Boys will be boys I

[Greg Collins]

U18's A division rugby. Blue = best team in county riding high certs to win league. Red = will prob avoid relegation, just.

Blue misplaced pass bobbles along the ground where it is picked up by a blue player sat on his arse on the ground who passes it to another blue player.

Ping! off your feet out of the game. PK

Little later Blue misplaced pass bobbles along the ground where it is kicked towards the oppo goal line by same blue player lying on his side on the ground. (he has got up and done running about in the mean time)

Ping! Which bit off don't play it when you are off feet do you not understand. PK Red.

Yay or Nay to either/both?

 

[Donal1988]

I dont think I would have penalised either. I may be wrong but this is open play. There is no tackle, no ruck, or no set piece. As far as I can recall the law says that a player must act immediately, not do nothing.

14.1 PLAYERS ON THE GROUND
(a) A player with the ball must immediately do one of three things:
• Get up with the ball
• Pass the ball
• Release the ball.
Sanction: Penalty kick

(b) A player who passes or releases the ball must also get up or move away from it at once.
Sanction: Penalty kick

(c) A player without the ball must not lie on, over, or near the ball to prevent opponents getting possession of it.
Sanction: Penalty kick

(d) A player on the ground must not tackle or attempt to tackle an opponent.
Sanction: Penalty kick

I might be wrong but it seems a bit harsh though very consistent.

 

[DrSTU]

I'm with you Greg. Off feet out of game.

 

[OB..]

Preamble to Law 14: The game is to be played by players who are on their feet.

As quoted in Ruling 1 of 2004
which says
The action noted above is illegal.

 

[Donal1988]

OB - noted!

 

[Donal1988]

Gotta say those rulings and stuff cheese me off at times. This kind of thing should be written in the laws. What about the newcomer who reads the law book, goes into his first game and ping! is penalised for passing the ball while sitting down. Doesnt seem logical to me that they cant put the Dos and Donts into the book instead of us trying to talk about directives and regulations to players.

 

[SimonSmith]

Because rulings on law, which are supposed to be clarifications of existing law, are not new laws I would guess.

 

[Donal1988]

True Simon but you know what I mean. I read through the Ruling there and I gotta say Im still confused. This is as close as I got to figuring out what OB meant.

The WRU has requested a ruling with regard Law 14 - Ball on the Ground-No Tackle
May a player lying on the ground during general play and not after a tackle, attempt to tackle a ball carrier?
The Designated Members have ruled the following in answer to the questions raised:
Ruling
Law 14 states 'The game is to be played by players on their feet'. The action noted above is illegal

But that is a completely different situation to what is described above. To me what Greg encountered was no different to a player running backwards jumping onto a ball in open play. He then immediately pops it up to the guy behind him. Im sure we all agree thats play on? Seems no different than whats above. But then again its late and my brain is goo at the moment. :drool:

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

Gotta say those rulings and stuff cheese me off at times. This kind of thing should be written in the laws. What about the newcomer who reads the law book, goes into his first game and ping! is penalised for passing the ball while sitting down. Doesnt seem logical to me that they cant put the Dos and Donts into the book instead of us trying to talk about directives and regulations to players.

I find 180+ pages more than enough!

As for Greg's calls - I agree. Off your feet - out of the game. Done it a couple of time this year.

 

[stuart3826]

The man on his feet is King. The man on his arse most certainly isn't. Ping him if he plays with the ball! Or another player!

 

[Taff]

... picked up by a blue player sat on his arse on the ground who passes it to another blue player. Ping! off your feet out of the game. PK

Sorry if this is a thick question, and thinking on my feet a bit here, but which law says this is a PK offence and not a FK offence? :chin:

 

[Dixie]

Taff, to a certain extent we are making it up as we go along. In very broad terms, on the ground is out of the game, using the preamble to the laws that OB identified earlier. There is no specified sanction for this as far as I know, but we normally PK breaches of the fundamental principles of the game. [backpedals fast - forward passes are scrums only].

However, I do believe that most refs would penalise the player on the ground taking an active part in the game - which is the principle behind the 2004 Ruling. Having said, that, there was an instance in Munster v Northampton where a Munster forward was allowed to get away with it.

 

[Greg Collins]

Sorry if this is a thick question, and thinking on my feet a bit here, but which law says this is a PK offence and not a FK offence? :chin:

There isn't one afaik. I'm just a busker blowing on a tin whistle at times.

 

[FlipFlop]

Personally - my view is that this is more similar to a player diving on a ball on the ground. Yes on your feet is king, but if there is no king present, then the Serf is the lord of his shack. So provided he then complies with other requirements (ie immediately) plays/passes/regains feet, and doesn't prevent a player on their feet playing the ball, then I see no reason in the law book to penalise it. It's positive play (lights fuse....) and not specifically illegal, so I'd play on.

Off their feet, out of the game, is clearly not 100% accurate as there are times we allow players to go off their feet and remain in the game - although once off their feet they do then have certain requirements (i. roll away, pass, place etc). It is however a good rule of thumb. (i.e. tackling player grasps ball carrier and ends up on the floor still holding the ball carrier (by 1 leg say)who has not gone to deck (yet) - would you penalise that player for not releasing the ball carrier? even though they are in the act of tackling a player?)

 

[OB..]

there are times we allow players to go off their feet and remain in the game - although once off their feet they do then have certain requirements (i. roll away, pass, place etc).

I think that is the point. When it is allowed, there are specific restrictions.

Let's keep things simple for everybody. On the ground is out of the game unless specifically allowed.

 

[FlipFlop]

I think that is the point. When it is allowed, there are specific restrictions.

Let's keep things simple for everybody. On the ground is out of the game unless specifically allowed.

I prefer to go down the route of - it's allowed unless it isn't. In this case there isn't anything specifically ruling it out (bar the definitions section, which is not specific and not always applied), we allow a similar situation of a player going off their feet deliberately to play the ball (to their advantage as well), so why not allow the player off their feet, who is obviously not waiting to play the ball, to exercise those option available to a play with the ball off their feet in other situations? i.e. pass, place or get to their feet? But they must release to a player on their feet - as per all other "player on teh ground with ball scenarios?)

So I would say I am keeping it simple - I am allowing all players on the ground with the ball the same rights - regardless of scenario (unless specifically exempted by law).

 

[Taff]

Taff, to a certain extent we are making it up as we go along. ... There is no specified sanction for this as far as I know, but we normally PK breaches of the fundamental principles of the game. ... However, I do believe that most refs would penalise the player on the ground taking an active part in the game.

I can understand the need for a sanction, but just thought that as it was more of a technical offence than say dangerous play, a FK may have been appropriate. I was told that generally FKs are usually given for technical offences eg too many numbers at a LO, while PKs were given for more serious and dangerous breaches. Personally, if put on the spot I would probably have voted for a FK. Wonder if I would have been pulled up for it?

There isn't one afaik. I'm just a busker blowing on a tin whistle at times.

Brilliant.

 

[SimonSmith]

True Simon but you know what I mean. I read through the Ruling there and I gotta say Im still confused. This is as close as I got to figuring out what OB meant.

The WRU has requested a ruling with regard Law 14 - Ball on the Ground-No Tackle
May a player lying on the ground during general play and not after a tackle, attempt to tackle a ball carrier?
The Designated Members have ruled the following in answer to the questions raised:
Ruling
Law 14 states 'The game is to be played by players on their feet'. The action noted above is illegal

But that is a completely different situation to what is described above. To me what Greg encountered was no different to a player running backwards jumping onto a ball in open play. He then immediately pops it up to the guy behind him. Im sure we all agree thats play on? Seems no different than whats above. But then again its late and my brain is goo at the moment. :drool:

Disagree. TPTB have declared that the game is to be played by players on their feet. That, then, is our starting point. It means that if you're on the ground, you shouldn't be playing the ball.
There is a small, but very important difference between that, and a player going to ground in order to play the ball - that is explicitly allowed in Law.

To continue your scenario: player on his feet elects to go to ground to play the ball - fine. He is on his feet, and complying with law. If we adhere to the principle that off your feet = out of the game, your man on the ground needs to get to his feet before getting back off them again to play the ball.

I think it's a massive distinction, and not one that needs new law written - it's the obvious extrapolation of the law.

 

[FlipFlop]

Simon,

I disagree.

The ruling is referring to a situation whereby a man on the floor is interferring with a player on their feet. In that situation, I agree the man on their feet is king, off your feet, out the game etc. This is a completely different scenario in my mind. One which impacts a player on their feet (who is king)

However, the situation whereby the player on the floor, plays the ball (when not in a situation that specifically is disallowed - i.e. in a ruck) then why should it be any different to the player diving on the ball? The player is hardly "waiting to gain an advantage", and provided they release to a player on their feet who tries to compete etc - then why worry about it?

Lets take a scenario. Ball shoots out of a ruck/tackle etc to an onside player who has tripped over (or however they got to the floor). An opponent arrives (legally) and dives on the ball. Why can that player legally be allowed to dive on the ball and then play/pass etc., but the player already on the ground can't do exactly the same?

 

[SimonSmith]

We disagree on the starting point.

The key phrase is "the player already on the ground" - he's on the ground. He's out of the game. The other player has come from a place that is lawful - his feet.

To reference your point in the your second para: the player on the ground making a tackle isn't specifically outlawed in the Laws - it is by inference (logically, IMO) from the statement that the game is to be played by players on their feet. For the sake of logical consistency, and I would also say in framing the right way to think about playing the game, it seems right to treat ALL players on the ground in the same way rather than pick and choose the ways in which they can interact with the game.