RugbyRebels

Can anyone see how this is possibly a fair decision? I can understand the chargers going, cause he does move his shoulder, which is usually a trigger before the first step is taken, but the camera zooms out at the point he takes his first step and the chargers are halfway to him!

To my mind, should've been a retake with no charge allowed.

Puja

Chargers charge. Besides surely Exeter cheated in scoring from one of the few positions he could have kicked with grass beneath him!

Mostly he needs to not have a technique which allows people to charge. I'd also like the game to be clear what are the trigger points for chargers, and I'd like the game to cut the time available to tack a kick.

It's impossible to tell from that video (which is the one shown live) as we can't see what he's doing with his feet. At 22 secs in that video he appears to move backwards slightly, which having seen Simmonds kick is likely to be when he draws his feet closer together before approaching. If that's the case, it's fair. Need to see a wide angle with his feet and the Saints players both in shot.

In any case, Exeter got away with plenty of decisions of their own during the 80 (including Sleightholme being obstructed for one of their tries) so can't feel much sympathy.

He moved.

If it's going by shoulder movement Biggar is screwed then. Seems a bit harsh, I'm surprised he didn't double check with the TMO.

FKAS wrote:If it's going by shoulder movement Biggar is screwed then. Seems a bit harsh, I'm surprised he didn't double check with the TMO.

Pretty sure it's his feet that prompted the charge rather than his shoulders

Ref said it was because he moved his shoulders, even though he did shuffle his feet. Right call (probably) for the wrong reason. But then the chargers were shouting so should have been retaken anyway. I think.

Rugby is getting really cack and over reffed.

Adam_P wrote:

FKAS wrote:If it's going by shoulder movement Biggar is screwed then. Seems a bit harsh, I'm surprised he didn't double check with the TMO.

Pretty sure it's his feet that prompted the charge rather than his shoulders

"he moved his shoulders and started his run up" according to sir.

To be fair kudos for the Saints players for going for it. Last kick of the game roll the dice, worst the ref can do is order it retaken and ban you from charging but you'll have got in the players head by then. Worth a gamble it paid off.

On a related note - bloody great to see Sleightholme fit again. Think he's going to be a great player.

Raggs wrote:He moved.

Excellent knowledge - thanks for that.

Puja

I don't see an issue, he was over the allotted minute in any event so it should have been pinged regardless

Edit: to elaborate a little, I dont see this as any different to squint feeds, wonky throw ins, double pumps, or failing to enter through the gate. It's one of those things that is penalised (or not) so rarely that it stands out on the odd occasion that it does (or doesn't) get pinged.

Danno wrote:I don't see an issue, he was over the allotted minute in any event so it should have been pinged regardless

Edit: to elaborate a little, I dont see this as any different to squint feeds, wonky throw ins, double pumps, or failing to enter through the gate. It's one of those things that is penalised (or not) so rarely that it stands out on the odd occasion that it does (or doesn't) get pinged.

I will note that you do get 90s for a conversion. He might've been over that too, but pedantry is a way of life for me.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Danno wrote:I don't see an issue, he was over the allotted minute in any event so it should have been pinged regardless

Edit: to elaborate a little, I dont see this as any different to squint feeds, wonky throw ins, double pumps, or failing to enter through the gate. It's one of those things that is penalised (or not) so rarely that it stands out on the odd occasion that it does (or doesn't) get pinged.

I will note that you do get 90s for a conversion. He might've been over that too, but pedantry is a way of life for me.

Puja

Forgot about that. I think my overarching point is still pretty solid.

Do us all a favour and stay out of the TMO game eh?

He moved. Not much, but enough.
Credit to Saints for being alive and getting their charge in.
Actually credit to Saints for their performance yesterday. That was not an insignificant result. They really worked hard for it, defending in a way that displayed considerable resolve.

Puja wrote:

Danno wrote:I don't see an issue, he was over the allotted minute in any event so it should have been pinged regardless

Edit: to elaborate a little, I dont see this as any different to squint feeds, wonky throw ins, double pumps, or failing to enter through the gate. It's one of those things that is penalised (or not) so rarely that it stands out on the odd occasion that it does (or doesn't) get pinged.

I will note that you do get 90s for a conversion. He might've been over that too, but pedantry is a way of life for me.

Puja

Ridley had checked with the timekeeper and had been told there was 1 min 10 secs (70 secs) on the clock and had told Simmonds he could "take the full time". I presume he meant the full 90 seconds.

fivepointer wrote:He moved. Not much, but enough.
Credit to Saints for being alive and getting their charge in.
Actually credit to Saints for their performance yesterday. That was not an insignificant result. They really worked hard for it, defending in a way that displayed considerable resolve.

Spot on 5p.

Also just love the fact Baxter had no complaints, saying the outcome was decided elsewhere.

I'd just stick with Baxter's comments on the law as it stands.

The overall time taken to complete a kick is excessive, IMO. I'd cheerfully do away with charging and cut the time for kicks to 30 seconds from the time that the tee arrives at the place where the kick is to be taken.

Oakboy wrote:I'd just stick with Baxter's comments on the law as it stands.

The overall time taken to complete a kick is excessive, IMO. I'd cheerfully do away with charging and cut the time for kicks to 30 seconds from the time that the tee arrives at the place where the kick is to be taken.

What you'd achieve with this is the kickers taking a breather, getting in position, starting to visualise their kick, and then the side with the kick sending on the tee.

I'd go for something like 60 seconds from the moment a penalty or try is awarded, maybe 90 seconds to allow a relevant body back up off the ground or to decide kick for touch Vs posts, do with the 60-90 seconds as you will. If the side facing the kick interact in any manner with the game following the award of a penalty or try there's no need for a kick and it's just automatic points

Why not something like a "crouch - pause - engage" call from the ref to guide them along. The referee can pop one of those little guns with a flag, when he says engage, so that the opposition know they can charge.

Mikey Brown wrote:Why not something like a "crouch - pause - engage" call from the ref to guide them along. The referee can pop one of those little guns with a flag, when he says engage, so that the opposition know they can charge.

Or just hold his arm up, and lower it down when they can charge?

Time limits on lineouts, too.

what happens to time limits on a lineout if the hooker goes down with cramp?

Jonny May has to throw in obvs

Mellsblue wrote:Jonny May has to throw in obvs

Beat me to it!

What if a hooker and two locks go down with cramp? Worse, what if someone goes down holding their head?

Or is introducing a culture wherein you're expected to play enough? And is that time based, or just failing to run to the set piece?