I've looked again at Law 8.2a and am left a little puzzled by this. There is no mention (that I can see) on how to deal with a simultaneous grounding... as a ref, I had always given favour/benefit of doubt to the attacker and awarded the try... rather than saying the attacker is not first, I would say simultaneous = joint first (you certainly can't say the attacker grounded the ball second, so it must be first when simultaneous!)For a try to be awarded, Law 8.2a says an attacking player has to ground the ball first. Where there is simultaneous grounding by an attacker and a defender, the attacking player did not do so ‘first’, so a try cannot be awarded.
Therefore the defender’s touch takes precedence in determining the restart.
I'll admit that I would have given a GLD for this... attacking team last to touch ball within FOP, ball goes in-goal and is touched down by defender = GLD for me. I can't find reference to this charge-down situation in other text... can someone point me to the correct place that this was originally stated?
- Charged down from the field of play into in-goal; or a penalty/drop kick at goal strikes the post and remains in in-goal = 22 Drop out (Law 12.11)
A charge down is not (1) held-up in goal, (2) a knock-on by attacker, or (3) an attacking kick, so we can't award a GLD and it must be a 22 drop out.If the ball is held up in in-goal, there is a knock-on from an attacking player in in-goal or an attacking kick is grounded by the defenders in their own in-goal, then play restarts with a goal line drop-out anywhere along the goal line.
As per Stu10's post I was more confused after reading the clarification.
Before that, I was awarding a GLDO if the attackers charge-downed a kick and it went into in-goal. My rationale being that law 12.11
- Play is restarted with a goal line drop-out when:
- The ball is played or taken into in-goal by an attacking player and is held up by an opponent.
The interpretation of "played" recently appearing in the definitions as "intentionally touched by a player".
Then, seemingly out of nowhere, this clarification tells me that we now have to treat a charge-down differently to what is in the laws.
Fine - I shall change in accordance with this new clarification. Very strange given that the question that led to this clarificaiton wasnt really asking about charge-downs - so not sure why it needed to be changed/clarified.
Can someone please help me by telling me I'm wrong.
But the law itself has:Charged down from the field of play into in-goal; or a penalty/drop kick at goal strikes the post and remains in in-goal = 22 Drop out (Law 12.11)
No mention of a charge down (except, maybe when the charge down goes over touch-in-goal or the dead-ball line).12.11 Play is restarted with a 22-metre drop-out when an unsuccessful penalty goal or dropped goal attempt is grounded or made dead in in-goal by the defending team, or the ball goes dead through in-goal from one these attempts.
Correct, but if it it touched down by a defender, or goes dead or touch in goal then it is a 22.Thanks Crossref. Makes sense now.
So I can still carry on awarding a GLDO is its charged-down into in-goal then held-up. That was what the scenario in my head.