[Law] 50/22 from a FK

[thepercy]

simpler than that - red pass back into own half, knock on, scrum, FK to red

Not sure about justly/unjustly though, I don't think there is an underlying logic here, else they wouldn't make mistakes, and we'd all be able to agree on what they meant

I am having a hard time imagining a scrum to Blue, where Blue hadn't touched the ball, and Red was awarded a FK.

 

[crossref]

I am having a hard time imagining a scrum to Blue, where Blue hadn't touched the ball, and Red was awarded a FK.

red 9 (in blue half) passes to red 10 (in his own half)
red 10 knocks on
scrum blue
blue early engages
FK to red

red 8 sees some space and kicks the FK into the blue 22 where it bounces into touch

Red throw in at lineout

 

[OB..]

At last night's referees meeting the law changes were explained by a Level 6 referee who had had the full RFU briefing.

I asked: "Scrum just iust in Red's half. The referee awards a FK to Red. Can a 50/22 be used?"

Answer: No. There must be a phase of play first.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Thanks OB

 

[thepercy]

red 9 (in blue half) passes to red 10 (in his own half)
red 10 knocks on
scrum blue
blue early engages
FK to red

red 8 sees some space and kicks the FK into the blue 22 where it bounces into touch

Red throw in at lineout

In this scenario did Blue touch the ball? If they were awarded a scrum, wouldn't the scrum half have the ball in their hand, thus touching it?

 

[crossref]

At last night's referees meeting the law changes were explained by a Level 6 referee who had had the full RFU briefing.

I asked: "Scrum just iust in Red's half. The referee awards a FK to Red. Can a 50/22 be used?"

Answer: No. There must be a phase of play first.

But that seems to be incorrect, see Patz and Balones above
The plot thickens

chbg .. am I overcomplicating, or is it actually the case that no one knows for sure and WR need to issue a clarification

- - - Updated - - -

In this scenario did Blue touch the ball? If they were awarded a scrum, wouldn't the scrum half have the ball in their hand, thus touching it?

Does touching it when it is dead count ?

 

[chbg]

At last night's referees meeting the law changes were explained by a Level 6 referee who had had the full RFU briefing.

I asked: "Scrum just iust in Red's half. The referee awards a FK to Red. Can a 50/22 be used?"

Answer: No. There must be a phase of play first.

Which just proves that anyone get it wrong: the RFU Clarifications include:

RFU "Would the ball from a scrum or lineout with a throw in on the half-way line qualify for a 50:22, whichever side wins the ball?"

WR; "It would depend where the ball emerged from the set piece. If it were in the half of the team winning the ball, then 50:22 allowable. If they had pushed their opponents beyond the halfway before it emerged and then passed it back to within their own half, then 50:22 is not allowable."

Not a single mention of "a phase of play". Some attempted simplifications just serve to confuse people. Just use the Law wording + grammar clarification:

"Either the team did not take the ball into their half, or [if it did] a tackle, ruck or maul took place within the half, or an opponent touched the ball within the half. This variation does not apply at a kick-off or any type of restart kick."

The WR explanation also demonstrates that the halfway line is included in both halves of the field of play!

BTW - I don't put it past WR to change their mind (again) at some stage!

 

[didds]

The only situation I can think of where a team could carry/pass into their own half and unjustly gain the throw in at a 50/22 would be:

Red carried/passed into their half, there is a freak accident, inadvertent whistle, or dog runs on the pitch, no T/R/M or Blue touching the ball, scrum awarded to Red, Blue engage early, or otherwise violate 19.12.a-d, Red are awarded a FK, 50/22 is on?

the point being there though that whilst the scrum might be "accidental" the pushing early at a scrum isnt, and has no bearing on what brought about the scrum etc.

???????????

 

[didds]

simpler than that - red pass back into own half, knock on, scrum, FK to red

Not sure about justly/unjustly though, I don't think there is an underlying logic here, else they wouldn't make mistakes, and we'd all be able to agree on what they meant

and again, the FK isnt becausie of a whoopsy scrum, its becasue of a FK offense at said scrum.

This is no different frrom red in blue 22, red knock on, blue do summat daft at the scrum, PK red, 3 points to red - for knocking on. But nobody suggests that is somehow wrong because reds 3 points came from their own silly mistake


didds

 

[chbg]

red 9 (in blue half) passes to red 10 (in his own half)
red 10 knocks on
scrum blue
blue early engages
FK to red

red 8 sees some space and kicks the FK into the blue 22 where it bounces into touch

Red throw in at lineout

If this scenario occurred over the 22 rather than halfway line, would you allow the FK to go directly into touch for a gain in ground?




The Law wording is the same.

 

[didds]

In this scenario did Blue touch the ball? If they were awarded a scrum, wouldn't the scrum half have the ball in their hand, thus touching it?

but the ball isnt live.... is that important ?

how about

Red kick off
caught be red player.
Blue high tackle on red/offisde at maul/summat
PK red.
red kick to touch
gain throw.
only red players touch ball.
blue give away a FK (numbers?) without ever touching the ball.

this is esoteric stuff mind....

 

[crossref]

If this scenario occurred over the 22 rather than halfway line, would you allow the FK to go directly into touch for a gain in ground?




The Law wording is the same.

Yes I would, following same logic
But OB reports that my logic is wrong
Altho other posts suggest it is right

Not sure what you are getting at ?

What would you give ?

 

[Balones]

At last night's referees meeting the law changes were explained by a Level 6 referee who had had the full RFU briefing.

I asked: "Scrum just iust in Red's half. The referee awards a FK to Red. Can a 50/22 be used?"

Answer: No. There must be a phase of play first.

Troubling situation. All I can say is that after the first official RFU National League briefing that is when further WR and RFU guidance/clarifications came out. Plus the information from MP/RFU via emails etc. It should be noted that the GLT page on the WR website has not been updated but the links to the laws/app has been updated. I have spoken to a couple of referees that attended the South National League RFU briefing and one happens to be our training officer and he supports the position I put forward.
Like the army? Obey the last order that you personally hear! More to come I think.

 

[Phil E]

At last night's referees meeting the law changes were explained by a Level 6 referee who had had the full RFU briefing.

I asked: "Scrum just iust in Red's half. The referee awards a FK to Red. Can a 50/22 be used?"

Answer: No. There must be a phase of play first.

I see your L6 ref and Trump you my L1 ref. Who said the "phase of play" bit only applies if the ball is taken back in the half.

In your scenario the play started in Reds half so why would you need a phase of play? That would mean that if a FK was awarded for anything in Red's half they would need a phase of play before attempting a 50/22, my understanding is that this is not the case since the RFU have said that a 50/22 can be made straight from a FK, providing it bounces in play.

 

[crossref]

I see your L6 ref and Trump you my L1 ref. Who said the "phase of play" bit only applies if the ball is taken back in the half.

In your scenario the play started in Reds half so why would you need a phase of play? That would mean that if a FK was awarded for anything in Red's half they would need a phase of play before attempting a 50/22, my understanding is that this is not the case since the RFU have said that a 50/22 can be made straight from a FK, providing it bounces in play.

anyway the new Law makes no mention of the phrase 'phase of play' - so I think this whole 'phase' thing is a red herring

GLOBAL LAW TRIAL
A player, in their own half, kicks the ball indirectly into touch in the opposition’s 22. Either the team did not take the ball into their half, or a tackle, ruck or maul took place within the half, or an opponent touched the ball within the half. This variation does not apply at a kick-off or any type of restart kick.

by the Law, the answer would seem to be "no", as no tackle, ruck or maul took place
but obviously we know the correct answer is "yes".
Or do we?

 

[Balones]

I think I’m repeating myself but a scrum is a phase of play as per definitions. The problem is that GLT doesn’t mention a scrum in its info, but the GLT page is not ‘law’, it is only an explanation of the laws that are being trialled. The GLT webpage links to the actual law. The only query should be whether an uncompleted scrum is actually a scrum in terms of a ‘phase’. I have taken the position that it is and that it is the awarding if a scrum that creates the ‘scrum’ and not what comes after it.

 

[crossref]

I think I’m repeating myself but a scrum is a phase of play as per definitions. The problem is that GLT doesn’t mention a scrum in its info, but the GLT page is not ‘law’, it is only an explanation of the laws that are being trialled. The GLT webpage links to the actual law. The only query should be whether an uncompleted scrum is actually a scrum in terms of a ‘phase’. I have taken the position that it is and that it is the awarding if a scrum that creates the ‘scrum’ and not what comes after it.

the law doesn't say "phase" it says "tackle, ruck or maul"

 

[Phil E]

I think I’m repeating myself but a scrum is a phase of play as per definitions. The problem is that GLT doesn’t mention a scrum in its info, but the GLT page is not ‘law’, it is only an explanation of the laws that are being trialled. The GLT webpage links to the actual law. The only query should be whether an uncompleted scrum is actually a scrum in terms of a ‘phase’. I have taken the position that it is and that it is the awarding if a scrum that creates the ‘scrum’ and not what comes after it.

But in OBs scenario the scrum was awarded in Reds half, so play is already in Reds half. No one has taken the ball back into the half so why do you need a phase of play before a 50/22 can be allowed?

If the same scenario took place in the 22 would you allow a gain in ground?

 

[chbg]

anyway the new Law makes no mention of the phrase 'phase of play' - so I think this whole 'phase' thing is a red herring



by the Law, the answer would seem to be "no", as no tackle, ruck or maul took place
but obviously we know the correct answer is "yes".
Or do we?

That is only a third of the Law.

 

[chbg]

Yes I would, following same logic
But OB reports that my logic is wrong
Altho other posts suggest it is right

Not sure what you are getting at ?

What would you give ?

I prefer people to think through the arguments, rather than blindly following others without understanding why.

I will treat the opportunity for 50:22 the same as I do for a 22 gain-in-ground.