How many can you get right? 🤔 | The Breakdown crew take on the Referee Exam 🤓🏉

Join the crew of the Breakdown as they take a shot at the rugby referee exam.
Your sport, your Sky: www.sky.co.nz/...
Subscribe and get notified when we're live: www.youtube.co...
You can catch all the best bits on:
➡️ Instagram: / skysportnz
➡️ Facebook: / skysportnz
➡️ TikTok: / skysportnz
➡️ Twitter: / skysportnz
Sky Sport is the home of sport in New Zealand. Visit www.sky.co.nz for more information.

[@k.o.t.h]

JK's the classmate that had the rest of the class rolling their eyes every time he raised his hand or opened his mouth😂

[@k.o.t.h]

JK's the reason I didn't watch till the end😂

[@Knowyourintent]

Me too

[@lobomorunga1]

at 29 minutes, I commited.....aaargh........!!!!

[@sanjivat]

Couple of difficult students. Feel sorry for the invigilator 😂😂

[@ib6542]

after 10min i skipped straight to the end and jk was still yarning on about things and still got no winner lol.

[@seanmac80]

The question about what happens when the ref can see a ball is available to be played from a ruck is a great illustration of stupid some of the laws are. If the ball is "out" of the ruck (i.e. available to be played) then an opposition played coming from an onside position should be allowed to play at it, as they should be allowed to play the halfback from an onside position as soon as the 9 has hands on the ball. If the halfback can't be played because the ball is deemed to be still in the ruck, then the half should be penalised for usinng hands in the ruck. It's as comical as the laws around rolling mauls; if a player is obstructing the opposition form tackling the ball carrier in normal play, it's a penalty. If a player runs into their own team mate in front of them while in possession and that player prevents contact, it's also offside. Yet both are fine in a maul. Stupid and archaic.

[@amancalledconor]

"If the ball is "out" of the ruck (i.e. available to be played)" "Available to be played" is NOT the same as "he ball is out" "If a player runs into their own team mate" in terms of a maul isn't what's allowed. The ball carrier must be bound to their team mate in a maul, rather than running into them.

[@carlospinheirotorres9499]

I reckon these are not the rules per se, but rather reflective of them. Each question may compound two or more rules. For instance the "free kick" question could be flipped to be the answer---and 'that' would be the correspondent rule (regarding the correct situations). i.e You have the rules for those specific situations where it determines that a free-kick is awarded. Or it's me that is on the wrong?...

[@Nineteenseventy2]

You are right, they are not rules. They are Laws.

[@andersonking73]

Sir JK been on the whacky baccie 🤣

[@elizabethleiper2664]

Well done Kirstie! 😂 When will we learn who passed? I do agree that a 'law' should be a law, not a what if A, B, C or D -- this is why 'interpretation' causes so much controversy. Everyone says "rugby is a simple game" - it's not with laws which are not finite laws-but are merely guidelines with 4 or 5 options imho

[@tclrsons9272]

Answer the questions and move on JK lol you wasted so much time, and I just couldn't keep watching. To everyone who made it to the end, you are legendary 😂

[@Knowyourintent]

Me too

[@waffle_burger8499]

Jeff and Kirstie were super patient with him lol.

[@Myke...]

totally agree with JK the laws need to be streamlined.

[@hdg0pc70]

These are not rules, they are guidance,. but you have to feel for the the refs working with this stuff.

[@justinmaddock9783]

They are laws not rules

[@waffle_burger8499]

Please JK, stop being so annoying. Mils would have been better 😂. Jeff is also obviously able to visualise the situation with each question, whereas JK ckearly struggled with this aspect. I think this could partly explain why he was not a successful coach.

[@glenndouglas.T]

JK is so annoying

[@Knowyourintent]

He's so hard to watch ... poor Kirstie and Jeff having to work with him.

[@aluikpoate1459]

🤣