2 things from the Ireland England game.

[FightOrFlight]

1) Goode trying to keep the ball in from a PK punt from Sexton. I know he was in touch no question however I have kinda forgotten much to my embarrassment if when a player jumps from "in play" over the plane of touch and plays the ball(also over the plane) back in before he lands in touch if it is play on or touch?

2) Goode caught the ball in in-goal. He grounded it and was heading out for the 22. However CJ had blown for a mark I suggest Goode had not called. CJ realised that he may have blown a mark Goode did not want but then forced Goode to kick the mark from inside in goal. Should he not be allowed bring it out to the 5m line?

 

[chrismtl]

1) He's in touch, the call was right and the commentators, once again, show that they are clueless when it comes to the majority of the law book. Image below from one of our presentations (I believe it's the same info that SARU provides).

2) It should have been at the 5m line

 

[Dickie E]

That would be that well known Canadian referee, Peter Marshall, with flag in hand? :aus:

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

Judging by the crowd that must be a S15 match!

 

[crossref]

1) He's in touch, the call was right and the commentators, once again, show that they are clueless when it comes to the majority of the law book. Image below from one of our presentations (I believe it's the same info that SARU provides).

2)
View attachment 3189

I am happy with the the decision, but in Law don't think it's as clear cut in the Laws as Rugby Quebec suggest: viz the Laws don't have any reference to the player crossing the plane of touch being significant, and the Quebec slide suggests that if the player hadn't crossed the PoT perhaps it would have been play on ? But the Law doesn't distingusih

There's a discussion of this incident in another thread
http://www.rugbyrefs.com/showthread.php?17500-Where-s-the-line&p=294528#post294528 from Post #55

 

[Jacko]

2) It should have been at the 5m line

Can you justify that please?

 

[menace]

Judging by the crowd that must be a S15 match!

Yep...a typical Waratahs home crowd!

 

[crossref]

Can you justify that please?

[LAWS]18.2 Kick awarded
The kick is awarded at the place of the mark. If the mark is made in the in-goal, the kick is awarded 5 metres from the goal line in line with where the mark was made.[/LAWS]

 

[chrismtl]

I am happy with the the decision, but in Law don't think it's as clear cut in the Laws as Rugby Quebec suggest: viz the Laws don't have any reference to the player crossing the plane of touch being significant, and the Quebec slide suggests that if the player hadn't crossed the PoT perhaps it would have been play on ? But the Law doesn't distingusih

There's a discussion of this incident in another thread
http://www.rugbyrefs.com/showthread.php?17500-Where-s-the-line&p=294528#post294528 from Post #55

Based on what I can see, I'm pretty sure we just stole the ARU pictures and re-wrote the text on a RQ background. Here's the document from the ARU: http://www.rugbyrefs.com/wiki/images/8/85/LineBallYourCall.pdf

As for law, I would think it would be this.

[LAWS]A player in touch may kick or knock the ball, but not hold it, provided it has not crossed the plane of the touchline[/LAWS]

The ball has crossed the plane of the touchline, and the player was in touch (although in the air, which law does not account for).

 

[crossref]

The ball has crossed the plane of the touchline, and the player was in touch (although in the air, which law does not account for).

yes, that's the whole problem : the Law tells us it matters whether or not the player is in touch

but when a player is in the air, the Law is silent on how to tell whether or not he's in touch.

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

but when a player is in the air, the Law is silent on how to tell whether or not he's in touch.

Ahh ze old player in ze air ploy.

View attachment 3190

 

[chrismtl]

yes, that's the whole problem : the Law tells us it matters whether or not the player is in touch

but when a player is in the air, the Law is silent on how to tell whether or not he's in touch.

I would lean towards him being in touch because of the way this part of the definition is written.

[LAWS]If a player jumps and catches the ball, both feet must land in the playing area otherwise the ball is in touch or touch-in-goal.[/LAWS]

Although, once again it doesn't really cover the particular scenario from the match or the presentations where the player doesn't catch the ball. I will say that it would be pretty useful if WR stamped their logo onto that ARU document. Then we could consider it as the proper application as their law book hasn't helped at all.

 

[Dixie]

2) It should have been at the 5m line

Can you justify that please?

[LAWS]18.2 Kick awarded
The kick is awarded at the place of the mark. If the mark is made in the in-goal, the kick is awarded 5 metres from the goal line in line with where the mark was made.[/LAWS]

[smirk]Jacko from the NP has been owned by a London 11+1.[/smirk]

 

[Browner]

The clip of Goodes athleticism

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QYcv6CIAcGA

 

[Jacko]

[smirk]Jacko from the NP has been owned by a London 11+1.[/smirk]

Very true.
I remember a big discussion a while back about whether you could ground the ball having made a mark in goal and get a 22m. Was there even a clarification?? I don't remember this point of law even being mentioned!!

 

[crossref]

I think that's exactly what Goode was doing - he called a mark and then tapped and grounded for a 22m.

I wonder if CJ's immediate thought was: WTF? Is that a 22m or a 5m scrum????
And with that uncertainty he panicked slightly and made him take a proper kick.

Even a pro can have a momentary brain-fart.

When I watched it live I was initially even a step behind that, as my first thought was : can you call a mark in the in goal ? I did decide yes, but I was therefore half a second behind CJ.

 

[OB..]

I remember Matt Burke being in a similar position. He asked the referee who told him it would be a 5m attacking scrum if he tapped and grounded.

That no longer applies since the Law was changed in 2011, and the second sentence was added.
[LAWS]18.2 [FONT=fs_blakeregular]The kick is awarded at the place of the mark. If the mark is made in the in-goal, the kick is awarded 5 metres from the goal line in line with where the mark was made.[/FONT][/LAWS]
(It should mention "in the field of play"!)