Charged down kick/no gain in ground

Pinky


Referees in Scotland
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
1,521
Post Likes
192
I would say that in trying to charge down the ball, that is an attempt to play the ball. Ideally he wants it to bounce off him and to be able to run forward and recover it, I would expect. But that means if he only touches it, it is still played and if it goes back inside the 22, there is no gain in ground. If in the same situation, the ball had gone into touch, would you really expect to disregard that the defending side had touched it and award them the lineout?
 

MrQeu

Avid Rugby Lover
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
440
Post Likes
37
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
Technically it might be right, but a successful charge down is not a knock-on, whereas an unsuccessful one means no gain in ground.
 

Phil E


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
16,111
Post Likes
2,372
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
Where in the laws of the game does it say that an unsuccessful charge-down is playing the ball?

LOTG 2012, Page 7, definitions.

[LAWS]Played: The ball is played when it is touched by a player.[/LAWS]
 

dave_clark


Referees in England
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
4,647
Post Likes
104
Current Referee grade:
Level 15 - 11
cue the circular argument about player touching ball vs ball touching player.
 

Davet

Referee Advisor / Assessor
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,731
Post Likes
4
If you attempt a charge down then you are deliberately attempting to toch the ball - ie you are Playing the ball.

If you do so poorly then you take the consequences - so the real rugby player will assess how successful he is likely to be before he attempts it - and make an informed and deliberate choice.

Only children act without thinking.
 

Pinky


Referees in Scotland
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
1,521
Post Likes
192
Only children act without thinking.[/QUOTE]

Eh? You must have a strange bunch of mates to say that :)
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,812
Post Likes
3,150
If you attempt a charge down then you are deliberately attempting to toch the ball - ie you are Playing the ball.

If you do so poorly then you take the consequences - so the real rugby player will assess how successful he is likely to be before he attempts it - and make an informed and deliberate choice.

Only children act without thinking.

i don't thnk a charge down is a considered action. it's a more a blind hope.

clearly any charge down is completely unpredictable, and is taking a chance -- the ball might go forwards four metres and bounce up into your arms for a certain try, it may glance sideways into the arms of an opponent for a change in angle and try to them, it may hit you in the face and break your nose. It's just a chance you take..

it may come off you and be carried over your own 22m where your team-mate, not realising, kicks for touch.
Unlucky!
but you can't charge down kicks and then complain about the luck of the bounce...
 

Taff


Referees in Wales
Joined
Aug 23, 2009
Messages
6,942
Post Likes
383
This doesn't seem like the right outcome... even if it is technically right. ... Where in the laws of the game does it say that an unsuccessful charge-down is playing the ball?
In the Definitions section on page 7.

Played: The ball is played when it is touched by a player.


Sorry Phil I think my computer is having a funny 5 minutes. I could only see 2 replies when I posted.
 
Last edited:

Davet

Referee Advisor / Assessor
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,731
Post Likes
4
Eh? You must have a strange bunch of mates to say that :)

I don't understand.

Do you think I am friends with people who don't think about what they do, before they do it?

"Acting on instinct" is fine - so long as you have good instincts, honed by experience. But just doing something without thought of consequence is probably the definition of "Childish"
 

Pinky


Referees in Scotland
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
1,521
Post Likes
192
I don't understand.

Do you think I am friends with people who don't think about what they do, before they do it?

"Acting on instinct" is fine - so long as you have good instincts, honed by experience. But just doing something without thought of consequence is probably the definition of "Childish"

Sorry, it was a lighthearted remark against your suggestion that only children act without thinking. Very often children will have thought long and hard about an action, although equally they may well act without thinking. I know from my own acquaintances that even as adults they often act withough thinking (or at least without thinking enough) about the consequences of the action. If you don't know folks like this, you operate in a very considerate circle :)
 
Top