[
PLEASE LOGIN TO POST TO THE FORUM
]
|
|
|
pauldg
|
Wed, 17 September 08 07:31 GMT
|
>Would it have been the blindingly obvious one that basically meant any breakthrough would result in everybody on the defending team being offside if they were lucky enough to actually tackle the breakthrough attacker?
I believe so.
>And if so did they really need to actually go aout and USE it to prove the point?
Apparently it wasn't obvious to whoever was promoting it. Perhaps because whoever it was is more used to rugby league where there *is* an offside line at every tackle..?
|
-------------------------
--
PaulDG |
|
|
didds
- scrumtime@hotmail.com
|
Wed, 17 September 08 06:14 GMT
|
<B>And the problem became immediately apparent,</B>
I wasn;t aware of this OB, thanks for mentioning it.
Errr - what problem became immediately apparent?
Would it have been the blindingly obvious one that basically meant any breakthrough would result in everybody on the defending team being offside if they were lucky enough to actually tackle the breakthrough attacker?
And if so did they really need to actually go aout and USE it to prove the point?
I despair.
didds
This message edited on Wed, 17 September 08 by didds
|
|
|
ob
|
Wed, 17 September 08 00:44 GMT
|
the whistleblower - !!!! very true.
However it is very specific: it only applies to one of the 30 players. When they introduced the tackle offside line as an ELV it applied to everybody not in the tackle, just like a ruck or maul. And the problem became immediately apparent, so they removed it.
|
|
|
the whistleblower
|
Tue, 16 September 08 23:24 GMT
|
Per OB: <<This does not create an offside line because the restriction does not extend across the field.>>
The scrum half at a scrum has two possible offside lines that don't extend across the full width of the field. This doesn't prevent them from being offside lines.
That said, your response is essentially accurate, of course:-))
|
-------------------------
Whistleblower |
|
|
didds
- scrumtime@hotmail.com
|
Mon, 15 September 08 12:55 GMT
|
... but the defender running backwards can still take the pass from the tackled player IF (s)he is >1m from the tackle.
didds
|
|
|
ob
|
Mon, 15 September 08 09:17 GMT
|
There is no offside line at a tackle.
It was one of the ELVs that has been discarded in the global trials.
What we do have is the requirement that a player not originally in the tackle must enter the tackle zone from the direction of his own goal-line. Law 15.6 (c).
This does not create an offside line because the restriction does not extend across the field.
|
|
|
Dan Cottrell
|
Mon, 15 September 08 08:56 GMT
|
Sorry for this question, but I am trying to find the IRB law that confirms the offside line for this situation.
From a set piece, open play ensues.
A tackle is attempted, but neither player goes to ground before it is offloaded. NO OFFSIDE for the defending team. Therefore a player from the DEFENDING side running back can take the pass (much to the disgust of the opposition of course).
A tackle is attempted and completed, no ruck is formed and the ball is moved away. The same ruling as above.
(IRB Ruck Law)
A tackle is attempted and completed. Players entering the tackle situation to play the ball must come through the gate and on their feet from their own side.
Once a ruck or maul is formed then offside lines appear.
|
|
|
|
|
|
