[Law] Charge down & off side

[Arabcheif]

Seems to be over-complicating things. Intentionally Playing for me would mean catching and passing to a team mate/kicking. Even batting the ball back into the field from touch (jumping and batting it back toward his own DbL). A charge down would be shortly after the kick, for me it doesn't matter where the ball goes goes after that, all kicking team's players are onside and can compete for the loose ball. whether it goes back, forward or to the side after the charge down.

 

[crossref]

Seems to be over-complicating things. Intentionally Playing for me would mean catching and passing to a team mate/kicking. Even batting the ball back into the field from touch (jumping and batting it back toward his own DbL). A charge down would be shortly after the kick, for me it doesn't matter where the ball goes goes after that, all kicking team's players are onside and can compete for the loose ball. whether it goes back, forward or to the side after the charge down.

after any deliberate touch by Blue, Red are played on side.

but the question is the 10m Law
- after a touch the 10m Law still applies
- after a charge down the 10m Law does not apply

So we need to have some definition that distinguishes a charge down from any other type of touch.

 

[Arabcheif]

10.7.b.(iv) - [FONT=fs_blakeregular]Intentionally touches the ball without gaining possession of it. The video accompanying this is attempted charge down that goes "back" from the chargers hands. [/FONT]

 

[crossref]

10.7.b.(iv) - [FONT=fs_blakeregular]Intentionally touches the ball without gaining possession of it. The video accompanying this is attempted charge down that goes "back" from the chargers hands. [/FONT]

Yes it's an intentional touch (of course) but is it a charge down ?

 

[L'irlandais]

I am no longer sure what the issue is here. We will all know a charge down when we see one. A successful one may be accompanied by a loud slapping sound, as the force of the kick goes thru’ the outstretched arms and the defender gets a faceful of leather. Successful charge down impies no knock on, so play on. And unsuccessful charge down where the ball goes backwards, is no knock on either, so play on. Only apply the 10m if the attempt is unsuccessful.

Am I missing something ?

 

[crossref]

Am I missing something ?

[LAWS]10.4.c The 10-metre law [...] applies if the ball [...] is played by an opponent but not when the kick is charged down.[/LAWS]

So what's the difference between the two?

 

[thepercy]

They say a picture tells a thousand words.
Law 11 has a picture of a charge down
I would agree, a deflection is not one. In a charge down the ball is blocked and goes toward the kicker’s deadball line. Which would otherwise be a knock-on, except for this exception in Law.

[LAWS]It is a knock-on when a player, in tackling or attempting to tackle an opponent, makes contact with the ball and the ball goes forward.[/LAWS]So charge down, retains this need for the ball to go forward.

If a kick was blocked (direction reversed) but went up rather than down?

Scrum for knock on?
PK Intentional knock forward?
Play on?

 

[L'irlandais]

Doh, successful charge down, no knock on play on.

Unsuccessful attempt at a charge down, 10 m rule applies.

I agree with #21, over complicating things. Look for reasons not to blow the whistle. Most teams will give you plenty of valid reasons to stop play, why add unnecessarily to those.

 

[crossref]

Unsuccessful attempt at a charge down, 10 m rule applies.

I think that's wrong - I think that the unsuccessful attempt at a chargedown (ie charger gets a touch on it but the ball essentially continues on its way) is exactly when the 10m rule does NOT apply.

I think that's what the quoted part of 10.4.c is aiming at.


But it all depends on what you consider to be the definition of a chargedown, and I agree that your view of 10.4.c follows logically from your definition of a chargedown (ie it's only a chargedown if it goes forward from the charger)

Note that you are going to be blowing your whistle, for 10.4.c infringments, in situations when I am saying 'play on'

 

[CrouchTPEngage]

Top Tip -
I've often watched refs , at much higher level than mine, who shout "Touched !" after an attempted charge-down ( where the ball glances a finger-tip of an attempted charge-down but still goes forward and upward). I always thought that a good idea to let everyone know that I have seen it and it's play-on as there will be no offsides from that kick.

 

[crossref]

Top Tip -
I've often watched refs , at much higher level than mine, who shout "Touched !" after an attempted charge-down ( where the ball glances a finger-tip of an attempted charge-down but still goes forward and upward). I always thought that a good idea to let everyone know that I have seen it and it's play-on as there will be no offsides from that kick.

Touched means no offside ..
BUT when it's touched the 10m law still applies
It's only when it is CHARGED DOWN that the 10m law is cancelled

So we have to know the difference

 

[smeagol]

Top Tip -
I've often watched refs , at much higher level than mine, who shout "Touched !" after an attempted charge-down ( where the ball glances a finger-tip of an attempted charge-down but still goes forward and upward). I always thought that a good idea to let everyone know that I have seen it and it's play-on as there will be no offsides from that kick.

I also do this, as it helps sell the call when the ball goes into touch after the deflection.

 

[mcroker]

For me any touch on the ball immediately after a kick is a charge-down irrespective of the direction of the onward flight.
Easier to sell, less confusion, and allows play to continue.

I get that the ball can be touched when it isn't charged down (e.g. slapping a kick back infield, or slapping a kick back to a waiting team-mate).- but for me that is dependent on the distance from the kick and the player's actions not the random flight of the ball

 

[Arabcheif]

Law 10.8 has a video, it specifically mentions a "Charge down" but in the video it bounces off the chargers hands and continues to go forward (subject to kicker). it seems there is no requirement for a reversal of direction. I believe that Touch refers in this case to a kick (hack at the ball)/failed catch/rebound of body at the other end eg when it's back to ground ish level

 

[crossref]

For me any touch on the ball immediately after a kick is a charge-down irrespective of the direction of the onward flight.
Easier to sell, less confusion, and allows play to continue.

I get that the ball can be touched when it isn't charged down (e.g. slapping a kick back infield, or slapping a kick back to a waiting team-mate).- but for me that is dependent on the distance from the kick and the player's actions not the random flight of the ball

I agree with this definition of a charge down

 

[Decorily]

I believe that Touch refers in this case to a kick (hack at the ball)/failed catch/rebound of body at the other end eg when it's back to ground ish level

Are you saying that a failed attempt to catch a kicked ball which goes forward from the 'catcher' is not a knock on in your opinion?

 

[ChrisR]

The issue resolves itself if you consider whether the ball is going up from a kick (charge down so no 10m law in effect) or coming down from a kick (10m law in effect even when played by opponent).

 

[beckett50]

This discussion is reminiscent of watching fairies dancing on pinheads, IMHO.

A "Charge Down" occurs when a player in opposition to the kicker puts any part of his body in the way of the ball to stop its forward (toward the goal line of the player in opposition to the kicker) momentum and the trajectory of the ball is reversed and travels toward the goal line of the player who kicked the ball. This is why it is not 'knock-on' despite the ball going forward off the player in opposition to the player who kicked the ball.

"Touched in flight" is where the ball comes off a part of the body of the player in opposition to the kicker and doesn't then travel in a direction toward the kickers goal line.

 

[crossref]

This discussion is reminiscent of watching fairies dancing on pinheads, IMHO.

A "Charge Down" occurs when a player in opposition to the kicker puts any part of his body in the way of the ball to stop its forward (toward the goal line of the player in opposition to the kicker) momentum and the trajectory of the ball is reversed and travels toward the goal line of the player who kicked the ball. This is why it is not 'knock-on' despite the ball going forward off the player in opposition to the player who kicked the ball.

"Touched in flight" is where the ball comes off a part of the body of the player in opposition to the kicker and doesn't then travel in a direction toward the kickers goal line.

Logical , but doesn't quite fit with 10.4.c and the 10m line where I think the phrase 'charge down' include what you call touched in flight.

See. Post 10 .. what's your answer ?

 

[ChrisR]

This discussion is reminiscent of watching fairies dancing on pinheads, IMHO.

A "Charge Down" occurs when a player in opposition to the kicker puts any part of his body in the way of the ball to stop its forward (toward the goal line of the player in opposition to the kicker) momentum and the trajectory of the ball is reversed and travels toward the goal line of the player who kicked the ball. This is why it is not 'knock-on' despite the ball going forward off the player in opposition to the player who kicked the ball.

"Touched in flight" is where the ball comes off a part of the body of the player in opposition to the kicker and doesn't then travel in a direction toward the kickers goal line.

And how does "Touched in flight" play into the Laws? Do you have a reference? If not, then it's a meaningless term re. refereeing the game.