[In-goal] Advantage from knock on into in goal

[Christy]

Argentina v wales .
10 mins into game blue 15 attempts to catch a kick outside red try line .
He fumbles catch & knocks ball on .
The ball lands in red in goal & red 15 touches ball down & makes it dead .

Red team ask ref ( jaco ) if they can have a 22 kick out .
Ref says no ,,its your scrum at knock on .

Red suggest they are entitled to advantage from knock on & there fore shouldn't they be allowed 22 as their advantage .

Ref answered i thought very relevant .
He said you can't play advantage .
You have to gain an advantage , for advantage then be over .
There fore it is a scrum , with red put in at point of knock on ...

 

[Taff]

Didn't see it, but I would say Red gave up their advantage when they made the ball dead. We can't play advantage once the ball is dead, and Red made sure it was dead when they grounded it.

This exact scenario was specifically mentioned in the law book. I'm not 100% sure about the new "simplified" version.

Red could always have kept the advantage alive by picking up the ball, sprinting down field and scoring at the other end .... but they didn't.

 

[Jason R]

Didn't see it, but I would say Red gave up their advantage when they made the ball dead. We can't play advantage once the ball is dead, and Red made sure it was dead when they grounded it.

This exact scenario was specifically mentioned in the law book. I'm not 100% sure about the new "simplified" version.

Red could always have kept the advantage alive by picking up the ball, sprinting down field and scoring at the other end .... but they didn't.

I assume the appropriate 2018 law reference in this instance would be:

[LAWS]7.3 Advantage must not be applied and the referee must blow the whistle immediately when:
...
e. The ball is made dead.
...[/LAWS]

 

[Taff]

I assume the appropriate 2018 law reference in this instance would be:

[LAWS]7.3 Advantage must not be applied and the referee must blow the whistle immediately when:
e. The ball is made dead.[/LAWS]

Makes sense Jason, but in the pre 2018 version of the book, knocking on into in-goal and making the ball dead was specifically mentioned as a scrum; ie no 22m DO option.

 

[crossref]

He he!
Now that this is no longer covered in the Law Book it will keep coming up.

You can't play advantage after the ball is dead , but you can gain advantage by making it dead. That happens very often.

 

[Camquin]

The classic no advantage after the ball is dead is white running up the touchline passes inside,blue intercepts and touches down under posts to much jubilation.
However, TJ notes White put a foot into touch just before releasing the pass, so stands there with his flag up. Jubilation tuns to desperation.

The knock on into touch is different as the defender is not wanting advantage - it is just wanting the more advantageous restart.
In the 2017 and earlier law book it was explicit that the correct restart was a 5 metre scrum.
I cannot find that in the 2018 law book.
We have restart after a knock on and restart after a touchdown in separate places.
If there is a note a show which takes precedence I cannot find it.

Frankly I would like a law book I could quote to back up each decision, without having to refer to a memo in a locked cabinet in the basement behind a sign saying beware of the leopard,

 

[crossref]

The other classic no playing advantage after the ball is dead used to be
- white knock on, ref plays advantage
- ball rolls into touch
- blue pick up the ball and take a quick throw in


Of course they changed the Law so that now this is allowed.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Oh dear. Still banging the drum. CONTEXT!

 

[crossref]

You keep yelling "context" like it's some kind of magic. You are going to have to explain what you mean in this case

 

[Phil E]

You keep yelling "context" like it's some kind of magic. You are going to have to explain what you mean in this case

This should help you.

http://bfy.tw/5dqC

 

[DocY]

This was explicitly clear in the old law book, but has been omitted from the new one. Though since "there are no law changes between the two" we can assume it's the same.

The wording, IIRC was:
If the ball is knocked on in the field of play, goes into in goal and is made dead there, play restarts with a scrum at the position of the knock on.

This is exactly what happened. The Welshman questioning the referee didn't know the laws.

 

[crossref]

Or else he was extremely familiar with the Laws and knew that the Law governing this has gone

 

[DocY]

Or else he was extremely familiar with the Laws and knew that the Law governing this has gone

Two weeks ago a Welsh player, in a position to catch the ball in in goal, decided to bat it over the dead ball line.

 

[Phil E]

Or else he was extremely familiar with the Laws and knew that the Law governing this has gone

In the words of John McEnroe..."you cannot be serious!"

 

[Rich_NL]

The explicit clarification has gone. The law is still there, advantage is over if the ball is made dead and you go back to the scrum/penalty.

The difficulty is that scoring a try counts as making the ball dead, but to be honest I can't imagine a referee disallowing a try because it was scored off the back of an opponent's knock-on in-goal.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

I think you could only rule against a try if you have no feeling for the game or why the law was written.

A knock on in goal leading t oa try woud have to be the defending side knocking on so they would not be gaining 22 mtr "free".

The attacking side scoring would be playing the "perfect" advantage.

But yes I am sure that some would take a blinkered view.

 

[crossref]

The explicit clarification has gone. The law is still there, advantage is over if the ball is made dead and you go back to the scrum/penalty.

The difficulty is that scoring a try counts as making the ball dead, but to be honest I can't imagine a referee disallowing a try because it was scored off the back of an opponent's knock-on in-goal.

Following a knock on from the oppo a team in their own 22m very often gain advantage by kicking it dead

 

[crossref]

I think you could only rule against a try if you have no feeling for the game or why the law was written.

A knock on in goal leading t oa try woud have to be the defending side knocking on so they would not be gaining 22 mtr "free".

The attacking side scoring would be playing the "perfect" advantage.

But yes I am sure that some would take a blinkered view.

Of course it's a try. No one claims that it is "too much advantage" to allow them to get a free try from a mere knock on

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Of course it's a try. No one claims that it is "too much advantage" to allow them to get a free try from a mere knock on

Did you read the post I was replying to?

 

[Rich_NL]

Following a knock on from the oppo a team in their own 22m very often gain advantage by kicking it dead

I get your point, but the advantage is over at the kick, if it's not charged down or fluffed; you don't call it back for no advantage (I hope) if it's caught 25m upfield by an opponent, because advantage is over by then.

By the way, I'm not for a moment saying that a try should be called back. Just that that is where the logical ambiguity in the laws lies, and that it's not a practical ambiguity.