An attacking player grubbers the ball into the in-goal area. In attempting to score the try the ball is knocked forward. Decision?
I think what confuses players and spectators here is that because you can't have a scrum in-goal, they then assume (wrongly) that you can't have a knock-on in goal either.[LAWS]Law11
1. A knock- on may occur anywhere in the playing area.[/LAWS]
The playing area includes in-goal.
So its a defending scrum on the 5m line.
Also there is clarification that law 21 (old law 22) that a knock on in or into the in goal results in a scrum NOT a 22m drop out.
You cannot have a scrum, ruck or maul in the in-goal, so those offside lines disappear, but you can be offside in general play.
[LAWS]Law11
1. A knock- on may occur anywhere in the playing area.[/LAWS]
The playing area includes in-goal.
So its a defending scrum on the 5m line.
what about if defenders pick up ball from inside in goal & kick it out over dead ball line / touch in goal line / or even touch it down in goal
would you allow advantage to of been played { even if you didn't shout advantage } & offer a 22 kick out to defending team .
what about if defenders pick up ball from inside in goal & kick it out over dead ball line / touch in goal line / or even touch it down in goal
would you allow advantage to of been played { even if you didn't shout advantage } & offer a 22 kick out to defending team .
No, advice I have been given is that we don't play advantage in-goal..although I can't back that up in law it's what we have been instructed.
Since in-goal is a bit of a maverick area (with no tackles, rucks etc allowed) this seems eminently sensible.
what about if defenders pick up ball from inside in goal & kick it out over dead ball line / touch in goal line / or even touch it down in goal
would you allow advantage to of been played { even if you didn't shout advantage } & offer a 22 kick out to defending team .
Well, we established in a recent thread that following an knock on, adv is over when they kick it !
Until about 40 years ago, a knock-on into in-goal was a 22 drop out, whereas an attacking knock-on inside in-goal was a 5 metre scrum. This was seen as an anomaly, so the law was changed. The outcome from a knock-on can never be a drop out.It was never so that a knock on into the in goal by the attacking side was a 22m drop out?
In 1977 the law said that a scrum offence in the In-goal would lead to a drop out. This was not changed in 1978.
So if the defenders chose to play on, when would you call advantage over before they cross the 5m line.
What if the attacking team knocks-on in/into the defenders goal, the defenders pick up the ball and make three passes to the wide side, the referee call "advantage over!" and the defenders ground the ball.
Now you have a 22DO following a KO into goal.
This argument will not die because there are people like myself (and crossref) who see the fallacy in how the laws are being applied. We have agreed to referee to the rule of the majority (at least, I have) but there are flaws in the logic and the 'old guard' simply don't want to hear it.