Viewing comments for Canadian15« back to profile

Stade Francais' Jerome Fillol spits in Peter Stringer's face

Challenge Cup is not part of the TMO extended power trials which is why he did not refer the incident upstairs

1 Year, 7 Months ago

Stade Francais' Jerome Fillol spits in Peter Stringer's face

Challenge Cup*

1 Year, 7 Months ago

Saracens through to Heineken Cup semi final as 'Ash Splash' returns

I don't understand why so many people think the dive is so bad. People seem to love to overreact to it. It is not as though he does a dance to attract attention after he scores; he does his swallow dive and is done with it and attracts no more attention than if he just scored without the swallow dive... also get real, the conversion is no harder from where he scored than if he scored under the posts...

1 Year, 7 Months ago

Stade Francais' Jerome Fillol spits in Peter Stringer's face

Heineken Cup is not part of the trial allowing TMOs to review foul play.

1 Year, 7 Months ago

Stade Francais' Jerome Fillol spits in Peter Stringer's face

That is just disgusting, says a lot about the character of both men. Excellent restraint showed by Stringer. If Fillol thinks that is any way to act in any situation at all then he needs a smack upside the head. What do you hope to prove by spitting at an opponent?

1 Year, 7 Months ago

Dimitri Yachvili forgets he's playing rugby, backheels pass for Erik Lund try

I openly agreed that what was seen here was not a knock on after consulting the rules. The discussion that followed was about a hypothetical scenario in which the ball started in hand...
It was not an assumption but rather an interpretation of what appeared to me to be an odd ambiguity in the rules.

And yeah... Yachvili was offside...

I had a discussion about an interpretation of the rules and you disagree with the position I took up, so what? I am sure you have heard far sillier things in your life.

1 Year, 7 Months ago

Dimitri Yachvili forgets he's playing rugby, backheels pass for Erik Lund try

I see what you are saying but I question whether possession is said to be lost when the ball leaves the hands as in the case of a drop goal attempt the ball is dropped forwards but is part of a controlled play. If the ball is heeled forward as a chip, I question whether or not it is the initial release of the ball from hands that qualifies as the direction in which the ball travels in the loss of possession, or the direction of the heel chip upon the ball touching the ground. This is probably my biggest hang up - the fact that in the scenario we have been discussing, the heel chip is planned and controlled in the same manner as a drop goal attempt.

1 Year, 7 Months ago

Dimitri Yachvili forgets he's playing rugby, backheels pass for Erik Lund try

Above all though, I feel like such a play violates the spirit of the game as traditionally and conventionally, the ball is meant to be passed laterally and/or backwards and can be kicked forward. I feel like both of us have made strong arguments for our positions and I have actually rather enjoyed this.

1 Year, 7 Months ago

Dimitri Yachvili forgets he's playing rugby, backheels pass for Erik Lund try

Agreed- this is not really any sort of special display of skill.

The discussion has been rather enjoyable for me, especially as it is a real discussion devoid of mud-slinging.

1 Year, 7 Months ago

Dimitri Yachvili forgets he's playing rugby, backheels pass for Erik Lund try

You are right, they are not specifically mentioned, good catch.

BUT the the definition of a knock-on does not specifically say that possession is lost forward from hands, it says possession is lost and the ball travels forward.

I'm really not trying to be nit-picky prick, I genuinely believe that such a scenario constitutes a knock-on.

A drop-kick can be taken to score a drop goal and in this context such a kick would have to conform to the definition of a kick (though I am not suggesting that kicking drop goals with your heel regularly is realistic). This, in my opinion, means that the definition of a kick does not apply only to restarts and penalties and free kicks, but also in the course of general play.

What is difficult from this point, for me, is that by allowing such a chip to occur without it being a kick is the application of rules such as "out on the full" and an opposing player calling for a mark. Furthermore, as it is not technically a kick, could a player be penalized for knocking the ball out of the field of play with such a chip?

From my perspective it makes more sense that the definition of a kick implies that the ball is to allowed to be advanced with the heel as opposed to meaning that the use of the heel (at the very least intentionally) such that the ball travels forward has implications on how rules are applied to the result of the play.

1 Year, 7 Months ago

 
Site Meter