Blues v Highlanders
-
Now the dust has settled on that great battle last Saturday,and watching a replay of that maul where the Blues held the ball up.,the question I have is this.Given that Sotutu was legal,are the backs coming in from the side ok? If they are not the reaction of Tom Coventry in the box is understandable.Phew!
@trodthesod said in Blues v Highlanders:
Now the dust has settled on that great battle last Saturday,and watching a replay of that maul where the Blues held the ball up.,the question I have is this.Given that Sotutu was legal,are the backs coming in from the side ok? If they are not the reaction of Tom Coventry in the box is understandable.Phew!
Nope! Got away with a little there
-
Now the dust has settled on that great battle last Saturday,and watching a replay of that maul where the Blues held the ball up.,the question I have is this.Given that Sotutu was legal,are the backs coming in from the side ok? If they are not the reaction of Tom Coventry in the box is understandable.Phew!
@trodthesod said in Blues v Highlanders:
Now the dust has settled on that great battle last Saturday,and watching a replay of that maul where the Blues held the ball up.,the question I have is this.Given that Sotutu was legal,are the backs coming in from the side ok? If they are not the reaction of Tom Coventry in the box is understandable.Phew!
i didn't think they were legal, looked like Clarke, christie and black all just flew in the side once they saw the ball was being held up.
I've heard people say that once the ball is held up its a free for all, maybe if it was still a tackle but my understanding is he had called Maul and until he blows up the maul they should have come from the back
I'me bias thought so who knows
-
@trodthesod said in Blues v Highlanders:
Now the dust has settled on that great battle last Saturday,and watching a replay of that maul where the Blues held the ball up.,the question I have is this.Given that Sotutu was legal,are the backs coming in from the side ok? If they are not the reaction of Tom Coventry in the box is understandable.Phew!
i didn't think they were legal, looked like Clarke, christie and black all just flew in the side once they saw the ball was being held up.
I've heard people say that once the ball is held up its a free for all, maybe if it was still a tackle but my understanding is he had called Maul and until he blows up the maul they should have come from the back
I'me bias thought so who knows
@Kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
I've heard people say that once the ball is held up its a free for all
Those people don't know what the fuck they're talking about. There's always an offside line for a maul in the field of play.
OFFSIDE AT A MAUL
Each team has an offside line that runs parallel to the goal line through the maul participants’ hindmost foot that is nearest to that team’s goal line. If that foot is on or behind the goal line, the offside line for that team is the goal line.
- A player must either join a maul from an onside position or retire behind their offside line immediately. Sanction: Penalty.
JOINING A MAUL
Players joining a maul must:
- Do so from an onside position.
- Bind on to the hindmost player in the maul.
-
Thank you for clearing that up.
The Blues obviously dodged one there.You win some and you lose some! Perhaps the ref had already called held up. -
@Kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
I've heard people say that once the ball is held up its a free for all
Those people don't know what the fuck they're talking about. There's always an offside line for a maul in the field of play.
OFFSIDE AT A MAUL
Each team has an offside line that runs parallel to the goal line through the maul participants’ hindmost foot that is nearest to that team’s goal line. If that foot is on or behind the goal line, the offside line for that team is the goal line.
- A player must either join a maul from an onside position or retire behind their offside line immediately. Sanction: Penalty.
JOINING A MAUL
Players joining a maul must:
- Do so from an onside position.
- Bind on to the hindmost player in the maul.
@antipodean said in Blues v Highlanders:
@Kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
I've heard people say that once the ball is held up its a free for all
Those people don't know what the fuck they're talking about. There's always an offside line for a maul in the field of play.
OFFSIDE AT A MAUL
Each team has an offside line that runs parallel to the goal line through the maul participants’ hindmost foot that is nearest to that team’s goal line. If that foot is on or behind the goal line, the offside line for that team is the goal line.
- A player must either join a maul from an onside position or retire behind their offside line immediately. Sanction: Penalty.
JOINING A MAUL
Players joining a maul must:
- Do so from an onside position.
- Bind on to the hindmost player in the maul.
I see that stipulation being ignored a lot in all games, particularly when the backs join an attacking maul
-
Thank you for clearing that up.
The Blues obviously dodged one there.You win some and you lose some! Perhaps the ref had already called held up.@trodthesod said in Blues v Highlanders:
Thank you for clearing that up.
The Blues obviously dodged one there.You win some and you lose some! Perhaps the ref had already called held up.That’s what I’m going with, was up for a while.
-
@trodthesod said in Blues v Highlanders:
Now the dust has settled on that great battle last Saturday,and watching a replay of that maul where the Blues held the ball up.,the question I have is this.Given that Sotutu was legal,are the backs coming in from the side ok? If they are not the reaction of Tom Coventry in the box is understandable.Phew!
i didn't think they were legal, looked like Clarke, christie and black all just flew in the side once they saw the ball was being held up.
I've heard people say that once the ball is held up its a free for all, maybe if it was still a tackle but my understanding is he had called Maul and until he blows up the maul they should have come from the back
I'me bias thought so who knows
@Kiwiwomble said in Blues v Highlanders:
@trodthesod said in Blues v Highlanders:
Now the dust has settled on that great battle last Saturday,and watching a replay of that maul where the Blues held the ball up.,the question I have is this.Given that Sotutu was legal,are the backs coming in from the side ok? If they are not the reaction of Tom Coventry in the box is understandable.Phew!
i didn't think they were legal, looked like Clarke, christie and black all just flew in the side once they saw the ball was being held up.
I've heard people say that once the ball is held up its a free for all, maybe if it was still a tackle but my understanding is he had called Maul and until he blows up the maul they should have come from the back
I'me bias thought so who knows
Yeah, I'm not sure what the deal is there, because you often see that when a player is held up in general play even if the ref calls "maul".
-
Yeah it’s one of the many inconsistencies you see with reffing of the maul. Similarly you rarely see a penalty for collapsing when the attacking side pulls down the maul to try and free up a “held up” player or the defence collapses that same maul to get the turnover.
-
Yeah it’s one of the many inconsistencies you see with reffing of the maul. Similarly you rarely see a penalty for collapsing when the attacking side pulls down the maul to try and free up a “held up” player or the defence collapses that same maul to get the turnover.
-
Thank you for clearing that up.
The Blues obviously dodged one there.You win some and you lose some! Perhaps the ref had already called held up.@trodthesod said in Blues v Highlanders:
Thank you for clearing that up.
The Blues obviously dodged one there.You win some and you lose some! Perhaps the ref had already called held up.looking at it, I think the ruling was that the ball carrier detached and the maul was therefore over - that's when everyone ran in as it became a tackle situation, and joining the tackle seems a bit lax.
-
Blues were lucky. Backs are dumb.
As an aside, does anyone have video of Parsons dropping the ball over line?
It occurred to me after to wonder if he was interfered with by a player on the ground, which would have been a penalty/PT, or if he was just a clumsy oaf.
But it only occurred after the game and I didn't look.
-
Yeah it’s one of the many inconsistencies you see with reffing of the maul. Similarly you rarely see a penalty for collapsing when the attacking side pulls down the maul to try and free up a “held up” player or the defence collapses that same maul to get the turnover.
@pukunui said in Blues v Highlanders:
Yeah it’s one of the many inconsistencies you see with reffing of the maul. Similarly you rarely see a penalty for collapsing when the attacking side pulls down the maul to try and free up a “held up” player or the defence collapses that same maul to get the turnover.
i'll be honest and say i thought the attacking team were allowed to go to ground, learn something new everyday
-
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune for James.After losing two lineouts on his throw and seeing his team’s lead disappear,he threw the most accurate throw into the 5 metre lineout which his forwards drove to the try line ,got himself into the boot,drove to the line with the ball in hand,only to have his attendant Dalton pinch it out of his hands for the try .Bugger he must have thought,I’ll get the next one.Not sure what happened when he lost the ball in his next drive ,but the play ended up a penalty to the Highlanders ,which I bet,much to James relief missed.However his day most blessed by the victory and the arrival of his baby.Congratulations .
-
@Bones said in Blues v Highlanders:
@pukunui I think there was one early on in this game!
I said rarely, not never, so there may well have been.
Which would highlight how inconsistent it is.@pukunui said in Blues v Highlanders:
@Bones said in Blues v Highlanders:
@pukunui I think there was one early on in this game!
I said rarely, not never, so there may well have been.
Which would highlight how inconsistent it is.Oh I know, I've never seen it, that's why I was surprised and at the same time TJ mentioned that it is one of the areas the refs are looking at.
Always annoyed me that it should be ruled so differently.
