[Law] Ball "grounding" inside a shirt

winchesterref


Referees in England
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
2,014
Post Likes
197
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
Blue ball carrier 5m out from defending try line goes into contact. 2 x Red defenders attempt to make a tackle and end up pulling the Blue shirt over his head (tackle was legal, Blue wriggled).

Blue keeps moving forwards and his shirt comes off his head, down his arms and smothers the ball (which is in 2 hands).

Red fail to execute the tackle well and go to ground over the try line with Blue ball carrier (made the tackle), who has possession inside his shirt (Red cannot access the ball) and "grounds" it on/in his clothing (no fault of his own, Red instigated removal of his shirt).

9.A.1 talks of grounding the ball for a try.

Try or no try in this case?
 

Phil E


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
16,073
Post Likes
2,346
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
Technically not a grounding since the ball didn't touch the grass.

If I had to go with a snap decision I think it would be "held up", attacking 5m scrum.
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,805
Post Likes
3,145
weird one.
I'd tend to think -
- did blue gain an advantage from having the ball in his shirt ? (like no one knew where the ball was) if so no try and held up seems like a good restart.
- was was blue completely disadvanteged by having his shirt pulled over his head ? but managed to score anyway in which case award the try
 

Rushforth


Referees in Holland
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
1,300
Post Likes
92
We certainly wouldn't want defenders pulling shirts up deliberately to gain an advantage. It will happen accidentally, as here, but Red couldn't get to the ball through their own actions.

I'd rather reward the BC for managing to get the ball to the ground than have a 5m scrum in principle, although technically speaking the latter is more correct.

An argument could theoretically be made for a penalty try, which is clearly ridiculous since Red were simply trying to tackle.

We all know "downward pressure" isn't necessary, but if it is all the same "clear and obvious" - not necessarily the case in this scenario generalized - award the try. Any complaints can be handled with the argument for a penalty try.
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,033
Post Likes
1,775
safety-enjoyment (nee equity) - law3.

grounds enough for a try?

didds
 

FlipFlop


Referees in Switzerland
Joined
Jun 13, 2006
Messages
3,227
Post Likes
226
Depends on level to me. But as soon as the ball is trapped in a shirt, then I'm blowing the whistle and awarding scrum to team in possession.

No try for me - has he dropped it, lost control, etc. You can't see it, so stop play.
 

Rushforth


Referees in Holland
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
1,300
Post Likes
92
Depends on level to me. But as soon as the ball is trapped in a shirt, then I'm blowing the whistle and awarding scrum to team in possession.

No problem with your call as such, in this scenario.

But if a player literally stuffed the ball up his own shirt the whistle would be the other way, and not for a scrum either!
 

beckett50


Referees in England
Joined
Jan 31, 2004
Messages
2,514
Post Likes
224
Current Referee grade:
Level 6
If it was me I would award the try based on the attacking player demonstrating positive play by still driving for the goal line.
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,033
Post Likes
1,775
I'm not unhappy with beckett50's suggestion, but what wold you do if the player in his confusion with shirt over his head dived over the T-i-G by mistake?

didds
 

Rushforth


Referees in Holland
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
1,300
Post Likes
92
I'm not unhappy with beckett50's suggestion, but what wold you do if the player in his confusion with shirt over his head dived over the T-i-G by mistake?

Laugh with the other 29 players, most likely.
 

winchesterref


Referees in England
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
2,014
Post Likes
197
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
Interesting variations in call!

Any more?
 

Decorily

Coach/Referee
Joined
May 3, 2013
Messages
1,556
Post Likes
423
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
Depends on level to me. But as soon as the ball is trapped in a shirt, then I'm blowing the whistle and awarding scrum to team in possession.

.

I tend to agree....ball trapped therefore unplayable, but why scrum to team in possession?
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,033
Post Likes
1,775
I tend to agree....ball trapped therefore unplayable, but why scrum to team in possession?

Conversely why would team in possession be denied the ball simply because the opposition (accidentally) pulled a shirt over the ball? Nobody has transgressed any law, its simply ended up that the situation is untenable?

didds
 

Decorily

Coach/Referee
Joined
May 3, 2013
Messages
1,556
Post Likes
423
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
Conversely why would team in possession be denied the ball simply because the opposition (accidentally) pulled a shirt over the ball? Nobody has transgressed any law, its simply ended up that the situation is untenable?

didds

Actually didds, my point referred to the use of the word "possession" which is a common error....the scrum should be awarded to the team going forward. In this case it is the same team...but not in every case.
 

FlipFlop


Referees in Switzerland
Joined
Jun 13, 2006
Messages
3,227
Post Likes
226
I tend to agree....ball trapped therefore unplayable, but why scrum to team in possession?

[LAWS]Law 20.4 (d) Scrum after any other stoppage. After any other stoppage or irregularity not covered by Law, the team that was moving forward before the stoppage throws in the ball. If neither team was moving forward, the attacking team throws in the ball.[/LAWS]
The game is stopped due to an irregularity not covered in law, the team in possession are going forward, and also are the attacking team.

Or perhaps:
[LAWS]22.10 Ball held up in-goal
When a player carrying the ball is held up in the in-goal so that the player cannot ground the ball, the ball is dead. A 5-metre scrum is formed. This would apply if play similar to a maul takes place in in-goal. The attacking team throws in the ball
[/LAWS]
Player failed to ground it (shirt prevented it) could easily be an argument.

Or even (at a stretch)
[LAWS]22.15 Doubt about grounding
If there is doubt about which team first grounded the ball in the in-goal, play is re-started by a 5-metre scrum, in line with the place where the ball was grounded. The attacking team throws in the ball.
[/LAWS]

And if a ruck, that is unplayable, it would also be to the team in going forward etc

All these give it to the team who was in possession. I don't see a single law that I could use to give it to the defending side.
 

Decorily

Coach/Referee
Joined
May 3, 2013
Messages
1,556
Post Likes
423
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
FlipFlop; And if a ruck said:
FlipFlop, I am not implying that the restart scrum should/would be given to the defending side.

My point again is that many people, including yourself it would appear, presume that the definition of 'team going forward' (wording used in relevant laws) equals team in 'possession'.

This is often but not always the case.

For instance if White 9 is in possession of the ball and is wrapped up by Black 8 who drives White 9 backwards 5 m before the ball (for whatever reason) becomes unplayable, the scrum will be awarded to Black as they are the team going 'forward' while White are clearly the team in 'possession'.
 

ChrisR

Player or Coach
Joined
Jul 14, 2010
Messages
3,231
Post Likes
356
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
Award the try!

Consider the player's shirt as a part of his body. Would you deny the try because a player fell on the ball and only his shirt was in contact with the ball?

Yes it's unusual but in this case it's not an unfair act by the player with the ball. It's not 'ball up the jumper'.
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,033
Post Likes
1,775
... and as I queried above what if this player in his blindness (shirt over head) "scored" over the T-i-G in error as he couldn;t see a tryline and guessed?

you'd effectively penalise him by awarding a 22 do?

didds
 

ChrisR

Player or Coach
Joined
Jul 14, 2010
Messages
3,231
Post Likes
356
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
Yep, no gimme.
 
Top