[Law] 12f Intentional knock forward

[shep]

Apologies if this has been answered previously

With all of the Oz/Scotland kerfuffle going on there has been some tit-for-tat reviews of the Samoan Scotland game and some intense scrutiny of the law book. One issue that has come up is the "intentional knock forward" that Seymour uses when he scores his try at around 11:30 on the game clock.

https://youtu.be/rjAn5IB5XU4


Just wondering what the consensus here is around law 12(f); if the "-on" has been omitted intentionally by the law makers and whether the incident above is a legitimate try?

 

[crossref]

Great question!

If he made a genuine attempt to catch the ball, then regathering it, would be ok

If he deliberately knocks it over the defenders head, that's trickier

Would it have been ok for the defender to tackle him between the knock and the catch.

Would like to see a slow motion replay of that

 

[crossref]

Here's the try again, with video replays and you can hear the referee's reasoning

https://youtu.be/mq_JSB8RAsA?t=1170

- knock on by white into blue
- comes forward off blue and ball is regathered without hitting either white or the ground, so not a knock on.

so a try.

Good clear use of the TMO from Jaco Peyper



There is a grey area in the law where a player might deliberately knock or throw a ball over an opponent's head and regather, but this particular incident, I reckon, isn't it.

 

[Paule23]

An interesting question is what would the call have been if he hadn't re gathered the ball? Knock on and scrum or deliberate knock on and penalty?

 

[crossref]

in this particular incident, that decision is moot, as first knock on was by white, so they'd come back for that. Scrum blue.

If the only player who touched it had been blue, it would have tested the interesting gray area...

 

[Phil E]

Here's the try again, with video replays and you can hear the referee's reasoning

- knock on by white into blue
- comes forward off blue and ball is regathered without hitting either white or the ground, so not a knock on.

so a try.

From that transcript they got it wrong. It should be a Knock On (although advantage may apply?)

The ball is knocked on by white and hits a blue player before white can regather. That's a knock on. Law doesn't say hits one of your own players, it just says "another player".

[LAWS]A knock-on occurs when a player loses possession of the ball and it goes forward,
or when a player hits the ball forward with the hand or arm, or when the ball hits
the hand or arm and goes forward, and the ball touches the ground or another
player before the original player can catch it.[/LAWS]

 

[crossref]

From that transcript they got it wrong. It should be a Knock On (although advantage may apply?)

The ball is knocked on by white and hits a blue player before white can regather. That's a knock on. Law doesn't say hits one of your own players, it just says "another player".

[LAWS]A knock-on occurs when a player loses possession of the ball and it goes forward,
or when a player hits the ball forward with the hand or arm, or when the ball hits
the hand or arm and goes forward, and the ball touches the ground or another
player before the original player can catch it.[/LAWS]

white was defending : he knocked on into blue, blue regathers and scores.

 

[Phil E]

white was defending : he knocked on into blue, blue regathers and scores.

So knock on...advantage, try. Which is fine.

But the transcript from the TMO/Referee stated it wasn't a knock on....It was. Unless he was saying blue didn't knock on? (so not two knock on's). Reading it again this may be what was meant. My bad in that case.

 

[crossref]

It was confusing!

Jaco wanted to make sure that having come off blue, it didn't touch white a second time [which would have made it a second knock on, obviously].

It was a great thing for Jaco to check..

the videos showed it didn't.

So the sequence is
- white knock - hits blue hand (white knock on, adv blue)
- bal lcomes forward from blue hand into clean air, and is regathered in the air by blue, try.

 

[OB..]

Just wondering what the consensus here is around law 12(f); if the "-on" has been omitted intentionally by the law makers and whether the incident above is a legitimate try?

I have always argued that this is a rare case where a subtlety in the wording is actually sensible. It means that a deliberate knock forward cannot be legitimised by catching the ball etc.

 

[shep]

- ball comes forward from blue hand into clean air, and is regathered in the air by blue, try.

So is the implication that neither the ref nor TMO thought that Blue intentionally knocked it forward (because that would be a penalty even if it didn't hit another penalty or the ground) or is he entitled to knock it up and forward intending to regather possession?

 

[OB..]

is he entitled to knock it up and forward intending to regather possession?

Not in my book.

 

[crossref]

So is the implication that neither the ref nor TMO thought that Blue intentionally knocked it forward (because that would be a penalty even if it didn't hit another penalty or the ground) or is he entitled to knock it up intending to regather possession?

I think so - especially because it came off white first - knock on by white onto blue's hand - I think it was clearly not in blue's control and it would be a real stretch to say that he had knocked it forward deliberately...

Change the situation a little, and lets say white never touched it and blue did just knock it over his head
- personally I am with OB.. you can't deliberately knock (or indeed throw) the ball over a player's head and regather it the other side.
- others say you can -- but are therefore liable to be tackled while you are juggling.

Caveat - you ask
is he entitled to knock it up and forward intending to regather possession?

my answer is that if this happened in the middle of the field - ie trying to catch a loose pass, then yes, but he can't deliberately knock it forward over the head of an opponent. This is why this is tricky!

 

[Dixie]

I think so - especially because it came off white first - knock on by white onto blue's hand - I think it was clearly not in blue's control and it would be a real stretch to say that he had knocked it forward deliberately...

Change the situation a little, and lets say white never touched it and blue did just knock it over his head
- personally I am with OB.. you can't deliberately knock (or indeed throw) the ball over a player's head and regather it the other side.
- others say you can -- but are therefore liable to be tackled while you are juggling.

Caveat - you ask
is he entitled to knock it up and forward intending to regather possession?

my answer is that if this happened in the middle of the field - ie trying to catch a loose pass, then yes, but he can't deliberately knock it forward over the head of an opponent. This is why this is tricky!

Interesting that people are trying to answer this by gut feel, without focusing on what the law does and does not allow. Relevant law is all in Law 12:

[LAWS]DEFINITION: KNOCK-ON
A knock-on occurs when a player loses possession of the ball and it goes
forward, or when a player hits the ball forward with the hand or arm, or when the
ball hits the hand or arm and goes forward, and the ball touches the ground or
another player before the original player can catch it.

DEFINITION: THROW FORWARD
A throw forward occurs when a player throws or passes the ball forward.
‘Forward’ means towards the opposing team’s dead ball line. [/LAWS]

We see that the law very clearly intends to address two separate and distinct matters, which are carefully defined to allow us to differentiate between them.

[LAWS]12.1(f) Intentional knock or throw forward. A player must not intentionally knock the ball forward with hand or arm, nor throw forward.
Sanction: Penalty kick. A penalty try must be awarded if the offence prevents a try that would probably otherwise have been scored[/LAWS]

The difficulty we face here is that it is neither a knock-on nor a throw forward as defined. It is a hybrid - the knock-forward. Was that deliberate - to introduce a 3rd, undefined element? It is the precursor to the knock-on, and it makes sense. All WR need to do is to include it in the definitions, and 12.1(f) is as clear as a bell. For me, as for many others, the law nonetheless makes sense without the additional definition; it works better for the game as a whole than if the defined tern Knock-On was used, leaving the knock-forward unclear; and it is consistent with the intent of the game. Juggling becomes an unintentionally effort, and any deliberate juggle is shown as illegal, regardless of whether the effort turns into a Knock-On.

 

[RobLev]

I think so - especially because it came off white first - knock on by white onto blue's hand - I think it was clearly not in blue's control and it would be a real stretch to say that he had knocked it forward deliberately...

Change the situation a little, and lets say white never touched it and blue did just knock it over his head
- personally I am with OB.. you can't deliberately knock (or indeed throw) the ball over a player's head and regather it the other side.
- others say you can -- but are therefore liable to be tackled while you are juggling.

Caveat - you ask
is he entitled to knock it up and forward intending to regather possession?

my answer is that if this happened in the middle of the field - ie trying to catch a loose pass, then yes, but he can't deliberately knock it forward over the head of an opponent. This is why this is tricky!

I disagree with the highlighted comment. Seymour makes no attempt whatsoever to catch the ball; he clearly intends to strike the ball forward. For me; White knock-on, followed by Blue intentional knock-forward. The best Blue get is a scrum for the original knock-on; the worst is (if this is considered intentional offending under 10.2(a)) PK White and a possible YC under 8.5(b).

 

[timmad]

Having reviewed the clip, I agree with your analysis RobLev.

Perhaps someone could tell me what should be the ruling if Seymour had headed the ball over the goal line and successfully grounded it?

 

[crossref]

Perhaps someone could tell me what should be the ruling if Seymour had headed the ball over the goal line and successfully grounded it?

heading a loose ball is just the same as kicking it -- ie it's allowed.

 

[timmad]

Has there ever been an outbreak of heading? Red 12 throws a high pass to Red 13 who heads the ball over the Blue backline and runs forward to collect it and score while (blissfully ignorant) Blues appeal for a knock on!

 

[crossref]

I think you'd practice that a couple of times .... and then go back to the grubber kick plan

 

[SimonSmith]

Has there ever been an outbreak of heading? Red 12 throws a high pass to Red 13 who heads the ball over the Blue backline and runs forward to collect it and score while (blissfully ignorant) Blues appeal for a knock on!

Peter Brown vs England, 1970 (I think)