what was the TJ smoking!! :cowboy:
TMO prob couldn't rule on the illegal throw, but should have been able to call the foot in touch.
Can I come out from behind the sofa yet?
www.stoutboys.co.uk
cardoc
Novice
Posts: 221
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 4:22 pm

Re: Do you think this is odd

Post by cardoc »

I started this topic because I thought it odd and was a blatant disregard of common sense, after giving some thought to the happenings at Ravenhill of the last 24 hours that have been even more odd and to the extent of being extremely blatant with a complete disregard to the supporters who have loyally followed UR both at home and away I now feel that this topic should take it's place in oblivion.
User avatar
rocky
Red Hand Ambassador
Posts: 2546
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 9:50 am
Location: Dundonald

Re: Do you think this is odd

Post by rocky »

Not only that, LK, but he failed to act properly after Yarde committed a totally cynical, deliberate professional foul and only awarded a penalty rather than a yellow card. He really is an incompetent ass
Bo***cks to Brexit
Post Reply