2023 Six Nations

[Tichtheid]

The new thing here is the Irish player making no attempt to play the ball. He comes in, puts his hands on top of the ball and pushes down, giving himself three points of contact with the ground so he's more stable, preventing the play of the ball while making no attempt to play it himself. Clever, but that can be called illegal for a number of different reasons.

He's actively trying to lift the ball, you can see this when Fagerson fails to knock him over as the ball raises into the air, Hogg is trying to hold it onto the ground and stop the turnover.

With one hand on the ground and the other on top of the ball?

[CM11]

He also, as I say, landed on the ball with one hand and the other on the ground whilst Hogg was placing the ball, the tackled player must be allowed to place the ball on sanction of a penalty.

Eh, no.

That applies to tacklers. Not other players arriving at the tackle.

[Tichtheid]

Now that I've played it through for about the tenth time, what Hansen does is almost perfect, he's not in at the side because there is no ruck at that point, he moves around and comes through the gate perfectly, unfortunately it's at that point the ball is too far away from him and the only way he can get near it is to lean so far forward that he is in no way supporting his own weight, he makes himself into a table, if I can put it that way

on the iplayer the incident is at 47.25 mins on the match clock or 1.55.27 on the programme clock

[JM2K6]

Nope, one of the reasons that he is difficult to shift is that he is leaning so far forward putting so much of his weight on the ball with his legs spread wide, that is a very stable position.

He also, as I say, landed on the ball with one hand and the other on the ground whilst Hogg was placing the ball, the tackled player must be allowed to place the ball on sanction of a penalty. The ball is only actually lifted when Zander Fagerson comes in and rolls him sideways.

I've gone through this frame by frame several times.

Err... allowing the tackled player to play the ball has nothing to do with whether you get your hands on the ball when you're on your feet - it's about the tackler releasing them. That's another smokescreen.

Honestly I do get where you're coming from but that is indeed how it's reffed - if you're able to get your hands on the ball and come up with it when the cleanout arrives before you're on the floor, you either win possession or win the penalty if the player doesn't release. There is nothing outrageous here, it's a penalty by the standards of every other match.

Nope, you can't just touch the top of the ball and expect to get the penalty, players have to "Remain on their feet when they play the ball." is the way it's written in the laws, the way it is interpreted is that the player must support their own weight.

And if Hansen had never lifted it he would not have gotten the penalty. You can claim he was using the ball to support his own bodyweight but it's guesswork, and he did end up lifting the ball, while Hogg never released. Hence, penalty.

There was another incident in the game where Hogg should actually have been yellow carded, when he knocked Murray's arms whilst making the pass, it was a penalty because Hogg was leaning on the ruck, if he'd been supporting his own weight he would have been fine. Hogg was adjudged offside there because he was leaning on the ruck

Hogg leaned over the ruck and was essentially lying on top of it in exactly the same way Hansen wasn't:



they're such obviously different scenarios I just don't see the point in comparing them

[earl the beaver]

The new thing here is the Irish player making no attempt to play the ball. He comes in, puts his hands on top of the ball and pushes down, giving himself three points of contact with the ground so he's more stable, preventing the play of the ball while making no attempt to play it himself. Clever, but that can be called illegal for a number of different reasons.

He's actively trying to lift the ball, you can see this when Fagerson fails to knock him over as the ball raises into the air, Hogg is trying to hold it onto the ground and stop the turnover.

With one hand on the ground and the other on top of the ball?

From the very start of the video posted he has 2 hands on the ball, players have the ability to grip the ball from above, but whatever, he has the fingers of both hands on the sides of the ball

At 0:01 the ball starts to lift as Fagerson (sitting on his arse and therefore in an illegal position to impact the play) tries to pull him to Scotland's side, you can see the ball rise above Fagerson's shin.

At 0:03, Fagerson (still illegal) is trying to pull him down but the ball is now raised to knee height and White is trying to wrestle it out of both Hansen's hands

At 0:05 the penalty is awarded.

I've gone back to i-player and the side entry is touch and go but these sort of penalties are given week in week out.

[Tichtheid]

He also, as I say, landed on the ball with one hand and the other on the ground whilst Hogg was placing the ball, the tackled player must be allowed to place the ball on sanction of a penalty.

Eh, no.

That applies to tacklers. Not other players arriving at the tackle.

(a) No player may prevent the tackled player from passing the ball.

(b) No player may prevent the tackled player from releasing the ball and getting up or moving away from it.

(c) No player may pull the ball from the tackled player before the tackled player has released it.

Penalty: Penalty Kick


This is a fine line and very subjective, but it would make sense to me that a player should be allowed to place or pass the ball unhindered. If they take too long, as discussed above, then they are open to being turned over.

[Jim Lahey]

A lot of effort put into 1 incident here lads, kudos.

Doubt it would have made much of a difference in the end. The ref made questionable decisions in favour of Scotland as well.

Draw a line under it and move on.

[JM2K6]

Now that I've played it through for about the tenth time, what Hansen does is almost perfect, he's not in at the side because there is no ruck at that point, he moves around and comes through the gate perfectly, unfortunately it's at that point the ball is too far away from him and the only way he can get near it is to lean so far forward that he is in no way supporting his own weight, he makes himself into a table, if I can put it that way

on the iplayer the incident is at 47.25 mins on the match clock or 1.55.27 on the programme clock

Thanks for the time - honestly I think you're right that he's overextended a little bit the second he puts his hands on the ball, but he does a very quick hop forward to get into a more stable position. I'd be hugely surprised if he had been penalised for that.

[Tichtheid]

And if Hansen had never lifted it he would not have gotten the penalty. You can claim he was using the ball to support his own bodyweight but it's guesswork,

educated guesswork, it is physically impossible to have your feet behind the rest of your body when your back is parallel to the ground and "remain on your feet" as the laws have it, especially when you are reaching so far forward. The only way you can stop from falling forward is by supporting your weight with your hands

and he did end up lifting the ball, while Hogg never released. Hence, penalty.

he'd illegally made himself very difficult to shift, so that when the clearout came he'd changed his grip on the ball and it lifted off the ground.

they're such obviously different scenarios I just don't see the point in comparing them

the point is body weight and supporting it, I thought I'd explained that

[Tichtheid]

Now that I've played it through for about the tenth time, what Hansen does is almost perfect, he's not in at the side because there is no ruck at that point, he moves around and comes through the gate perfectly, unfortunately it's at that point the ball is too far away from him and the only way he can get near it is to lean so far forward that he is in no way supporting his own weight, he makes himself into a table, if I can put it that way

on the iplayer the incident is at 47.25 mins on the match clock or 1.55.27 on the programme clock

Thanks for the time - honestly I think you're right that he's overextended a little bit the second he puts his hands on the ball, but he does a very quick hop forward to get into a more stable position. I'd be hugely surprised if he had been penalised for that.

He's not "on his feet" as per the laws, and after the hop forward he is still putting weight through his shoulders onto his hands

I wouldn't be surprised if Hansen had been penalised for that reason.

Look, it was a mistake by Pearce, the players from tboth sides made more mistakes than he did over the course of the game, so I'm not getting at him, it's just in the detail, that one was a mistake, and it's plain to me that Ritchie saw it that way and hence said something, as was his right as captain.

I think it's wrong to be painting him as intimidating in the scene, his voice does not sound aggressive at all.

[Jim Lahey]

Was he not pinged for mouthing earlier in the game? And I've definitely seen him marched back before.

I don't think its a stretch to question his communication skills with refs. However he has been doing it, he needs to improve, rather than expecting refs to be empathetic in the heat of a game.

[JM2K6]

It's not at clear to me that Ritchie is claiming he was off his feet because of his initial body shape and not the fact that he lifted the ball in the process of being cleaned out and ending up off his feet. We see turnovers like this given all the time. You've made your case very well but that's life. Also it's very easy to clean out someone who is using the ball to hold themselves up - pull them forward.

Ritchie cannot expect to walk up to the ref, be inches from his face questioning the decision, with previous backchat having pissed the ref off, and to avoid sanction. The whole point of captains being able to talk to refs is NOT to argue about decisions. A ref isn't going to change his mind (ignoring that Lions game). There's a way to converse with the referee and that ain't it.

[Tichtheid]

A lot of effort put into 1 incident here lads, kudos.

Doubt it would have made much of a difference in the end. The ref made questionable decisions in favour of Scotland as well.

Draw a line under it and move on.

Are we not men?

Do we not spend our days making lists on the internet and going into excruciating detail on a half second's action in a two hour, with stoppages, match?

I hope I haven't pitched up on the wrong forum.

[Tichtheid]

Was he not pinged for mouthing earlier in the game? And I've definitely seen him marched back before.

I don't think its a stretch to question his communication skills with refs. However he has been doing it, he needs to improve, rather than expecting refs to be empathetic in the heat of a game.

Finn Russell said something to upset Pearce earlier, as did Porter calling for a yellow card for someone. Sexton's in the ref's ear all game.

I can imagine it all gets a bit much

[earl the beaver]

He also, as I say, landed on the ball with one hand and the other on the ground whilst Hogg was placing the ball, the tackled player must be allowed to place the ball on sanction of a penalty.

Eh, no.

That applies to tacklers. Not other players arriving at the tackle.

(a) No player may prevent the tackled player from passing the ball.

(b) No player may prevent the tackled player from releasing the ball and getting up or moving away from it.

(c) No player may pull the ball from the tackled player before the tackled player has released it.

Penalty: Penalty Kick


This is a fine line and very subjective, but it would make sense to me that a player should be allowed to place or pass the ball unhindered. If they take too long, as discussed above, then they are open to being turned over.

The wording above appears nowhere in the world rugby law book.

Law 13.3
A player on the ground, in the field of play, without the ball is out of the game
and must:
a. Allow opponents who are not on the ground to play or gain possession of
the ball.
b. Not play the ball.
c. Not tackle or attempt to tackle an opponent.
Sanction: Penalty.

Law 14.5
Tacklers must :
a. Immediately release the ball and the ball-carrier after both players go to
ground.
b. Immediately move away from the tackled player and from the ball or get
up.
c. Be on their feet before attempting to play the ball.
d. Allow the tackled player to release or play the ball.
e. Allow the tackled player to move away from the ball.
Sanction : Penalty.

Any player on their feet can play the ball, provided they are the first person there, and the tackled player has no right to stop them, placement or no.

Only the tackler has a duty to allow the tackled player to place the ball.

[CM11]

He also, as I say, landed on the ball with one hand and the other on the ground whilst Hogg was placing the ball, the tackled player must be allowed to place the ball on sanction of a penalty.

Eh, no.

That applies to tacklers. Not other players arriving at the tackle.

(a) No player may prevent the tackled player from passing the ball.

(b) No player may prevent the tackled player from releasing the ball and getting up or moving away from it.

(c) No player may pull the ball from the tackled player before the tackled player has released it.

Penalty: Penalty Kick


This is a fine line and very subjective, but it would make sense to me that a player should be allowed to place or pass the ball unhindered. If they take too long, as discussed above, then they are open to being turned over.

https://www.world.rugby/the-game/laws/law/14

I don't see what you've quoted there.

[Tichtheid]

Eh, no.

That applies to tacklers. Not other players arriving at the tackle.

(a) No player may prevent the tackled player from passing the ball.

(b) No player may prevent the tackled player from releasing the ball and getting up or moving away from it.

(c) No player may pull the ball from the tackled player before the tackled player has released it.

Penalty: Penalty Kick


This is a fine line and very subjective, but it would make sense to me that a player should be allowed to place or pass the ball unhindered. If they take too long, as discussed above, then they are open to being turned over.

https://www.world.rugby/the-game/laws/law/14

I don't see what you've quoted there.

Actually fair enough, now that I look again it was from an older version of the laws quoted on Rugby365

That part has been taken out of the laws but the problem with what Hansen did is covered in 15:11

Once a ruck has formed, no player may handle the ball unless they were able to get their hands on the ball before the ruck formed and stay on their feet.

The ruck hadn't formed, so he is covered by the first arriving player law
https://rugbyreferee.net/2020/04/02/new ... announced/


https://www.world.rugby/the-game/laws/law/15


if you think Hansen stayed on his feet and supported his own bodyweight, then I'll beg to differ.

[CM11]

As already discussed, the way it's being reffed now is that they are allowing players go off their feet if they were initially on their feet with hands on the ball.

We've even seen players go to ground as they are still struggling to rip the ball but if the tackled player releases in time and the defender passes straight away from the ground, it's play on.

[Camroc2]

This isn't the first time someone has talked about a player being off his feet while only looking at how he finished up. Hansen got his hands on the ball straight away, on his feet. He only ends up the way he does because the player held on.

Refs are letting this pan out more, basically giving a chance for the player on the ground to let go and allowing the defender go off his feet if they're initially latched on their feet because they're trying to keep the game moving. Scottish player lets go there and Hansen comes away with the ball is far preferable to whistling for a penalty and there were certainly other incidents in the game where that's exactly what happened.

I can't see a lift when on feet, I can only see him place hands on ball and topple when trying to lift (and then being hit). He ultimately falls forwards.

We've discussed ruck laws to the point of painful nausea on the bored before, but this just seems weird to me - just reach out to place hands on the ball, even if you've not much chance of actually lifting it away whilst staying on feet. We got rid of the dragnet style (hands on floor past the ball and let the clearout drag you back over the ball) and this feels the same to me.

Anyway, it's tedious getting into whether it's on feet or off feet, my main observation is it just seems that this is being allowed more in this 6N than before.

If you'll bear with me for a minute, I won't labour the point beyond this comment, but if you rewind that clip to the very first frame, Hansen's heel is on the line, plain as day. Every part of his body is in front of that. The only reason he doesn't topple forward immediately is because he is kneeling on Fagerson and supporting his weight with his hands on the top of the ball.

It's is physically impossible to support your own weight from the position he is in.

I won't say any more on it.

I'll note that Hansen ended up being flipped with his hips well above the head. Could easily have been a penalty for that alone. But Guy is correct, the ref ruled that Hansen was 'on his feet/supporting his own weight' when he first grabbed the ball, and the Scot didn't release.

[Tichtheid]

As already discussed, the way it's being reffed now is that they are allowing players go off their feet if they were initially on their feet with hands on the ball.

We've even seen players go to ground as they are still struggling to rip the ball but if the tackled player releases in time and the defender passes straight away from the ground, it's play on.

You can go through the frame by frame yourself, at no point was Hansen supporting his own weight when he went over Hogg and reached the ball.

His feet were in contact with the ground, but that is not being on your feet, he was as much on his feet as Furlong was and he was lying on the deck.

[Tichtheid]

Rumours the match is being replayed because of the whole thing

Fuck off

[Jim Lahey]

Rumours the match is being replayed because of the whole thing

[Biffer]

Biffer: Yes. He does lift it eventually, though, without changing his own body angle in any meaningful way. It's a classic "soak the hit and grab the ball" situation. And the player holding onto the ball shows he's still holding onto the ball at the same time.

But his offence of not supporting his weight on his feet occurs before that. So that’s what should be called. The pressing the ball down is a new one on me.

[JM2K6]

Biffer: Yes. He does lift it eventually, though, without changing his own body angle in any meaningful way. It's a classic "soak the hit and grab the ball" situation. And the player holding onto the ball shows he's still holding onto the ball at the same time.

But his offence of not supporting his weight on his feet occurs before that. So that’s what should be called. The pressing the ball down is a new one on me.

Yes, this is where the Scottish fans and the rest diverge. You are convinced he wasn't supporting his own bodyweight.

[themaddog]

Rumours the match is being replayed because of the whole thing

Fuck off

We can definitely award the Scots the moral victory trophy.

[Tichtheid]

Biffer: Yes. He does lift it eventually, though, without changing his own body angle in any meaningful way. It's a classic "soak the hit and grab the ball" situation. And the player holding onto the ball shows he's still holding onto the ball at the same time.

But his offence of not supporting his weight on his feet occurs before that. So that’s what should be called. The pressing the ball down is a new one on me.

Yes, this is where the Scottish fans and the rest diverge. You are convinced he wasn't supporting his own bodyweight.

If someone can convince me, and believe me I'm open to it, that it is physically possible for Hansen to be supporting his bodyweight on his feet at the point he makes contact with the ball, ie if you withdrew the ball he would not topple forward and fall on to the deck, then I'll take back everything I wrote on this today.

You'll also have to convince me that his right hand didn't land on the floor first before moving on to the ball, but I'll settle for the physics on the first question.

I'll say it again, his entire body was in front of his feet at the point he makes contact with the ball, is that in doubt? If it is I'll have to be shown the appropriate still. If it is not, then how can he have his back parallel to the ground and his feet as the back-most part of him and still be supporting his weight on his feet?

The latter is the only definition that fits the "on your feet criterion" in the laws

[JM2K6]

But his offence of not supporting his weight on his feet occurs before that. So that’s what should be called. The pressing the ball down is a new one on me.

Yes, this is where the Scottish fans and the rest diverge. You are convinced he wasn't supporting his own bodyweight.

If someone can convince me, and believe me I'm open to it, that it is physically possible for Hansen to be supporting his bodyweight on his feet at the point he makes contact with the ball, ie if you withdrew the ball he would not topple forward and fall on to the deck, then I'll take back everything I wrote on this today.

You'll also have to convince me that his right hand didn't land on the floor first before moving on to the ball, but I'll settle for the physics on the first question.

I'll say it again, his entire body was in front of his feet at the point he makes contact with the ball, is that in doubt? If it is I'll have to be shown the appropriate still. If it is not, then how can he have his back parallel to the ground and his feet as the back-most part of him and still be supporting his weight on his feet?

The latter is the only definition that fits the "on your feet criterion" in the laws

It was a split second - he leaned over, put his hands on the ball, the cleanout hit, and he lifted it. It's really not clear he puts his right hand on the floor, either. You're talking about a time period that literally goes 47:26 to 47:27 on the match clock. He didn't instantly lose his balance, he very quickly got his hands on the ball, got hit, lifted it, and got tipped.

It's absolutely not surprise that it was a penalty in his favour and arguing that for 500 milliseconds he might not have been fully supporting his bodyweight is probably not going to make much difference, because by that metric, the vast majority of turnovers are illegal and we're back to "this is how it's refereed" again

[Tichtheid]

the lift is only effected by the actions of the clear out because Hansen made contact with the ball whilst not supporting his weight

I’ll reiterate my invitation to show how he could be supporting his weight when his back is parallel to the ground and his entire body is in front of his feet

By the way, on the length of time argument that is being introduced, it’s not really relevant, it affected the play and that is the fact of it.

It was a mistake by the ref, I can live with that, we got them in our favour too, but it was a mistake

[Rhubarb & Custard]

By all accounts Mack has the strongest hammies in camp so could easily stay upright at that angle

Is that why the Scottish forwards bottled going into contact against him?

One of those weird plays when the little back goes in to challenge the ball and you're expecting the forwards' eyes to light up with what's being presented to them. Okay the back might get the ball, but pain (in a good clean fun rugby sort of way) should be radiating through the back for their cheek, and they did nothing to him. It's from the wrong sport (in so many ways the wrong sport) but I like a line Alan Shearer was given as kid down at Southampton from their old lag 2nd/3rd choice goalie on forwards going in to challenge a lose ball in the box, 'the goalkeeper is expecting to get hurt, don't disappoint him'

Which isn't to overly denigrate Scotland. England can produce 80 minutes of not exacting any serious price for our capitulation, that was just one of a small number of brief capitulations from the Scots

[sturginho]

Crowley has done a Rassie....

[Ymx]

He has fair points, but blimey that could sideline him …

[sturginho]

He has fair points, but blimey that could sideline him …

It wasn't really him

[Ymx]

He has fair points, but blimey that could sideline him …

It wasn't really him

The after match interview was pretty bad.

[Jim Lahey]

Well this thread has spent the last couple of pages disecting one incident in a game, that had little to no bearing on the overall outcome.

Makes sense that a coach would have stronger feelings over perceived injustices than us fans given they have more skin in the game.

The complex nature of our sport makes officiating mistakes an inherent risk. Provided that there is no blatent bias from refs, purposely shafting one side over another, I think we all need to just suck it up.

[sturginho]

Well this thread has spent the last couple of pages disecting one incident in a game, that had little to no bearing on the overall outcome.

Makes sense that a coach would have stronger feelings over perceived injustices than us fans given they have more skin in the game.

The complex nature of our sport makes officiating mistakes an inherent risk. Provided that there is no blatent bias from refs, purposely shafting one side over another, I think we all need to just suck it up.

Which is easy to say when you're the #1 team in the world

[Ymx]

They were bad decisions alright and I have had a thesis about Wales for years about why they get so many fucked up decisions in their favour. It's to do with the refs being brought up on a diet of Gareth Edwards and other various Blethyn's and Jones's. I think the refs also feel sorry for Walrs the way you would for a bird that had flown into a window pane

you’re a bastard

[Biffer]

Well this thread has spent the last couple of pages disecting one incident in a game, that had little to no bearing on the overall outcome.

Makes sense that a coach would have stronger feelings over perceived injustices than us fans given they have more skin in the game.

The complex nature of our sport makes officiating mistakes an inherent risk. Provided that there is no blatent bias from refs, purposely shafting one side over another, I think we all need to just suck it up.

Which is easy to say when you're the #1 team in the world

Yeah that attitude has changed a lot over the last few years

[Paddington Bear]

I have a lot of sympathy for the idea that Italy get ridden by refs, but they still butchered at least four cast iron opportunities to score and had probably a couple more they cocked up, so I wouldn’t start by blaming the ref

[CM11]

On thing highlighting the 'was he or wasn't offside' incident does is also repeatedly showing how a walk in try was butchered. I'd be slinking away in embarrassment to be honest.

[TartanBear]

Scotland has benefitted from some debatable turnover penalties this campaign. The final one against England was (to my eyes) no different to some of Ireland’s last weekend.