[Law] Charge down & off side

[Arabcheif]

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?

Ok let me clarify "a fail catch that goes backwards," I didn't really think anyone would infer anything else from my statement as i believed we were all reasonably intelligent people, who can tell the difference between a failed catch and a knock on.....

 

[crossref]

Ok let me clarify "a fail catch that goes backwards," I didn't really think anyone would infer anything else from my statement as i believed we were all reasonably intelligent people, who can tell the difference between a failed catch and a knock on.....

arab, you have missed part of the point of here - which is not concerned with knock ons


Scenario : Red kick, and Blue attempt a charge down, but get just a finger to the ball, deflecting the ball just very slightly, but the ball essentially continues on its way

1 did blue touch it? Yes
2 did blue play it? Yes
3 did blue charge it down ?
4 does the 10m Law apply?

for 4 the answer depends on this Law

1[LAWS]0.4.c Was in front of a team-mate who kicked the ball and fails to retire immediately behind an onside team-mate or an imaginary line across the field 10 metres on that player’s side from where the ball is caught or lands, even if it hits a goal post or crossbar first. If this involves more than one player, then the player closest to where the ball lands or is caught is the one penalised. This is known as the 10-metre law and still applies if the ball touches or is played by an opponent but not when the kick is charged down.[/LAWS]

I think the answers are
3 - Yes that counts as a chargedown
4 - So the 10m Law does not apply

Other posters think
3 - that's not a charge down, that's just a touch
4 - so the 10m Law does apply

 

[Arabcheif]

I agree with you here CR. I was attempting to suggest what was meant by a "touch." Like said in a previous post, the video use to demonstrate this on WR website is of this very example.

 

[Dickie E]

True story from my playing days.

I ended up on the deck in the opposition in-goal chasing a ball carrier who scarpered and kicked the ball up-field. As I was getting back to my feet my team mate kicked the ball in my direction, ball grazed an opponent's fingers on the way and ball lands in my arms. Dotted down for a rare try

 

[crossref]

True story from my playing days.

I ended up on the deck in the opposition in-goal chasing a ball carrier who scarpered and kicked the ball up-field. As I was getting back to my feet my team mate kicked the ball in my direction, ball grazed an opponent's fingers on the way and ball lands in my arms. Dotted down for a rare try

good job you were back on your feet, or that would have been a PK against you

 

[thepercy]

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.

Its a descriptive term used to describe a situation that isn't clear in law.

 

[buff]

Wales vs Ireland this weekend. Welsh player kicks and an Irish player touches the ball trying to charge down the kick, but it carries on towards the Irish goal . Poite yells "Ball touched" and the Welsh players who were ahead of the ball chase downfield. Just past 8:00 on the YouTube clock.

https://youtu.be/XadlC5LY6Xc?t=6m50s

 

[crossref]

Yes, a touch puts the oppo onside, but what point are you making ?

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Ok let me clarify "a fail catch that goes backwards," I didn't really think anyone would infer anything else from my statement as i believed we were all reasonably intelligent people, who can tell the difference between a failed catch and a knock on.....

A failed catch can be a knock on. It depends where the ball goes next.

i believe we were all reasonably intelligent people, who can tell the difference between a failed catch that goes BACKWARD (play on) and a failed catch that goes FORWARD (knock on).

 

[crossref]

I think Arab meant to compare a failed catch to a chargedown

Which is indeed trickier, given we don't have a definition of a charge down

So : when the ball goes forward: when is it a charge down (not a KO) and when is it a failed catch (ie a KO) ?

 

[Arabcheif]

A failed catch can be a knock on. It depends where the ball goes next.

i believe we were all reasonably intelligent people, who can tell the difference between a failed catch that goes BACKWARD (play on) and a failed catch that goes FORWARD (knock on).

Yes, I'm aware of that. A failed catch (from a kick) that goes forward is just a knock-on. We don't call it something different, it's just a knock-on. I felt that in my comment that just mentioned a "failed catch," it was clear that the failed catch would have went back as I didn't use the term knocked-on.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Well you know what "felt" did.

 

[L'irlandais]

Well you know what "felt" did.

Leaked the White House tapes to the Washington Post, right?

Several Nixon administration veterans have criticized Felt for helping the Post.

G. Gordon Liddy, who helped plan the Watergate break-in as a member of the White House Plumbers unit, said Felt "violated the ethics of the law enforcement profession" by talking to the newspaper rather than turning his information over to a grand jury. Bradlee said critics like Liddy, who served four and a half years in prison for his roles in the scandal and the Plumbers' activities, have little credibility.

"Where would Felt have gone?" Bradlee told CNN. "He saw something wrong in the government, and what should he have done?

 

[Zebra1922]

I think we can all agree that the law is unclear in this situation. As such I fall back on what does everyone expect? In my experience, everyone expects any form of touch from an attempted charge down to cancel offsides, regardless of if the ball goes forwards backwards, up or down. This is why some referees (and players!) shout "touched" to indicate everyone is now onside.

I would not equate this with one of the many incorrect myths of the game, it is an accepted interpretation of another poorly worded law. I really don't want to get into technical conversations mid game, or in a brief, about the differences between a charge down and an attempted charge down and why I referee this differently to 95% of other referees, so I stick to the accepted practice that any touch from a charge down means no offside.

Does anyone referee this differently in practice?

 

[crossref]

I think we can all agree that the law is unclear in this situation. As such I fall back on what does everyone expect? In my experience, everyone expects any form of touch from an attempted charge down to cancel offsides, regardless of if the ball goes forwards backwards, up or down. This is why some referees (and players!) shout "touched" to indicate everyone is now onside.

I would not equate this with one of the many incorrect myths of the game, it is an accepted interpretation of another poorly worded law. I really don't want to get into technical conversations mid game, or in a brief, about the differences between a charge down and an attempted charge down and why I referee this differently to 95% of other referees, so I stick to the accepted practice that any touch from a charge down means no offside.

Does anyone referee this differently in practice?

this thread has got a little confused.

The law is perfectly clear that any deliberate touch of the ball puts your opponents onside

View attachment 3913

The ambiguity is whether or not the 10m Law applies, which is a slightly different thing -

[LAWS]The10-metre law [...] applies if the ball touches or is played by an opponent but not when the kick is charged down[/LAWS]

so, to determine when and where the 10m Law applies you need to know the difference between a charge down, and any other type of playing the ball.

 

[thepercy]

Wales vs Ireland this weekend. Welsh player kicks and an Irish player touches the ball trying to charge down the kick, but it carries on towards the Irish goal . Poite yells "Ball touched" and the Welsh players who were ahead of the ball chase downfield. Just past 8:00 on the YouTube clock.

https://youtu.be/XadlC5LY6Xc?t=6m50s

Not a 10m law example though.

 

[Phil E]

This is why some referees (and players!) shout "touched" to indicate everyone is now onside.

Does anyone referee this differently in practice?

It doesn't put "everyone" onside.
It puts all the kickers team onside, plus the charger downer and any of his team behind him.

Any of the chargers team who are in front of the charge down are still offside as they are in front of a team-mate who last played the ball.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

It doesn't put "everyone" onside.
It puts all the kickers team onside, plus the charger downer and any of his team behind him.

Any of the chargers team who are in front of the charge down are still offside as they are in front of a team-mate who last played the ball.

Good point.