Boys will be boys I

[Donal1988]

Flipflop what your saying reflects what I am thinking on the subject. Im going to raise this next week at our meeting see what the association think.

 

[Simon Thomas]

In the main, we should be looking for players to stay on their feet and, if on the ground, working to get to their feet or play the ball immediately.

Already on the ground - out of the game imho, and if he cant be bothered to make an effort to get up he has no right to play the ball or any opposition player. But at lower levels, in the interests of keeping the game moving, and if viewed as not material, play on may often be called.

Going to ground to do something positive is a totally different issue and should be managed accordingly.

 

[Dixie]

Flipflop what your saying reflects what I am thinking on the subject. Im going to raise this next week at our meeting see what the association think.

NEXT WEEK????!!! I thought you lot had hourly meetings:wink: :biggrin:

 

[FlipFlop]

...... 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.

This we agree on. The outcome we disagree on. Different ways of looking at it! Personally I'd rather find a reason NOT to blow the whistle. There is no specific law (or ruling) banning it. It can be argued either way. So I'll let the players play.

But I'll want the player on the ground to be immediate and not prevent a player on their feet doing what they wanted (i.e. they must release to a player on their feet/can't prevent a player on their feet playing the ball etc). In a close situation - the player on their feet gets any benefit of doubt, the player off their feet will get none.

I believe my route leads to a logical fit with other similar situations - play on teh ground, ball comes to him, arriving oppo player dives off feet onto player on ground. Decision? I would parallel it to player on feet dives on ball, oppo player to arrives goes to ground on them. PK against arriving player going off feet (not player on the ground).

So I believe it makes my life easier (and is consistent) and decisions easier to sell, to treat all players off their feet (not in a T/R/M) the same way (which we agree on). And to me - logically that is to allow the player on the ground to pass/play/place the ball immediately.

Of course - you can disagree. We each have our point of view. And in this grey area, I'll go with a player being positive (i.e. making the ball available) and not blow the whistle.

 

[ddjamo]

FF: red player sitting on ground facing blue DBL. ball bounces to him quickly. just as he is catching the ball, blue player arrives on his feet grabbing for the ball as red plays keep-away with the ball and quickly flips it over his shoulder to arriving red teammate.

IMO the man out of the game took away the rights of a man on his feet. what do you think?

 

[OB..]

Of course - you can disagree.

I do indeed.

We each have our point of view. And in this grey area, I'll go with a player being positive (i.e. making the ball available) and not blow the whistle.

But the ball IS available. He is doing nothing to create availability.

The right to play the ball on the ground in certain circumstances is known to be an exception. Let's keep it that way.

 

[Greg Collins]

Dear God I love Rugby....:drool:

 

[Davet]

I think I favour the pragmatic approach.

If the player on the ground acts immediately, in the same way that a player going to ground would have to do then I would suggest play on.

This means he must either get up with the ball, pass the ball, or release the ball, and must act immediately. If an opposition player, on his feet challenges for the ball then the player on the ground cannot move it away and play a "see if you can grab it" game, player on his feet has all the rights.

So long as the player on the ground acts immediately I don't see an issue

If a player was on the ground say 5m behind and to the side of a ruck, ball squirts out, and strikes him, ricocheting to a team-mate, we would not penalise him - nor consider an "accidental" type of scenario and award a scrum as we might in the case of accidental offside, if he grabs the ball and pops it up to a team mate, why would we penalise him?

 

[Greg Collins]

If a player was on the ground say 5m behind and to the side of a ruck, ball squirts out, and strikes him, ricocheting to a team-mate, we would not penalise him - nor consider an "accidental" type of scenario and award a scrum as we might in the case of accidental offside, if he grabs the ball and pops it up to a team mate, why would we penalise him?

We debated similar in my first season on here. I don't think a consensus was reached. As a pragmatist 'off your feet = out of the game' is a lot easier to manage. ymmv.

 

[FlipFlop]

FF: red player sitting on ground facing blue DBL. ball bounces to him quickly. just as he is catching the ball, blue player arrives on his feet grabbing for the ball as red plays keep-away with the ball and quickly flips it over his shoulder to arriving red teammate.

IMO the man out of the game took away the rights of a man on his feet. what do you think?

No different to if a Red player arrived first, dived on the ball, and then passed it to a team mate as Blue player arrived. What would you do if rather than the red player just sitting there, they had just arrived and gone off their feet onto the ball? Why the difference?

We debated similar in my first season on here. I don't think a consensus was reached. As a pragmatist 'off your feet = out of the game' is a lot easier to manage. ymmv.

Which means you then have to remember the exceptions to your rule, and treat near identical situations differently. I treat all non Ruck situations (no hands in a ruck) with players off their feet the same - Man on feet is King, and act immediately. (Even the tackle is the same as I treat it - act immediately, and release to man on feet). So in all scenarios where there is a player on the floor I apply the same logic, the same standards, the same requirements on the player on the floor.

I don't think I'm complicating it, I also think this is a sensible logic, that is easy for players/spectators etc to understand. ALL scenarios where a player is off their feet, they must immediately play/pass etc, or release to a player on their feet. I think this is how 99% of players would understand it, and as such makes it easier to ref.

Otherwise with your logic - anyone on the ground must immediately release the ball (not pass or play, or otherwise touch the ball), except in exceptions X, Y and Z.

And in the accidental contact with a player lying on the ground? my call - play on (logical conclusion). Your logical conclusion? PK? Scrum? Imagine injuried player (not serious) lying on the ground, ball is kicked and ricochets of them into his team mates arms. I say play on (ignoring the possibility I may stop for safety etc). You say PK against.

I see the logic in the other side of teh arguement, but see too many flaws, exceptions etc. It is over complicating it IMHO.

 

[Donal1988]

Greg we actually have a meeting tonight but I wont be in attendance. The more thought Im of the opinion that once he acts immediately its play on. Agree that other approach has a clear logic but it is overly complicated.

 

[Ciaran Trainor]

going back to the first point, U18 match, first time it happens, play on quiet word with player.
Second time you were warned, freekick
Manage it.

 

[OB..]

If a player on the ground is entitled to play the ball, then Laws 14 and 15 can only be seen as restricting what he might otherwise do. If he cannot normally play the ball, then they provide extra rights.

Whichever way you slice it you have exceptions.

I will stick with the player on the ground being out of the game as a basic principle unless I am instructed otherwise.

 

[Greg Collins]

going back to the first point, U18 match, first time it happens, play on quiet word with player.
Second time you were warned, freekick
Manage it.

Don't buy 100% such leniency at U18. Best colts side in the county. Full of
county representative and pro club academy players. Paid coaches. Clubs 1st Team have won finals at Twickers in recent years and some of these lads will skip the 1sts to go play elsewhere. I've known and reffed since they were U14 so surely they know what is what?

Not sure they appreciate being shown the soft option.

 

[chopper15]

I will stick with the player on the ground being out of the game as a basic principle unless I am instructed otherwise.

You and other threaders don't appear to be addressing the original scenario. The law lords decision doesn't seem relevant either.

Have you perhaps overlooked the first sentence?

Law14 – Ball on the ground – No tackle

This situation occurs when the ball is available on the ground and a player goes to ground to gather the ball

The scenario doesn't confirm the player went to ground to gather the ball.

If he was on the ground tying his laces or even lying prone having a breather, what law prevents him playing the ball or tackling a ball-carrier? :hap:

 

[Taff]

If he was on the ground tying his laces or even lying prone having a breather, what law prevents him playing the ball or tackling a ball-carrier? :hap:

14.1 (d)

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

 

[OB..]

Have you perhaps overlooked the first sentence?

No we haven't.

This subject has come up many times before in different forums. Many people (like me) take the view that although written in Law 14, the statement that "The Game is to be played by players who are on their feet" is a statement of general principle that is used here to explain the basis of what follows.

It does not say "In this situation ...". Why refer to "The Game" if they do not mean it?

Others prefer to restrict it. The point is moot, and what we are arguing about is basically the best way to do things because the law is not clear enough.

 

[Dickie E]

If the player on the ground acts immediately, in the same way that a player going to ground would have to do then I would suggest play on.

I agree and this sentence "It also occurs when a player is on the ground in possession of the ball and has not been tackled." allows for a player coming into possession whilst on the ground.

The 2004 law ruling is specifically & clearly related to a player on the ground tackling an opponent.

 

[FlipFlop]

Thank you Dickie. I had not actually looked at the law to back up my point. You have provided it though.

Law 14 clearly covers players on the ground, who have not been tackled. (Definitions section specifically includes them - they are a "player on the ground in possession of the ball [who] has not been tackled"). Law 14.1 says what they can and can't do - they can play the ball, they can't tackle players, or prevent a player on their feet getting possession of the ball.

So I now back my argument and stance up with the Laws of the Game.

I await the reasoned response of OB et al.

 

[Greg Collins]

FLip FLop -

Ball on the ground - no tackle
DEFINITIONS
This situation occurs when the ball is available on the ground and a player goes to ground to gather the ball, except immediately after a scrum or a ruck.

It also occurs when a player is on the ground in possession of the ball and has not been tackled.

The Game is to be played by players who are on their feet.

A player must not make the ball unplayable by falling down. Unplayable means that the ball is not immediately available to either team so that play may continue.

A player who makes the ball unplayable, or who obstructs the opposing team by falling down, is negating the purpose and Spirit of the Game and must be penalised.

A player who is not tackled, but who goes to ground while holding the ball, or a player who goes to ground and gathers the ball, must act immediately.

Your stance is a lawyerly one, I give you that, and such a stance is well served by picking a single clause from the definition. Law 14 appears to be your friend but with a wider optic Law 14 shows itself to be fickle.

Says not one word about a player already on the floor, and therefore out of the game, coming into or gaining possession of the ball. Doesn't need too. The Game is to be PLAYED by players on their feet. If the ball hits a prone player out cold he has not PLAYED the ball. If it squirts out of a ruck and hits lazy boy on the back he has not PLAYED the ball.

If chummy, sat on his arse, picks up the ball and PLAYS it by lobbing a perfect pass to his winger who runs 30 yards to score.... How will you manage that? :chin: