"Uncle Bully" <wakeupcall@optushome.com.au.Remove> wrote in message news:48845ecb$0$13949$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
4. Quick throw-ins can be straight or backwards, but not forwards.
I thought this was always the case anyway. Must be one of those unwritten
rules that they decided to rubber stamp.
What's the point in having a lineout if it cannot be contested when the ball is thrown backwards ? I t's just a step in the direction of rugby league. Lineoout ball sjould be thrown straight and contested. If you suggest otherwise, why noy go the whole hog and have a kick like they do in rugby league ?
4. Quick throw-ins can be straight or backwards, but not forwards.
I thought this was always the case anyway. Must be one of those unwritten
rules that they decided to rubber stamp.
What's the point in having a lineout if it cannot be contested when the
ball is thrown backwards ? I t's just a step in the direction of rugby
league. Lineoout ball sjould be thrown straight and contested. If you
suggest otherwise, why noy go the whole hog and have a kick like they do
in rugby league ?
Because contested lineouts are good, and quick throw ins are good too. Just like Drop Goals have their place, as do tries. Rugby is a game of colour. Black and white is for soccer poofs.
4. Quick throw-ins can be straight or backwards, but not forwards.
I thought this was always the case anyway. Must be one of those unwritten
rules that they decided to rubber stamp.
What's the point in having a lineout if it cannot be contested when the ball
is thrown backwards ? I t's just a step in the direction of rugby league.
So it's definately a good idea then. Seriously Nigel, if you don't know anything about RL then you'd be better off not making any comparisons involving it.
Lineoout ball sjould be thrown straight and contested. If you suggest
otherwise, why noy go the whole hog and have a kick like they do in rugby
league ?
A bloke just had a practice kick in the RL game I'm watching and he got sent off! Problem was that he was practicing on his opposing front-rowers leg.
"Uncle Bully" <wakeupcall@optushome.com.au.Remove> wrote in message news:48847644$0$17508$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
"Nigel Evans" <nigel@dingdong.com> wrote in message
But, you cannot possibly have a contested lineout if the ball is thrown
backwards.
But how do the ELVs change this?
Quick throw-ins are never contested, old rules or ELVs.
Yes, quick throw-ins are not contested because the opposition have not arrived at the scene. In an ordinary lineout the ball must be thrown straight otherwise there is no point in having one.
4. Quick throw-ins can be straight or backwards, but not forwards.
I thought this was always the case anyway. Must be one of those
unwritten
rules that they decided to rubber stamp.
What's the point in having a lineout if it cannot be contested when the
ball is thrown backwards ? I t's just a step in the direction of rugby
league. Lineoout ball sjould be thrown straight and contested. If you
suggest otherwise, why noy go the whole hog and have a kick like they do
in rugby league ?
No such thing. Lineout for ball / ball carrier in touch in union = scrum
in league...
Yes, sorry, you are correct, nevertheless the ineffective rugby league scrum then gives possesion immediately to the team which would have thrown into the lineout. So, this rule is a move to leagure.
4. Quick throw-ins can be straight or backwards, but not forwards.
I thought this was always the case anyway. Must be one of those unwritten
rules that they decided to rubber stamp.
I'm a bit unsure about this one. The throwing team gets a definite advantage even if the attacking wing follows up properly - he can't cover every direction, which means the quick throw can turn into a game of piggy in the middle. I'd have liked the quick throw to be straight-ish, unless there's an amendment to allow the follower-up to bowl the thrower over even though technically he's outside the field of play.
4. Quick throw-ins can be straight or backwards, but not forwards.
I thought this was always the case anyway. Must be one of those unwritten
rules that they decided to rubber stamp.
I'm a bit unsure about this one. The throwing team gets a definite
advantage even if the attacking wing follows up properly - he can't
cover every direction, which means the quick throw can turn into a
game of piggy in the middle. I'd have liked the quick throw to be
straight-ish, unless there's an amendment to allow the follower-up to
bowl the thrower over even though technically he's outside the field
of play.
--
greig
Which brings up a point regarding this 'piggy in the middle' comment. Why don't the ref's, assistant and otherwise call baulking during the quick throw in process? Along with the defender trying to prevent the thrower from getting the ball back in play.
Back to the same old questions about why the existing laws are not enforced.
By the way this is one of those ELV that are just common sense.
4. Quick throw-ins can be straight or backwards, but not forwards.
I thought this was always the case anyway. Must be one of those
unwritten
rules that they decided to rubber stamp.
I'm a bit unsure about this one. The throwing team gets a definite
advantage even if the attacking wing follows up properly - he can't
cover every direction, which means the quick throw can turn into a
game of piggy in the middle. I'd have liked the quick throw to be
straight-ish, unless there's an amendment to allow the follower-up to
bowl the thrower over even though technically he's outside the field
of play.
--
greig
Which brings up a point regarding this 'piggy in the middle' comment.
Why don't the ref's, assistant and otherwise call baulking during the
quick throw in process? Along with the defender trying to prevent the
thrower from getting the ball back in play.
But if he's stood 5M in why should he not participate in the play ? Seems like it's just a way of saying that attack and continuity is everything.
Back to the same old questions about why the existing laws are not
enforced.
Indeed.
By the way this is one of those ELV that are just common sense.
I don't have a problem with a quick throw-in going straight or sideways if there's nobody else there, but if a winger has had the energy to follow up a kick the ball should come in straight in my opinion so there can be a contest.
"Nigel Evans" <nigel@dingdong.com> wrote in message news:48846bee$0$26078
But, you cannot possibly have a contested lineout if the ball is thrown
backwards.
Why not? The "defending" team does not have to stand at the point where the kick goes out. They can challenge any player they think may be about to receive a quick throw in. a bit like under the old laws really.
"simon s-b" <baittrap@gmail.com> wrote in message news:4ad28cd7-8d06-4d8b-bff0-222a655a6abc@79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com... On Jul 21, 11:02 am, "Uncle Bully" <wakeupc...@optushome.com.au.Remove> wrote:
4. Quick throw-ins can be straight or backwards, but not forwards.
I thought this was always the case anyway. Must be one of those unwritten
rules that they decided to rubber stamp.
I'm happy with this one, as long as it's policed correctly according to the current definition of when a lineout is formed and when a quick throw is allowed.
agreed - one of the less contentious ones and didn't cause any drama as far as I know in S14.
Greig Blanchett 23 July 2008 09:55:04 [ permanent link ]
On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 19:00:03 -0500, Russell <Russell@home.com> wrote:
BrritSki wrote:
Russell wrote:
Greig Blanchett wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 20:02:49 +1000, "Uncle Bully"
<wakeupcall@optushome.com.au.Remove> wrote:
4. Quick throw-ins can be straight or backwards, but not forwards.
I thought this was always the case anyway. Must be one of those
unwritten
rules that they decided to rubber stamp.
I'm a bit unsure about this one. The throwing team gets a definite
advantage even if the attacking wing follows up properly - he can't
cover every direction, which means the quick throw can turn into a
game of piggy in the middle. I'd have liked the quick throw to be
straight-ish, unless there's an amendment to allow the follower-up to
bowl the thrower over even though technically he's outside the field
of play.
--
greig
Which brings up a point regarding this 'piggy in the middle' comment.
Why don't the ref's, assistant and otherwise call baulking during the
quick throw in process? Along with the defender trying to prevent the
thrower from getting the ball back in play.
But if he's stood 5M in why should he not participate in the play ?
Seems like it's just a way of saying that attack and continuity is
everything.
Because the specifically states that you cannot prevent the ball from
being thrown in and that to play the must travel 5m before its played.
Russell
Which gives the defending team the advantage - the thrower has a 90 degree quadrant in which to throw and there's nothing the industrious little winger who followed up can do about it. Stupid ELV.
4. Quick throw-ins can be straight or backwards, but not forwards.
I thought this was always the case anyway. Must be one of those
unwritten
rules that they decided to rubber stamp.
I'm a bit unsure about this one. The throwing team gets a definite
advantage even if the attacking wing follows up properly - he can't
cover every direction, which means the quick throw can turn into a
game of piggy in the middle. I'd have liked the quick throw to be
straight-ish, unless there's an amendment to allow the follower-up to
bowl the thrower over even though technically he's outside the field
of play.
--
greig
Which brings up a point regarding this 'piggy in the middle'
comment. Why don't the ref's, assistant and otherwise call baulking
during the quick throw in process? Along with the defender trying
to prevent the thrower from getting the ball back in play.
But if he's stood 5M in why should he not participate in the play ?
Seems like it's just a way of saying that attack and continuity is
everything.
Because the specifically states that you cannot prevent the ball from
^^law^^
being thrown in and that to play the must travel 5m before its played.
But he's not preventing the ball being thrown in, he's participating in
the lineout.
When a defender stands right in front of the thrower, the ball cannot be put in play. The defender must stand behind the 5M line.
Then with the defender at 5M and the thrower constantly baulks, pretending to throw in straight or backward, an infringement is being committed. Short arm penalty I think.
On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 19:00:03 -0500, Russell <Russell@home.com> wrote:
BrritSki wrote:
Russell wrote:
Greig Blanchett wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 20:02:49 +1000, "Uncle Bully"
<wakeupcall@optushome.com.au.Remove> wrote:
4. Quick throw-ins can be straight or backwards, but not forwards.
I thought this was always the case anyway. Must be one of those
unwritten
rules that they decided to rubber stamp.
I'm a bit unsure about this one. The throwing team gets a definite
advantage even if the attacking wing follows up properly - he can't
cover every direction, which means the quick throw can turn into a
game of piggy in the middle. I'd have liked the quick throw to be
straight-ish, unless there's an amendment to allow the follower-up to
bowl the thrower over even though technically he's outside the field
of play.
--
greig
Which brings up a point regarding this 'piggy in the middle' comment.
Why don't the ref's, assistant and otherwise call baulking during the
quick throw in process? Along with the defender trying to prevent the
thrower from getting the ball back in play.
But if he's stood 5M in why should he not participate in the play ?
Seems like it's just a way of saying that attack and continuity is
everything.
Because the specifically states that you cannot prevent the ball from
being thrown in and that to play the must travel 5m before its played.
Russell
Which gives the defending team the advantage - the thrower has a 90
degree quadrant in which to throw and there's nothing the industrious
little winger who followed up can do about it. Stupid ELV.
--
greig
I don't know, if the 'winger' stands at about 10M, he can safely prevent a quick throw. If its to 5M, he can come up, much longer than that from a standstill, the thrower would be telegraphing the long throw. Not very safe.
Of course in the context that the existing law at the quick restart are enforced.
If you would like to report an abuse of our service, such as a spam message, please . Если Вы хотите пожаловаться на содержимое этой страницы, пожалуйста .
