Learned colleagues, was the decision to award a 5-metre scrum to Team A in the following instances correct?
a. Team A hoofs the ball into Team B's in-goal, where a scrambling Team B player tries to catch it. The ball slips backwards through his hands, hits the ground, and rolls across his team's dead ball line.
b. Team A kicks the ball into Team B's in-goal, where a Team B player desperately dives to touch it down. He falls short so that the tops of his fingers propel the ball backwards along the ground over his team's dead ball line.
To clarify, in neither case did the defender knock the ball on (Law 22.14), ground it (Law 22.5), hold the ball when it crossed the dead ball line (Law 22.1.a), or intentionally throw the ball over the dead ball line (Law 10.2.c).
Does Law 22.11, which says what happens when a ball (as opposed to a player) touches the touch-in goal or dead ball lines, suggest that the decision could have been a 22-m drop-out instead (Law 22.7 has a similar implication)?
It is not an infringement in the field of play to let the ball fall backwards, and in-goal infringements "are treated as if they had taken place in the field of play" (Law 22.16).
Is there a law or guideline that specifies that it is an infringement when the ball falls backwards in the in-goal and the dead ball line comes into play?
a. Team A hoofs the ball into Team B's in-goal, where a scrambling Team B player tries to catch it. The ball slips backwards through his hands, hits the ground, and rolls across his team's dead ball line.
b. Team A kicks the ball into Team B's in-goal, where a Team B player desperately dives to touch it down. He falls short so that the tops of his fingers propel the ball backwards along the ground over his team's dead ball line.
To clarify, in neither case did the defender knock the ball on (Law 22.14), ground it (Law 22.5), hold the ball when it crossed the dead ball line (Law 22.1.a), or intentionally throw the ball over the dead ball line (Law 10.2.c).
Does Law 22.11, which says what happens when a ball (as opposed to a player) touches the touch-in goal or dead ball lines, suggest that the decision could have been a 22-m drop-out instead (Law 22.7 has a similar implication)?
It is not an infringement in the field of play to let the ball fall backwards, and in-goal infringements "are treated as if they had taken place in the field of play" (Law 22.16).
Is there a law or guideline that specifies that it is an infringement when the ball falls backwards in the in-goal and the dead ball line comes into play?
