So until the ball is out of in-goal (and probably past the 5m line), you don't call advantage over. If they're under pressure in their own in-goal that shouldn't take too long.
What if they kick it ?
So until the ball is out of in-goal (and probably past the 5m line), you don't call advantage over. If they're under pressure in their own in-goal that shouldn't take too long.
Rich_NL, you are missing the point. If the referee calls "Advantage over" then, by grounding the ball, the non-offending team gains a true advantage. If he doesn't, and they ground the ball, then they can't gain that same advantage (as the law is applied today).
That strikes me as being counterintuitive.
I can't track down that quote (for context), but the law on in-goal knock-ons was changed to a 5 metre scrum in 1989.OB
Are you sure about that because when I asked you about that a while ago you told me[LAWS]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.[/LAWS]
Do we agree that a 22DO is of greater advantage to the defenders than a defending 5m scrum?
That's intriguing !he law on in-goal knock-ons was changed to a 5 metre scrum in 1989.
What if they'd put up a high kick into in goal and failed to gather it?Yes, I agree it is a greater advantage, but not one that the defending team deserve. The attacking team has brought the ball all the way into the in-goal
or very near it and has made a simple handling error, the law makers have decided giving the defending team a 22DO is too much gain for a minor infringement.
Yes, I agree it is a greater advantage, but not one that the defending team deserve. The attacking team has brought the ball all the way into the in-goal or very near it and has made a simple handling error, the law makers have decided giving the defending team a 22DO is too much gain for a minor infringement.
Yes, I agree it is a greater advantage, but not one that the defending team deserve. The attacking team has brought the ball all the way into the in-goal or very near it and has made a simple handling error, the law makers have decided giving the defending team a 22DO is too much gain for a minor infringement.
Below is from 2017 law book ,,as we all know nothing has changed.
See point ( b ) .
that made me laugh out loud, Christy ! because something did change : 22.7(b) didn't make it into the 2018 Law Book :biggrin: It was removed.
To be honest I don't think the removal of 22.7(b) makes any difference, but it's removal was amusing!
If we look at the 2018 Law book for the relevant Law on knock ons we find this-
[LAWS]
19.1 1. Where the game is restarted with a scrum and which team throws in is determined as follows:
Infringement / stoppage- A knock-on or throw forward, apart from at a lineout.
Location of scrum - In the scrum zone at the point closest to the place of infringement
Who throws in - The non-offending team.
[/LAWS]
That tells us where the scrum is, if there is one .... but very often after a knock on the other team gain possession, gain advantage, advantage over and we play on... and there never is a scrum.
..which is why we keep returning to the advantage Law, and when is advantage over.
Which may well work for the gnarly old Refs, but what about the youngsters starting next year? They won't have the original to work from and will be working from just the "simplified" lawbook. There will be laws which exist that they know nothing about. :wow:.... I get impression 2018 law book authors, take it for granted that the bits left out although are still relevant ,,but some how expect us to some how remember the bits left out.
Menace, my post is just making a point of how the current practice is turning the law on it's collective head.
Do we agree that a 22DO is of greater advantage to the defenders than a defending 5m scrum? If we don't then we don't have much to discuss.
In the situation where the defenders pick up the attackers KO and continue play in their own goal. If they ground the ball before the referee calls "Advantage over" then they can't gain the 22DO advantage (under current practice) but if the referee calls "Advantage over" and the ground the ball then they get the 22DO.
Doesn't that strike you as back asswards? It does me.
The IRB believed shorter meant easier to read and mistakenly assume this means easier to understand and interpret.
But I think that is a mistake.
Rugby has too many corner cases - and sometimes you need more words to describe them.
You can make it easier to understand with diagrams and short sentences.
So if the defenders chose to play on, when would you call advantage over before they cross the 5m line.