[In-goal] when is the ball in goal?

[crossref]

When is the ball, on the ground, in goal ?

- if it's touching the goal line, is it in goal ?
- or does it gave to be all the way past the goal line?

Touching, right?

So AG got it wrong here ?

 

[Camquin]

But he did not touch it down, he picked it up and waved it about.
Had he immediately touched down, then it would be a dropout.

Now we are in an undefined area.
The laws simply do not define when a ball enters the in-goal.

The ball is being carried, so do the roles for entering touch apply - that is do we look at the player's feet.
In which case it probably never left the in-goal.

Or do we simply look at the ball and the plane of the in-goal - in which case the defender may well have taken the ball back into the field of play and returned it to the in-goal.

Should he have gone to the TMO,given no official within 30m there is a case.
But the main mistake was by the player for giving AG the decision to make.

 

[crossref]

If the ball was in goal (which I think it was) it makes no difference if the defender picks it up, waves it around before he touches it down.. it's still a 22

 

[Marc Wakeham]

An error by AG for me.

 

[ChrisR]

The point that Camquin is making is that there is no definition for a ball to be deemed 'in-goal'. We are left to assume that there is to be a 'plane-of-goal' as there is a 'plane-of-touch'.

So, a ball on the goal line is in goal. A player may pick up the ball without grounding it. If that player has a foot in goal does the ball stay in goal when it's in his possession? If, in picking up the ball he moves the ball into the field-of-play but his foot remains in goal, what then? Has the ball actually left the in-goal?

I'm with Camquin, ground the ball when it's on the line and don't give the ref any chance to get it wrong.

 

[Christy]

For me ref got correct call .
The ball bobbles onto goal line & rests out side goal line ( the fact that ball touched the goal line , is still play on )
If this was the dead ball line or side line , the ball would become dead .
But as the ball touches the goal line its not dead .
The deffender who was in goal , picked up a ball which was in field of play ,,there fore he took it back ..

The deffender him self told the ref same by his actions ..
Had the ball it self stayed in goal or stayed on the actual goal line fair enough .
But it didnt ,,it rested in field of play .

 

[Jolly Roger]

Definition:
Field of play: The area between the goal lines and the touch lines. Those lines are not part of the field of play.

Law 21 In Goal:
DEFENDING PLAYER IN IN-GOAL
13. If any part of a defending player is in in-goal, that player is considered to be in in-goal, provided they are not also in touch or on or over the dead-ball line.
14. If a player, who is in in-goal, catches or picks up a ball that is still in the field of play, that player has taken the ball into in-goal.
15. If a player who is on or beyond the dead-ball line or who is in touch-in-goal, picks up a moving ball within in-goal, that player is not deemed to have made the ball dead.

Law 18 Touch
TOUCH OR TOUCH-IN-GOAL
1. The ball is in touch or touch-in-goal when:
a. The ball or ball-carrier touches the touchline, touch-in-goal line or anything beyond.
b. A player, who is already touching the touchline, touch-in-goal line or anything beyond, catches or holds the ball.
i. If the ball has reached the plane of touch when it is caught, the catcher is not deemed to have taken the ball into touch.
ii. If the ball has not reached the plane of touch when it is caught or picked up, the catcher is deemed to have taken the ball into touch, regardless of whether the ball was in motion or stationary.


Therefore, as:

Law 21. 14 states If a player, who is in in-goal, catches or picks up a ball that is still in the field of play, that player has taken the ball into in-goal.
The field of play is defined as the area between the goal lines and the touch lines. Those lines are not part of the field of play.
Law 18 refers to the ball REACHING the plane of touch not crossing it.

I deduce that if a player who is standing in goal picks up a ball that has reached the plane of the goal line and then touches it down in goal then that player has picked up a ball that was not in the field of play and therefore the restart should be 22 drop out.

 

[Camquin]

I know the law.

21.14 talks about a ball in the field of play - but does not actually define what that means.
So if I catch a ball as it crosses the plane of the goal line at what point did I pick it up in the field of play.
Is it in the in goal when any part of the ball has crossed the plane?
Or only when no part is inside the field of play?
Does it matter where my hands are?

The phrase plane of the goal line does not actually occur in the law book.
So the goal line may only exist on the ground.
Therefore the ball may only be in goal when it touches the ground - which was the case with touch until 2017/8.
2017 trials introduced the plane of touch - though it was always there as the line out took place where the ball entered touch.

Also while the ball is in my hands while I am in goal , is the ball deemed in-goal, or is the plane of the goal line important?
Bear in mind, the plane of touch is irrelevant while I hold a ball.

Also what about the case where an attacker is carrying the ball.
The attacker is still in the field of play.
The ball has crossed the plane of the goal line - if that exists.
But before he grounds it, a defender strips the ball and grounds it.
What is the restart?


things to consider, if I am carrying the ball and put a foot in touch, it matters not where the ball is, it matters whether my foot lands in touch or touch in goal.
99 times out of 100 it matters not.
The 100th time makes some people question AG.

 

[Ian_Cook]

Its fairly simple

1. The goal line is not treated exactly like the touch line. If the ball touches the touchline, its in touch regardless of whatever happens next. The fact that the ball touched the goal-line and rolled back into the field of play does not mean the ball was in the in-goal

2. The ball was in the field of play, not touching the goal-line (and clearly so). Janjies even indicated this to the referee by his actions.

3. Jantjies picked it up while he himself was standing in the in-goal, and then grounded it.


[LAWS]Law 21
14. If a player, who is in in-goal, catches or picks up a ball that is still in the field of play, that player has taken the ball into in-goal.[/LAWS]

4. That is a 5m scrum with the opposition to throw in

Gus got the call 100% correct.

 

[Christy]

Hi jolly .
The laws you have pasted have now been amended & brought into law.
If you havent already ,,down load the world rugby laws app .

Under the laws section ,,some are still the old laws .
Even under the text of smaller law book . ( this im sure will change when next season book comes out )
But there is also a law section showing laws 2018 ammendments . ( we all need to read these laws & take them on board where applicable )

 

[chbg]

Its fairly simple

1. The goal line is not treated exactly like the touch line. If the ball touches the touchline, its in touch regardless of whatever happens next. The fact that the ball touched the goal-line and rolled back into the field of play does not mean the ball stayedin the in-goal

2. The ball was in the field of play, not touching the goal-line (and clearly so). Janjies even indicated this to the referee by his actions.

3. Jantjies picked it up while he himself was standing in the in-goal, and then grounded it.


[LAWS]Law 21
14. If a player, who is in in-goal, catches or picks up a ball that is still in the field of play, that player has taken the ball into in-goal.[/LAWS]

4. That is a 5m scrum with the opposition to throw in

Gus got the call 100% correct.

FTFY! Pedantry rules!

But I agree otherwise - the impression given by the defender (and the video clip makes it no clearer) is that the ball was still in the FoP. Had the ball been sat on the GL, all he had to do was apply downwards pressure and the 22 DO would have been awarded.

 

[Taff]

If the ball was in goal (which I think it was) it makes no difference if the defender picks it up, waves it around before he touches it down.. it's still a 22

Is there a close up of the ball? I think this is crucial.

From what I can see the ball bounced onto the goal line (so it's in-goal) and then rolled back out into the FoP.

If the ball was still touching the goal line when he picked it up, then to me the restart should be a 22m DO because the ball had been put in-goal by an opponent.

If the ball had rolled back into the FoP when he picked it up, then to me the restart should be an attacking 5m Scrum, because the defending player had taken it back in and made it dead.

But he did not touch it down, he picked it up and waved it about. Had he immediately touched down, then it would be a dropout.

Are you sure you're not confusing this with a KO / Restart being kicked into in-goal?

And before Phil E bursts a blood vessel, I know the wording doesn't say "immediately". I think it says "Without delay". :biggrin:

 

[crossref]

I think taff has the analysis right

And Imo the ball was resting on the line when he picked it up .. so it was in goal .. so a 22m dropout

Angus Gardner is a good ref .. but prone to Law errors

 

[Taff]

.... Angus Gardner is a good ref .. but prone to Law errors

Why didn't the TMO help him? :chin:

That's all he had to say was "Do you want me to check that Ref?" and ... the problem goes away.

 

[Ian_Cook]

I think taff has the analysis right

Yes

And Imo the ball was resting on the line when he picked it up .. so it was in goal .. so a 22m dropout

No. The ball was in the field of play. Jantjies himself indicated this, as he motioned that he was standing in the in-goal when he picked it up. His problem was that he didn't know the new law... if he did, and the ball was on the line, all he had to do was press down on it.

Even the South African press admit that this was Jantjies' mistake..
https://www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/SuperRugby/5-talking-points-super-rugby-final-20180806-3

3. Dead ball controversy
A big turning point in the game came on the half-hour mark when Lions flyhalf Elton Jantjies dotted the ball down after carrying it over the dead-ball line, handing the hosts a five-metre scrum.

Jantjies, who was covering a kick from his opposite number Richie Mo'unga, appeared to misunderstand the rules when he carried the ball over the tryline.

Jantjies could have dotted it down had the ball been on the tryline - which would have counted as being in-goal - but because the ball rolled back in-field, Jantjies couldn't move it back over the tryline.

It was a critical moment in the game as the Crusaders won a penalty off the ensuing scrum to go 13-3 ahead.

Angus Gardner is a good ref .. but prone to Law errors

This was not one of them!

http://www.rugbydump.com/2018/08/64...e-blunder-in-the-final-hell-be-keen-to-forget

Referee Angus Gardner was quick to the spot and knew the interpretation exactly, stating: "He's taken the ball across the line, so that's a scrum."
Gardner went on a moment later: "You've taken it across the plane. Let me explain. So, the ball's gotta cross the plane. Because Elton is standing into in-goal and picks it up, he's deemed to have taken it across the plane. That's the new law."

... and he was exactly right.

 

[Ian_Cook]

Why didn't the TMO help him? :chin:

That's all he had to say was "Do you want me to check that Ref?" and ... the problem goes away.

I understand that the TMO did check it and said nothing, because Gus was right.

 

[ChrisR]

Even under the old laws if the ball was stationary he would have been deemed to have taken it back.

 

[thepercy]

What if the ball is not touching the goal line, but part of it is hovering over it?

Is it any part of the ball past the plane of goal or the whole ball past the plane of goal?

 

[Camquin]

We know if you touch the ball down with any part of the ball touching the line it is in goal.

 

[Christy]

What if the ball is not touching the goal line, but part of it is hovering over it?

Is it any part of the ball past the plane of goal or the whole ball past the plane of goal?

The ball or a person carrying the ball , if either was to make contact with the side line , the ball would be in touch .
If a player kicks ball in air out side touch line & it bends back into play , its not in touch .
If a player stands in field of play & holds ball off the ground & out side touch line , its not in touch .
If the ball rolls towards side line , & rests in field of play , but the pointy end of ball hovers over touch line ,,its not in touch ..

By same , its not that the ball needs to be passed the goal line , per say ( if ball is on floor as clip above )
Its whether or not the ball has kept in contact with the painted line .

The plane of touch is really only relevant if ball is in air ( as in kicked )
The plane of touch is only relevant , to what side of touch the player catches ball & where he is standing , as in field of play or out side field of play .