[Law] Ball dead in the in goal .. 22m DO or 5m scrum ?

[crossref]

More problems, it seems with the 2018 Law Book.

When the ball is touched down by a defender , or otherwise goes dead in goal , how do you decide whether it's an attacking 5m scrum or a drop out ?

Its a question that frequently confuses newbies and even many players , but every referee knows the answer : I don't need to give you the Law References it's NOT about who made it dead or how it went dead, it's about who put the ball into the in goal. Right ?

Well, not so fast as 2018 Laws say something different

[LAWS]12.9 If the ball is kicked into the kicking team’s own in-goal and is made dead by a defending player or it goes dead through in-goal, the non-kicking team is awarded a five-metre scrum.[/LAWS]

And conversely

[LAWS]12.10 Apart from at a kick-off or restart kick, if the ball is played or taken into in-goal by an attacking player and is made dead by an opponent, play is restarted with a 22-metre drop-out.[/LAWS]

Is it a mistake ? Or did the authors consider this change to be more intuitive and simpler ?

Challenge to everyone , using the 2018 Law Book alone what is the restart when

1 an attacking player carries the ball into the opponents in goal and, trying to score under the posts, steps over the DBL

2 a defending team pass the ball back into their own in goal and make it dead

3 a defending team pass the ball back into their own in goal , kick, but an attacker in goal charges it down and knocks the ball over the DBL

 

[thepercy]

More problems, it seems with the 2018 Law Book.

When the ball is touched down by a defender , or otherwise goes dead in goal , how do you decide whether it's an attacking 5m scrum or a drop out ?

Its a question that frequently confuses newbies and even many players , but every referee knows the answer : I don't need to give you the Law References it's NOT about who made it dead or how it went dead, it's about who put the ball into the in goal. Right ?

Well, not so fast as 2018 Laws say something different

[LAWS]12.9 If the ball is kicked into the kicking team’s own in-goal and is made dead by a defending player or it goes dead through in-goal, the non-kicking team is awarded a five-metre scrum.[/LAWS]

And conversely

[LAWS]12.10 Apart from at a kick-off or restart kick, if the ball is played or taken into in-goal by an attacking player and is made dead by an opponent, play is restarted with a 22-metre drop-out.[/LAWS]

Is it a mistake ? Or did the authors consider this change to be more intuitive and simpler ?

Challenge to everyone , using the 2018 Law Book alone what is the restart when

1 an attacking player carries the ball into the opponents in goal and, trying to score under the posts, steps over the DBL

2 a defending team pass the ball back into their own in goal and make it dead

3 a defending team pass the ball back into their own in goal , kick, but an attacker in goal charges it down and knocks the ball over the DBL

1 Not covered in the new book, refer to 2017 LotG as there are no changes.

2 Scrum Chart, The referee awards a scrum for any other reason not covered in law. Team moving forward/attacking team put in.

3 Scrum Chart, The referee awards a scrum for any other reason not covered in law. Team moving forward/attacking team put in.

 

[chbg]

More problems, it seems with the 2018 Law Book.

When the ball is touched down by a defender , or otherwise goes dead in goal , how do you decide whether it's an attacking 5m scrum or a drop out ?

Its a question that frequently confuses newbies and even many players , but every referee knows the answer : I don't need to give you the Law References it's NOT about who made it dead or how it went dead, it's about who put the ball into the in goal. Right ?

Well, not so fast as 2018 Laws say something different

[LAWS]12.9 If the ball is kicked into the kicking team’s own in-goal and is made dead by a defending player or it goes dead through in-goal, the non-kicking team is awarded a five-metre scrum.[/LAWS]

And conversely

[LAWS]12.10 Apart from at a kick-off or restart kick, if the ball is played or taken into in-goal by an attacking player and is made dead by an opponent, play is restarted with a 22-metre drop-out.[/LAWS]

Is it a mistake ? Or did the authors consider this change to be more intuitive and simpler ?

Challenge to everyone , using the 2018 Law Book alone what is the restart when

1 an attacking player carries the ball into the opponents in goal and, trying to score under the posts, steps over the DBL

2 a defending team pass the ball back into their own in goal and make it dead

3 a defending team pass the ball back into their own in goal , kick, but an attacker in goal charges it down and knocks the ball over the DBL

1. 21.4: [LAWS]When an attacking player holding the ball [grounds the ball in in-goal and simultaneously] makes contact with the touch-in-goal line or the dead-ball line (or anywhere beyond either), a 22-metre drop-out is awarded to the defending team. [/LAWS]

2. 19.1 Table, 5th Row:
[LAWS]Infringement / stoppage: The ball is taken into in-goal by the defending team and made dead.
Location of scrum: In the scrum zone at the point closest to where the ball was made dead.
Who throws in: The attacking team.[/LAWS]

3. Ibid (it does not state which team makes the ball dead).

 

[crossref]

1 Not covered in the new book, refer to 2017 LotG as there are no changes.

2 Scrum Chart, The referee awards a scrum for any other reason not covered in law. Team moving forward/attacking team put in.

3 Scrum Chart, The referee awards a scrum for any other reason not covered in law. Team moving forward/attacking team put in.

not convincing !
(1) the 2017 Law Book - what is this Law Book of which you speak, it is no longer available (taken down from WR website)
(2) and (3) rather contradict your assertation in (1)

 

[crossref]

1. 21.4: [LAWS]When an attacking player holding the ball [grounds the ball in in-goal and simultaneously] makes contact with the touch-in-goal line or the dead-ball line (or anywhere beyond either), a 22-metre drop-out is awarded to the defending team. [/LAWS]

2. 19.1 Table, 5th Row:
[LAWS]Infringement / stoppage: The ball is taken into in-goal by the defending team and made dead.
Location of scrum: In the scrum zone at the point closest to where the ball was made dead.
Who throws in: The attacking team.[/LAWS]

3. Ibid (it does not state which team makes the ball dead).

21.4 is itself a problem, as it's another Law in conflict with 2017 - in 2017 it would only be a DO if the attackers took it into the in goal

19.1 is a good point, it is in line with the 2017 Laws BUT 2018//19.1 contradicts 2018//12.9

- - - Updated - - -

keep them coming

 

[Dickie E]

1 Not covered in the new book, refer to 2017 LotG as there are no changes.

2 Scrum Chart, The referee awards a scrum for any other reason not covered in law. Team moving forward/attacking team put in.

So the new paradigm is:
1. scour the 2018 book. If unsuccessful,
2. scour the 2017 book. If unsuccessful,
3. award a scrum for any other reason not covered in law.

Good grief! If there's no changes, I may as well just go straight to the 2017 book.

It will get tricky when the next book (2019?) makes the 2017 book obsolete by including law trials, clarifications, etc but still misses lots of 2017 stuff.

 

[crossref]

It will get tricky when the next book (2019?) makes the 2017 book obsolete

At some point in the last few weeks the 2017 Law Book was removed from the WR Laws website.
Just as the 2016 Book has been .. and the 2015 Book, and the 2014 book (can you see where I am going with this)

I'd say that's a pretty good sign of obsolescence

 

[Dickie E]

At some point in the last few weeks the 2017 Law Book was removed from the WR Laws website.
Just as the 2016 Book has been .. and the 2015 Book, and the 2014 book (can you see where I am going with this)

I'd say that's a pretty good sign of obsolescence

maybe we can create a black market for 2017 books

It must be a nightmare for new refs:

"boss, I can't find the law in the 2018 book"

"never mind, son, it's unchanged from 2017. Just do what you did last year"

"but I didn't referee last year!"

 

[Dickie E]

21.4 is itself a problem, as it's another Law in conflict with 2017 - in 2017 it would only be a DO if the attackers took it into the in goal

21.4 is specifically about simultaneous grounding and not about an attacker running over DBL

 

[Balones]

maybe we can create a black market for 2017 books

It must be a nightmare for new refs:

"boss, I can't find the law in the 2018 book"

"never mind, son, it's unchanged from 2017. Just do what you did last year"

"but I didn't referee last year!"

This is what is worrying me. Training new referees.
‘Why is it a scrum 5”? - “Because I tell you it is”.

 

[didds]

More problems, it seems with the 2018 Law Book.

Well, not so fast as 2018 Laws say something different

[LAWS]12.9 If the ball is kicked into the kicking team’s own in-goal and is made dead by a defending player or it goes dead through in-goal, the non-kicking team is awarded a five-metre scrum.[/LAWS]

Once again I am left wondering what I am not "getting"... Because...

that's quite convoluted but surely that means basically team A somehow contrive to kick the ball in the F0P such that it ends up in their own in-goal (!!) I don't really understand how this is likely to occur in a generalised instance or why the 2018 law book feels it needs to pick such a bizarre scenario out but...


team A kick the ball in such a way it ends up in their own in-goal. QED : team A has taken the ball into their own in-goal. If its touched down by a defender ie team A then of course its a 5m scrum to the opponents. which is what the law says. So its what we expect.

(and of course because if team B touch it down its a bloody try anyway!)

[LAWS]12.10 Apart from at a kick-off or restart kick, if the ball is played or taken into in-goal by an attacking player and is made dead by an opponent, play is restarted with a 22-metre drop-out.[/LAWS]

which again sounds historically correct. Team B put the ball into team A's in goal. An opponent to team B ie a team A player touches it down. its a drop out. i.e. what we would expect.

what am I missing here?

???????????????????????????????

 

[didds]

Challenge to everyone , using the 2018 Law Book alone what is the restart when

1 an attacking player carries the ball into the opponents in goal and, trying to score under the posts, steps over the DBL

2 a defending team pass the ball back into their own in goal and make it dead

3 a defending team pass the ball back into their own in goal , kick, but an attacker in goal charges it down and knocks the ball over the DBL

However these queries make sense in terms of asking. In fact I asked 1 elsewhere on another (?) thread today.


That rubbish about being made dead by an opponent is total confusion territory. As CR asks what happens? Because there is a nuance that its ONLY a 22 d/o if an opponent makes it dead... of course.

I've wondered for a long time one of two things

1) the law makers don't actually "proof" the stuff they right to make sure its sensible
2) the law makers don't actually understand rugby whatsoever.

In fact there is a 3rd option...

3) both of the above.



Frankly when they come up with rubbish like this you have to seriously question whether the "laws dept" is fit for purpose.

 

[didds]

So the new paradigm is:
1. scour the 2018 book. If unsuccessful,
2. scour the 2017 book. If unsuccessful,
3. award a scrum for any other reason not covered in law.

Good grief! If there's no changes, I may as well just go straight to the 2017 book.

It will get tricky when the next book (2019?) makes the 2017 book obsolete by including law trials, clarifications, etc but still misses lots of 2017 stuff.

But that is the dichotomy I postulated last week somewhere here.

"There are no changes". So of 2018 has a definitively conflicting result to 2017 then 2018 MUST be wrong.

And on top of that "there are no changes" - so you don't need to even look at the 2018 book if you are content with what 2017 tells you.


didds

 

[crossref]

There are three types of changes in the Law Book
- accidental
- deliberate, to resolve an ambiguity (which creates a change for some people, continuity for others)
- completely new stuff, obviously deliberate

Of the accidental changes this one is surely the worst ?
1 it seems to betray a haziness in the minds of the authors about what the previous Law actually was
2 it's an area that is confusing to many, so it's an area where refs are often unsure and will be consulting the Law Book on .

So I think it's going to lead to different on pitch decisions between new refs consulting the Law Book and old refs, cheerfully applying the Law as it always was

Later I will nominate the winners in the other two categories

 

[chbg]

At some point in the last few weeks the 2017 Law Book was removed from the WR Laws website.
Just as the 2016 Book has been .. and the 2015 Book, and the 2014 book (can you see where I am going with this)

I'd say that's a pretty good sign of obsolescence

Recently found ... scroll down and you will find a library of 2003-2017: http://www.rugbyfootballhistory.com/laws.htm

The author seems to have tired (not surprisingly) of maintaining the list of Law Clarifications.

 

[Pita]

I found this in the scrum section of the 2018 law book.

The ball is taken into in-goal by the defending team and made dead.

In the scrum zone at the point closest to where the ball was made dead.

The attacking team.

 

[crossref]

There was some confusion in this thread
For complete clarity (I hope)
See #12 in my table

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UzYvtcl03eG7xN13VCwboOyfC0yATNdxgQ7_N1slxEc/edit?usp=drivesdk

 

[chalksta]

Once again I am left wondering what I am not "getting"... Because...

that's quite convoluted but surely that means basically team A somehow contrive to kick the ball in the F0P such that it ends up in their own in-goal (!!) I don't really understand how this is likely to occur in a generalised instance or why the 2018 law book feels it needs to pick such a bizarre scenario out but...


team A kick the ball in such a way it ends up in their own in-goal. QED : team A has taken the ball into their own in-goal. If its touched down by a defender ie team A then of course its a 5m scrum to the opponents. which is what the law says. So its what we expect.

(and of course because if team B touch it down its a bloody try anyway!)



which again sounds historically correct. Team B put the ball into team A's in goal. An opponent to team B ie a team A player touches it down. its a drop out. i.e. what we would expect.

what am I missing here?

???????????????????????????????

I fell this is to cover situations like this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUwYVZQff2A