Boys will be boys I

[Dickie E]

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:

by telling the kicker he's got one minute so best get cracking.

I think this statement is being overly flogged:
The Game is to be played by players who are on their feet

It is a general statement to remind us all that players shouldn't be crawling around on the ground with the ball under their arm.

Law 14 is very short so shouldn't be too contentious. The message is (IMHO) "keep on your feet as much as possible. However, if you do find yourself off your feet and in possession of the ball, do something with it quick-smart".

 

[OB..]

I await the reasoned response of OB et al.

I have already given it.

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?

The situation is unsatisfactory, but every time this topic comes round I become more firmly convinced that "The Game is to be played by players who are on their feet" is a statement of general principle.

 

[Dickie E]

"The Game is to be played by players who are on their feet" is a statement of general principle.

Bit like "cricket is a game to be played by gentlemen"?

 

[OB..]

Bit like "cricket is a game to be played by gentlemen"?

Hardly. That does not appear in the Laws of Cricket.

 

[FlipFlop]

From the IRB laws site:

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.

I look at this and I see:
1) the situation of the player on the ground without a tackle is covered (second paragraph). It doesn't say how or why the player is on the ground, just not a tackle (note ruck and scrum scenarios ruled out in paragraph 1)
2) The "Game must be played by players on their feet" quote is in the third paragraph about making the ball unplayable by going off their feet. It then defines "unplayable".

I say you are placing way to much reliance on a quote taken out of context from a paragraph.

All my arguement is doing is applying Law 14 to the scenario when the "Ball on the Ground - No Tackle" (Title of Law 14) where "a player is on the ground in possession of the ball and has not been tackled." (2nd paragraph of definitions). I require said player to comply with Law 14.1. I'm not inventing any exceptions, or changin the law. I am applying it as written.

Those on teh otherside of this discussion seem to want to rule that a player on the ground who has not been tackled can't play the ball because the Game is to be played by players on their feet. But this refers to falling down to make the ball unplayable. And Unplayable means not immediately available to EITHER team. In this scenario - the ball IS immediately available to one team - by virture of the player on the ground immediately being required to comply with law 14.1 (pass etc).

If the Player on feet quote was meant to be all encompasing - I believe it should be written at the top of the Definitions section, in a paragraph on it's own.

So I don't think I'm dancing a legalistic battle. Actually I think I am purely reading what is written, as it is written, and applying it.

(Greg - play on - what's the problem, try scored. Fantastic awareness and reaction by a player out of position (and probably carry an knock/injury/winded etc - reason why most players are on the floor away from play), to legally play the ball to the benefit of his team. And consider - tap tackle, player on floor, not tackled (by definition), gets back up/passes - you PK him for playing the ball on the floor? If not - why is it different in the eyes of the Law Book?)

 

[Dickie E]

Law 1.4 is close:

4. Responsibility of captains
The captains are responsible at all times for ensuring that play is conducted within the spirit and traditions of the game as well as within the Laws.

 

[Dickie E]

FF, I'm with you, buddy.

Next player who lies on ground and holds tip of ball for a place kick in windy conditions is mincemeat: "the Game is to be played by players who are on their feet, sunshine". :Looser:

 

[FlipFlop]

The situation is unsatisfactory, but every time this topic comes round I become more firmly convinced that "The Game is to be played by players who are on their feet" is a statement of general principle.

Then I would argue it should be in Law 7: Mode of Play as "The Game is to be played by players who are on their feet, except where the Laws permit otherwise" or similar.

It is not.

It is hidden away on page 84, in a third paragraph to the definitions to Law 14, a specific law to cover ball on the ground without a tackle, in the same definition section where players on the ground not tackled are specifically included, and therefore given the rights to use 14.1.

So why give it more weight than the preceeding paragraph?

It is in a section where the ball is on the ground (sans tackle), and is there to prevent players diving on the ball (or lying on the ball) to make it unplayable. It is to set the tone that if a player is on their feet, the player on the ground must release it to them if they contest it, and to state the ball must be available immediately (they can't make it unplayable)

And the more I think about it - the more I like my views. There is no need for exceptions, except where specifically mentioned in the Law book. The tap tackle, the player gathering a loose ball, the "resting player" getting accidently hit, the player who falls over (either with the ball, or when trying to catch a pass), the player who slips when trying to catch a kick, the catcher of a kick who slides in to catch it (or has a knee on the ground). All covered in an identical, consistent, way. All scenarios of a player who hasn't been tackled - treated in an identical way, unless the LOTG specifically rule otherwise. Very easy to explain to coaches/players etc, and gives a consistent approach to different scenarios.

 

[OB..]

FF, I'm with you, buddy.

Next player who lies on ground and holds tip of ball for a place kick in windy conditions is mincemeat: "the Game is to be played by players who are on their feet, sunshine". :Looser:

Law 21.4 (h)
All the kicker's team at a penalty or free kick must be behind the ball until it has been kicked, except the placer for a place kick.
(My emphasis)

 

[FlipFlop]

Greg - one for you:

#10 passes (clearly backwards) to his #13. The #13 is too late on his run, and to get the ball, dives forward, hitting the ground and collects the ball. Great skill - no knock on - clean recovery. He rolls over and pops up to his #12 who was running the loop.

I say play on. You say - PK for playing the ball on the ground?

 

[Dickie E]

Law 21.4 (h)
except the placer for a place kick.[/I]

but must stay on feet, yes?

 

[FlipFlop]

Law 21.4 (h)
All the kicker's team at a penalty or free kick must be behind the ball until it has been kicked, except the placer for a place kick.
(My emphasis)

doesn't say he can be off his feet though!


But I can carry on my arguement here - the player on the ground has made it immediately available, and has placed the ball. They have not made the ball unplayable (by definition) - therefore the Game to be played by players on their feet quote is not applicable! :biggrin:

 

[OB..]

So I don't think I'm dancing a legalistic battle. Actually I think I am purely reading what is written, as it is written, and applying it.

Of course you do, and of course you therefore reject anybody else's view.

The law does not cover the situation properly. Trying to dig out a law-based solution from other bits can sometimes be helpful but cannot be considered authoritative. We therefore have to make do and mend. To me (unsurprisingly) my view makes better overall sense than yours.

We are going round in circles.

 

[OB..]

but must stay on feet, yes?

Definitions
Placer: a player who holds he ball on the ground for a team mate to kick.

This does not specify how he is to do it, but you know as well as everybody else that lying on the ground is normal. Are you now going to campaign to penalise players for a hand-off?

If you really think this is helpful, may I suggest it merely shows up the pitfalls inherent in trying to dig out an answer from bits of law that do not really cover the issue effectively. As with dead ball line vs touch-in-goal and so on ad nauseam.

 

[Greg Collins]

Greg - one for you:

#10 passes (clearly backwards) to his #13. The #13 is too late on his run, and to get the ball, dives forward, hitting the ground and collects the ball. Great skill - no knock on - clean recovery. He rolls over and pops up to his #12 who was running the loop.

I say play on. You say - PK for playing the ball on the ground?

I say play on - he went to ground to play the ball and played it immediately. Entirely in accord with what Law 14 allows.

 

[FlipFlop]

Greg - how does the Law differentiate between that scenario and the player just on the ground, the balls comes to them, and they make the play? Or are you saying it is covered by Paragraph 1?

Perhaps you can come up with a scenario for Paragrpah 2, which doesn't fall under any of the others, where you would allow play to continue?

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

Greg - one for you:

#10 passes (clearly backwards) to his #13. The #13 is too late on his run, and to get the ball, dives forward, hitting the ground and collects the ball. Great skill - no knock on - clean recovery. He rolls over and pops up to his #12 who was running the loop.

I say play on. You say - PK for playing the ball on the ground?

I cannot find the law covering "playing the ball on the ground" is this a real and true PK or is it a misused phrase?

As with dead ball line vs touch-in-goal and so on ad nauseam.

Hey, um was that directed at me. I stayed out of this thread so not to nauseate. But I must support and agree with FlipFlop, he has stood up to the status quo and did not cave. I agree with Davet, Donal, DickieE and maybe Greg (who I think is on the fence) Not sure this support worth much from an argumentative, poor spelling, L3 Yank.


Also, we should be careful of phrases like "the man on his feet is king" as they may be misconstrued. It applies nicely at a tackle, but not elsewhere.


Acting immediately is the difference, anything else is making is unplayable. Then we can apply 14.1

 

[SimonSmith]

Help me understand, because I'm having a logic problem.

Using the rationale put forward here, until the Law Lords put forth that a player on the ground cannot effect a tackle, citing the principle of "the game is to be played...etc", FF et al would have allowed that tackle to have been made.

However, the Lords have made it clear that because the player is out of the game, he cannot effect the tackle. To follow their thought processes through to conclusion, it appears that the same principle should be applied to the player on the ground not being able to play the ball.

The law is not specific, but as OB says, we have a general statement of principle as well as a law ruling.

I would also add that the law refers to apleyr on the ground in possession of the ball not a player on the ground gathering the ball!

 

[FlipFlop]

Err - no.

Law 14.1 says he can't make a tackle. It says he has to release the ball to the player on their feet. It says the Player on their feet has more rights to teh ball than the player on the ground. BUT it also says that if the player on the ground may immediately play the ball etc.

As for the possession bit (and I got accussed of the "legal arguement" ). Ball rolls towards player on ground, they pick it up and then pass/place etc. Are you saying they never have posession? No different to a player going to ground to claim a ball.

Perhaps I can phrase my arguement slightly differently.

Law 14.
Definitions:
Paragraph 1 says the situation (ball on ground - no tackle) occurs when a ball is available on the ground (except immediately after scrum or ruck), and a player goes to ground to gather it.

I think we are all happy about that. Covers most scenarios.

But it then goes on. Paragraph 2
It also covers when a player is on the ground in possession of the ball.

So Para 2 is saying that Law 14 covers situation when a player is on the ground with the ball, but who hasn't gone to ground to claim it (as this is covered in Para 1). So this gives us 2 scenarios. The player is already on the ground when they got posession OR the player had possession when they went to ground. It doesn't specify which - so I'll allow both.


I believe that Paragraph 2 would read: "It also occurs when a player GOES TO ground in possession of the ball and has not been tackled." if your opinion is meant. It does not it just refers to players on the ground.

I believe that "Game is to be played by players who are on their feet" means that those off their feet cannot prevent those on their feet playing, nor can they impact those players directly (tackle). I do not believe it means they cannot play the ball - provided they comply with Law 14.1. If the "Game is to be played by players who are on their feet" was truely meant to be such a profound overriding statement, it would be in Law 7, not Law 14. It also would be the first paragraph in Law 14 Definitions as an overridding concept, not halfway down.

(And for clarification on this arguement: The argument is only over if a player on the ground can play the ball the same as a player going to ground to claim the ball can - i.e. in accordance with 14.1)

 

[FlipFlop]

Sorry misread your question Simon.

Law 14 did not cover this situation before the law ruling. The ball was not on the ground without a tackle.

Before the ruling it was common to see a player on the ground making a tackle. It was probably 50/50 if they were penalised - hence I guess the request for a ruling.

Personally I think the law ruling was only half thought through (surprised?) - if a player in the process of making a tackle ends up on the ground, before teh tackle is made (ball carrier still on their feet) and this then causes the tackle to be made, you should be penalising the tackler for making a tackle while off their feet. Do you? It basically means that as soon as a player hits the ground (unlees they are the ball carrier, or claiming the ball) they are out of the game. This is so not the case in lots of scenarios - not only the one given above.

So I see the point of the law ruling. I can even agree with the principal it is setting out. But I believe they are referring to a player on the ground impacting a player on their feet. I don't believe they are taking away the right of a player on the ground to play the ball in accordance to Law 14.

(I don't actually agree that the law ruling should be in Law 14 - it has nothing to do with a ball on the floor - no tackle). It should be in the definitions of Law 15 - the Tackle (or 15.4 The Tackler).)