2023 Six Nations

[CM11]

It's not as straightforward as that. If the ball is available, refs will prefer tacklers to stay where they are as movement in any direction can hamper the attacking side. Yes the recent clarification is to roll away towards the touchline but it's not always possible. Refs have to make a judgement call each time.

[sefton]

I feel this is my Banshee moment with ER.
I am obviously the sexy brooding Farrell to his fat gnarled old miserable Gleeson.

So sad

Nice to meet you, Owen.

[Yr Alban]

Ref had a good game overall. My only issue was walking us back 10 because Ritchie apparently told him Ireland were off their feet. Assuming he didn’t say anything ruder than that, surely the captain is allowed to say things like this? OTOH, he warned the Irish lad about telling him to give a YC, which is something I detest.

Yes, he let a lot of stuff go, but all refs have things they will tolerate and things they won’t, and I don’t think he favoured one side over the other.

[Lobby]

Ref had a good game overall. My only issue was walking us back 10 because Ritchie apparently told him Ireland were off their feet. Assuming he didn’t say anything ruder than that, surely the captain is allowed to say things like this? OTOH, he warned the Irish lad about telling him to give a YC, which is something I detest.

Yes, he let a lot of stuff go, but all refs have things they will tolerate and things they won’t, and I don’t think he favoured one side over the other.

He marched him back because Ritchie shouted his disagreement with the penalty decision directly at the ref. The way to do it is to ask the ref for a discussion, suggest to him that the Irish keep going off their feet and then ask him to look out for this at the next tackle situation, not wave your hands in the air and complain that the ref’s decision is wrong.

[Yr Alban]

Ref had a good game overall. My only issue was walking us back 10 because Ritchie apparently told him Ireland were off their feet. Assuming he didn’t say anything ruder than that, surely the captain is allowed to say things like this? OTOH, he warned the Irish lad about telling him to give a YC, which is something I detest.

Yes, he let a lot of stuff go, but all refs have things they will tolerate and things they won’t, and I don’t think he favoured one side over the other.

He marched him back because Ritchie shouted his disagreement with the penalty decision directly at the ref. The way to do it is to ask the ref for a discussion, suggest to him that the Irish keep going off their feet and then ask him to look out for this at the next tackle situation, not wave your hands in the air and complain that the ref’s decision is wrong.

Fair enough - if you wanted a masterclass in how to play the ref, you’d ask the Irish

Slightly more seriously, Ritchie is early in his captaincy and will learn the softer approach.

[fishfoodie]

England facing a new challenge un Super Saturday !

[TheFrog]

[Jim Lahey]

Ref had a good game overall. My only issue was walking us back 10 because Ritchie apparently told him Ireland were off their feet. Assuming he didn’t say anything ruder than that, surely the captain is allowed to say things like this? OTOH, he warned the Irish lad about telling him to give a YC, which is something I detest.

Yes, he let a lot of stuff go, but all refs have things they will tolerate and things they won’t, and I don’t think he favoured one side over the other.

He marched him back because Ritchie shouted his disagreement with the penalty decision directly at the ref. The way to do it is to ask the ref for a discussion, suggest to him that the Irish keep going off their feet and then ask him to look out for this at the next tackle situation, not wave your hands in the air and complain that the ref’s decision is wrong.

Fair enough - if you wanted a masterclass in how to play the ref, you’d ask the Irish

Slightly more seriously, Ritchie is early in his captaincy and will learn the softer approach.

I feel like I've seen him marched back for mouthing off a good number of times. He's a good player but if he isn't communicating with refs well, then he might not have the temperment to be an international captain.

[Ymx]

Are you accusing him of nose candy? Or??

[Guy Smiley]

Galthie was in tears during the postmatch interview.

[Jim Lahey]

Are you accusing him of nose candy? Or??

The English back row could've done with some on Saturday.

[laurent]

Are you accusing him of nose candy? Or??

Cécile Grès (the journalist) martyrized him and Laporte not long ago , maybe that's the reason .

She is fearless ... (having worked on sidelines in ProD2 before).

[inactionman]

Those glasses are really growing on me.

Not quite specs, not quite sunglasses, not quite goggles.

[Ymx]

Those glasses are really growing on me.

Not quite specs, not quite sunglasses, not quite goggles.

He claims it’s because he keeps breaking normal framed glasses.

I Googled it earlier.

[sturginho]

Those glasses are really growing on me.

Not quite specs, not quite sunglasses, not quite goggles.

I need some new specs, I might ask for The Full Galthié

[Yr Alban]

He marched him back because Ritchie shouted his disagreement with the penalty decision directly at the ref. The way to do it is to ask the ref for a discussion, suggest to him that the Irish keep going off their feet and then ask him to look out for this at the next tackle situation, not wave your hands in the air and complain that the ref’s decision is wrong.

Fair enough - if you wanted a masterclass in how to play the ref, you’d ask the Irish

Slightly more seriously, Ritchie is early in his captaincy and will learn the softer approach.

I feel like I've seen him marched back for mouthing off a good number of times. He's a good player but if he isn't communicating with refs well, then he might not have the temperment to be an international captain.

It seems that it wasn’t so much what he said, but his intimidating body language (not that I’m sure Ritchie knows how not to be intimidating). It has also been reported that the ref apologised to him for the ‘back 10’ call afterwards.

[Torquemada 1420]

Are you accusing him of nose candy? Or??

Cécile Grès (the journalist) martyrized him and Laporte not long ago , maybe that's the reason .

She is fearless ... (having worked on sidelines in ProD2 before).

She's no Isabelle though

[laurent]

Are you accusing him of nose candy? Or??

Cécile Grès (the journalist) martyrized him and Laporte not long ago , maybe that's the reason .

She is fearless ... (having worked on sidelines in ProD2 before).

She's no Isabelle though

I refuse to choose.

[Torquemada 1420]

Cécile Grès (the journalist) martyrized him and Laporte not long ago , maybe that's the reason .

She is fearless ... (having worked on sidelines in ProD2 before).

She's no Isabelle though

I refuse to choose.

I'd like the chance to choose.

[Tichtheid]

This is the incident where Ritchie was marched back 10.

He can't really help being six foot four, he didn't shout, he walked towards the referee.

Apparently Luke Pearce apologised to Ritchie afterwards

[inactionman]

This is the incident where Ritchie was marched back 10.

He can't really help being six foot four, he didn't shout, he walked towards the referee.

Apparently Luke Pearce apologised to Ritchie afterwards

That is harsh - I've seen many players be much more direct and animated with refs, he looked a bit miffed but that's about it.

On the topic of off feet, is it just me or has more been let go in this 6N? Matey there was practically in a headstand and it was let go

[Guy Smiley]

On the topic of off feet, is it just me or has more been let go in this 6N? Matey there was practically in a headstand and it was let go

If a player gets hands on the ball and it's not released immediately you often see the penalty given for that regardless of whether that player remains on their feet. They've won the ball, after all.

[CM11]

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.

[Tichtheid]

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.

The law is that the player has to be supporting his own weight, take the ball away and Hansen falls forward onto his face.

[inactionman]

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.

[Guy Smiley]

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.

The law is that the player has to be supporting his own weight, take the ball away and Hansen falls forward onto his face.

The crucial change in the way this is ruled now came about sometime over the last year and a half. The tackled player must release immediately and that has done away with that bloody ridiculous place but not place, release but not release charade that went on in every tackle. It's taking me a while to adjust because it looks wrong... but the first defender to get hands on the ball usually is supporting their own weight at the instant of grabbing the ball and that's enough. They go to ground after that, then they have to release.

We got used to seeing players like David Pocock, for example, with the sheer strength to be able to hold their ground on their feet while they 'contested' for the ball. Now, there's no need for that... they've won it as soon as they grab it and it isn't released.

[Tichtheid]

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.

[Raggs]

Hansen could have been called either way, personally I see the argument for off feet more than winning the ball.

However, I think Ritchie had been on Pearce's case a bit beforehand, so coming upto him and basically telling him he'd made the wrong call (it wasn't a question, it wasn't a clarification, he straight up told Pearce he was wrong), is an easy way to get marched back.

[inactionman]

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.

The law is that the player has to be supporting his own weight, take the ball away and Hansen falls forward onto his face.

The crucial change in the way this is ruled now came about sometime over the last year and a half. The tackled player must release immediately and that has done away with that bloody ridiculous place but not place, release but not release charade that went on in every tackle. It's taking me a while to adjust because it looks wrong... but the first defender to get hands on the ball usually is supporting their own weight at the instant of grabbing the ball and that's enough. They go to ground after that, then they have to release.

We got used to seeing players like David Pocock, for example, with the sheer strength to be able to hold their ground on their feet while they 'contested' for the ball. Now, there's no need for that... they've won it as soon as they grab it and it isn't released.

Yep, I've definitely noticed a change in the reffing in that direction. I agree it's a good thing to get rid of the sort-of-release charade we had before, but I think it needs to be at least balanced by a genuine attempt to remain on feet whilst picking the ball. Otherwise players could just end up doing a plank and claiming they're on feet.

To be honest it's all occurring in a blink of an eye and - even on-slo-mo - I'd hate to make calls. It may just be more objective to go with the approach of allowing players to jackal as long as only feet are on ground and hands are on ball, even if they fall over in the act of grasping for the ball. Or we could go back to rucking past the ball.

[CM11]

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.

You'd need his arrival. He's already over the ball with his hands on it at the start of the clip.

[inactionman]

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.

Agreed. It's a giveaway - if your feet are further back than hips, you can't maintain static balance on your feet.

Unless you have rolls of lead in the heels of your boots.

[Tichtheid]

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.

You'd need his arrival. He's already over the ball with his hands on it at the start of the clip.

It actually worse than it appears from the twitter clip, he comes in from the side and then moves around to the correct position, but this is his first contact with the ball, he touches the top of it with his left hand but his right is on the ground. He adjusts himself and puts both hands on top of the ball. His arms are obvious because he is wearing black long sleeves.
I made a mistake in that it was Hogg who carried into the contact, not Fagerson

https://i.postimg.cc/4dfmLY1v/3-F42-A9- ... -A61-F.jpg


edit, well I made a pig's ear of that, but you can get the gist of it from clicking through

[PornDog]

Personally I don't think there's ever a need for a player to have their shoulders below their hips - whether carrying 1 out close to the line or trying to poach the ball - it should be considered illegal*

*not a law that exists, I just think it should be. Would change the ruck and tight carrying to both be much safer.

[JM2K6]

Hansen could have been called either way, personally I see the argument for off feet more than winning the ball.

However, I think Ritchie had been on Pearce's case a bit beforehand, so coming upto him and basically telling him he'd made the wrong call (it wasn't a question, it wasn't a clarification, he straight up told Pearce he was wrong), is an easy way to get marched back.

Right. It needs a bit of context and even if he is captain, walking up to complain about the call in the referee's face isn't going to help. Captains get leeway to talk to the ref but it's never intended to be an argument.

[Tichtheid]

Hansen could have been called either way, personally I see the argument for off feet more than winning the ball.

However, I think Ritchie had been on Pearce's case a bit beforehand, so coming upto him and basically telling him he'd made the wrong call (it wasn't a question, it wasn't a clarification, he straight up told Pearce he was wrong), is an easy way to get marched back.

Right. It needs a bit of context and even if he is captain, walking up to complain about the call in the referee's face isn't going to help. Captains get leeway to talk to the ref but it's never intended to be an argument.

If he'd have stayed where he was he'd have needed to shout at Pearce in order to be heard.

[JM2K6]

Hansen could have been called either way, personally I see the argument for off feet more than winning the ball.

However, I think Ritchie had been on Pearce's case a bit beforehand, so coming upto him and basically telling him he'd made the wrong call (it wasn't a question, it wasn't a clarification, he straight up told Pearce he was wrong), is an easy way to get marched back.

Right. It needs a bit of context and even if he is captain, walking up to complain about the call in the referee's face isn't going to help. Captains get leeway to talk to the ref but it's never intended to be an argument.

If he'd have stayed where he was he'd have needed to shout at Pearce in order to be heard.

Yup, those were the two options: shout at the referee to complain about the decision, or walk over and complain about the decision from 6 inches away.

[Tichtheid]

Right. It needs a bit of context and even if he is captain, walking up to complain about the call in the referee's face isn't going to help. Captains get leeway to talk to the ref but it's never intended to be an argument.

If he'd have stayed where he was he'd have needed to shout at Pearce in order to be heard.

Yup, those were the two options: shout at the referee to complain about the decision, or walk over and complain about the decision from 6 inches away.

There was a bit of noise happening around them, you may have heard it, after the penalty is awarded Ritchie walks over to Pearce and says, quite calmly, "He's off his feet, Sir"*. He didn't shout nor did he sound intimidating, it's there on the clip. There is a reason he is the one doing it, it's because he's the captain and as such he is entitled to do so.

He can't be penalised for being the height he is and having to stand close the ref to make himself heard, Shirely?


*it's either "off his feet" or "He's lost his feet, Sir", meaning he wasn't supporting his own weight, which he certainly wasn't.

[JM2K6]

If he'd have stayed where he was he'd have needed to shout at Pearce in order to be heard.

Yup, those were the two options: shout at the referee to complain about the decision, or walk over and complain about the decision from 6 inches away.

There was a bit of noise happening around them, you may have heard it, after the penalty is awarded Ritchie walks over to Pearce and says, quite calmly, "He's off his feet, Sir"*. He didn't shout nor did he sound intimidating, it's there on the clip. There is a reason he is the one doing it, it's because he's the captain and as such he is entitled to do so.

He can't be penalised for being the height he is and having to stand close the ref to make himself heard, Shirely?


*it's either "off his feet" or "He's lost his feet, Sir", meaning he wasn't supporting his own weight, which he certainly wasn't.

He marches over to the ref and questions his decision having previously pissed him off - I'm not sure what outcome you're expecting. It's far from the worst I've seen but you always run a risk of this if you're on the wrong side of the ref and all you want to tell him is that he's wrong.

It was also a fair decision so let's not start making out it was some travesty - he was on his feet, had his hands on the ball, and had it in the air at the start of the cleanout, before he lost his balance thanks to the guy sitting on the floor pulling him over. You could quibble it wasn't actually holding on and should've been play on, but a) it's clear that throughout that the Scottish player never releases the ball, even after it's been lifted, and b) it's in line with how those have been reffed for the last few years - it's not like the cleanout player didn't go straight to deck and continue to interfere with play...

[Tichtheid]

Yup, those were the two options: shout at the referee to complain about the decision, or walk over and complain about the decision from 6 inches away.

There was a bit of noise happening around them, you may have heard it, after the penalty is awarded Ritchie walks over to Pearce and says, quite calmly, "He's off his feet, Sir"*. He didn't shout nor did he sound intimidating, it's there on the clip. There is a reason he is the one doing it, it's because he's the captain and as such he is entitled to do so.

He can't be penalised for being the height he is and having to stand close the ref to make himself heard, Shirely?


*it's either "off his feet" or "He's lost his feet, Sir", meaning he wasn't supporting his own weight, which he certainly wasn't.

He marches over to the ref and questions his decision having previously pissed him off - I'm not sure what outcome you're expecting. It's far from the worst I've seen but you always run a risk of this if you're on the wrong side of the ref and all you want to tell him is that he's wrong.

It was also a fair decision so let's not start making out it was some travesty - he was on his feet, had his hands on the ball, and had it in the air at the start of the cleanout, before he lost his balance thanks to the guy sitting on the floor pulling him over. You could quibble it wasn't actually holding on and should've been play on, but a) it's clear that throughout that the Scottish player never releases the ball, even after it's been lifted, and b) it's in line with how those have been reffed for the last few years - it's not like the cleanout player didn't go straight to deck and continue to interfere with play...

Shite, look at the still I linked to above, he'd come in from the side to begin with, when he first touches Hogg, who has already been tackled, Hansen is facing the touchline and has his left leg in front of Hogg and his right the other side. Hansen's first contact with the ball was as per that still, he has one hand on the ground and his other on top of the ball, his arse is about in line with his calf, ie his feet are way behind the rest of his body

Take a picture of yourself supporting your own weight like that and I'll say you are right on this.

[JM2K6]

Sorry bro I don't do fetish requests


I'm not sure your still shows anything but given how often we see the ball stolen by players in that exact same situation - and that Hansen did actually lift the ball, and that the big lad hit him hard without managing to budge him - I don't think that still is evidence of any kind of "not supporting his bodyweight" call.

Not going to argue on how he enters the ruck because I don't have that to hand. Doesn't sound like it was what Ritchie was complaining about though so that sounds a bit like a smokescreen.

By the standards of modern ruck policing, that decision was absolutely fine.