[Law] Ball hits physio

[merge]

Black in possession and in Green's half kick put a grubber kick through, where the ball hits a physio treating an injured (green) player. Referee awards a scrum to green, citing green "would have got the ball back from the kick". Is this the correct decision?

[LAWS]Law 20.4(d) [FONT=fs_blakeregular]Scrum after any other stoppage. [/FONT][FONT=fs_blakeregular]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.[/FONT] [/LAWS]

In which case surely black were moving forward, and if not then they were the attacking team anyway?

 

[Dickie E]

referee cock up IMO

 

[beckett50]

This was discussed at length after the game (Falcons -v- Leicester) and the consensus was that the referee made the wrong call in Law

 

[crossref]

Q : in that case GG was right to blow his whistle, BUT if the ball had taken just a glancing sideways bounce off the physio so that it ended up well away from the injured player on the floor and no danger ------ could you just play on ??? Or is it so unusual you'd always stop

 

[Rich_NL]

Q : in that case GG was right to blow his whistle, BUT if the ball had taken just a glancing sideways bounce off the physio so that it ended up well away from the injured player on the floor and no danger ------ could you just play on ??? Or is it so unusual you'd always stop

I'd be tempted to treat it as the ball touching the referee. No advantage, play on; any advantage, scrum black.

 

[Dixie]

I suspect GG was thinking in terms of the in-goal scenario:

[LAWS]6.A.11 THE BALL IN IN-GOAL TOUCHED BY NON-PLAYER
The referee judges what would have happened next and awards a try or a touch down at the place where the ball was touched.[/LAWS]

 

[crossref]

I suspect GG was thinking in terms of the in-goal scenario:

[LAWS]6.A.11 THE BALL IN IN-GOAL TOUCHED BY NON-PLAYER
The referee judges what would have happened next and awards a try or a touch down at the place where the ball was touched.[/LAWS]

has anyone ever had to use this Law ? I can imagine that decisions made under this Law are very unpopular!

 

[didds]

Its difficult to see how Green would likely have come up with the ball first...

didds

 

[Dixie]

Its difficult to see how Green would likely have come up with the ball first...

Ball would not have stopped where it did, and would have bounced on - possibly into in-goal. Green full-back was tracking across roughly at the 5m line. He'd have won the race to the ball.

 

[didds]

Maybe... at best... under pressure from two chasers... to kick out or get caught unsupported within metres of his own line.



didds

 

[Dickie E]

Its difficult to see how Green would likely have come up with the ball first...

didds

and I'm not sure it even matters. Ball hits physio and pops in Green's arms. Still a scrum to Black.

 

[TigerCraig]

Q : in that case GG was right to blow his whistle, BUT if the ball had taken just a glancing sideways bounce off the physio so that it ended up well away from the injured player on the floor and no danger ------ could you just play on ??? Or is it so unusual you'd always stop

Need to be careful when it gets that close. We have a female physiotherapist suing NSW rugby after being injured because a ref let play go on and they got run into. NotNot sure if case has finalised yet

 

[JonT]

has anyone ever had to use this Law ? I can imagine that decisions made under this Law are very unpopular!

The law I never want to use is 6.A.10(b) - ball hits referee in-goal when ball was in possession of attacking player. Award try!