deliberate into touch after knock-on

[Decorily]

You are right. There is no suggestion that Green did anything intentionally illegal. It was a common or garden variety knock-on. If he'd regained the ball it would have been play on. But he didn't, it was touched by Blue, so Blue scrum ... EXCEPT Blue then committed egregious & unnecessary foul play.

But what makes it interesting for me is considering what Barnes would have done if Blue had committed some other type of non-dangerous foul play, such as obstruction or intentionally knocking the ball forward. Would he still have penalised Blue or come back for the scrum?

You are asking some good questions. ...challenging!

We seem to agree that Green was 'juggling' therefore deemed to be in possession.
So therefore blue simply took the ball and gained possession. I would therefore be refereeing from that point and judging what happened next....ie no knock on from green.

 

[crossref]

maybe this is a better question.

Let's say that, after the Green knock-on, the ball hits the ground then Blue intentionally knocks ball into touch. Would Barnes have still gone to his pocket?

Great question.
He would have given scrum blue , I reckon

 

[Dickie E]

Great question.
He would have given scrum blue , I reckon

but there'd be no logic to that. Once he decided that no PT, then whether ball hits ground or not shouldn't matter. Advantage law says foul play trumps knock on, so penalty should always be awarded against Blue.

 

[crossref]

but there'd be no logic to that. Once he decided that no PT, then whether ball hits ground or not shouldn't matter. Advantage law says foul play trumps knock on, so penalty should always be awarded against Blue.

well the logic would be that ifthe ball hit the floor (clearly now a knock on by green) then blue subsequently knocking the ball into touch would be completely immaterial. So scrum blue for the knock on (and a quick word of explanation would be in order)

 

[Dickie E]

well the logic would be that ifthe ball hit the floor (clearly now a knock on by green) then blue subsequently knocking the ball into touch would be completely immaterial. So scrum blue for the knock on (and a quick word of explanation would be in order)

1. but as soon as Blue touches the ball (in lieu of ball touching ground) it is "clearly a knock on by Green". So what happens after that is immaterial.

2. law 7 doesn't distinguish between dangerous foul play and non-dangerous foul play. So if a punch to the mouth is always material, then all other "foul plays" (inc. knocking ball into touch) must be material.

Anyway, all good fun. Good to have a think about these things.

 

[crossref]

Yes, it is actually a very interesting incident

 

[Rich_NL]

This was recently addressed in another thread. I think (at least for me) foul = dangerous, unfair, misconduct and not obstruction or repeated offences.

If green knocked on and blue started screaming abuse in the ref's ear or flung himself to the ground clutching his face, I'd be giving the penalty against that and not going back for the scrum.

 

[crossref]

This was recently addressed in another thread. I think (at least for me) foul = dangerous, unfair, misconduct and not obstruction or repeated offences.

If green knocked on and blue started screaming abuse in the ref's ear or flung himself to the ground clutching his face, I'd be giving the penalty against that and not going back for the scrum.

green knocks ball forward, ball hits ground, blue smacks it into touch ..... decision?
green knocks ball forward, blue smacks it into touch .... decision?

 

[Rich_NL]

In practice, scrum blue for the first (if I've not called advantage), penalty green for the second. Certainly in the case of last weekend, where there's a clear and obvious chance of regathering.

 

[crossref]

it's fun to introduce a clock

blue is winning by 1 point, time has expired - green knocks ball forward, ball hits ground, blue smacks it into touch ..... decision?

knock on = time up = end of game hmmm.. doesn't seem quite right -- but you are not going to give green a match winning PK from that

 

[Decorily]

it's fun to introduce a clock

blue is winning by 1 point, time has expired - green knocks ball forward, ball hits ground, blue smacks it into touch ..... decision?

knock on = time up = end of game hmmm.. doesn't seem quite right -- but you are not going to give green a match winning PK from that

Time is irrelevant.

Edit....match winning or otherwise is definitely irrelevant!

 

[thepercy]

it's fun to introduce a clock

blue is winning by 1 point, time has expired - green knocks ball forward, ball hits ground, blue smacks it into touch ..... decision?

knock on = time up = end of game hmmm.. doesn't seem quite right -- but you are not going to give green a match winning PK from that

I'd give the PK, Bleu are stupid, and deserve the PK. In the OP the Bleu player can be seen anguishing as soon as he knocks it into touch because he knows it was dumb to do what he did, and expects the PK and YC.

At my level a PK near enough to touch that intentionally knock into touch is a possibility is not definite points.

 

[Dickie E]

it's fun to introduce a clock

blue is winning by 1 point, time has expired - green knocks ball forward, ball hits ground, blue smacks it into touch ..... decision?

knock on = time up = end of game hmmm.. doesn't seem quite right -- but you are not going to give green a match winning PK from that

So blue is winning by 1 point, time has expired - green knocks ball forward, ball hits ground, blue player catches ball and throws it into crowd in celebration of the win. ???

And would field position be of any relevance to your decision?

 

[Dickie E]

A corollary:

White are running their back line and a try is a distinct possibility.

The final pass is clearly forward however a Red defender sticks his hand out and deliberately knocks the ball forward to thwart the try. He had no prospect of catching ball.

Decision: scrum Red for the knock on or White penalty for the knock down?

 

[Balones]

A corollary:

White are running their back line and a try is a distinct possibility.

The final pass is clearly forward however a Red defender sticks his hand out and deliberately knocks the ball forward to thwart the try. He had no prospect of catching ball

Decision: scrum Red for the knock on or White penalty for the knock down?

At grassroots both your scenarios are easy. What is clear and obvious?
Scenario 1 in previous post. Ball knocked on and hit floor before anything else, therefore knock on. The ref saw the knock on and so did the thirty players.
Scenario 2 above. Clear and obvious forward pass. First offence. Scrum.

It gets tricky if it is not C&O and we get down to management as usual. The ref has to decide. Tricky if - scenario 1 - what if the ball had come off the chest and no arms involved - or maybe? Scenario 2 - Long pass llegal to start but blown forward by wind.

 

[Dickie E]

At grassroots both your scenarios are easy. What is clear and obvious?
Scenario 1 in previous post. Ball knocked on and hit floor before anything else, therefore knock on. The ref saw the knock on and so did the thirty players.
Scenario 2 above. Clear and obvious forward pass. First offence. Scrum.

while I don't disagree with you, do you agree that this is contrary to law?

 

[OB..]

A knock-on does not in itself stop play.

 

[crossref]

At grassroots both your scenarios are easy. What is clear and obvious?
Scenario 1 in previous post. Ball knocked on and hit floor before anything else, therefore knock on. The ref saw the knock on and so did the thirty players.
Scenario 2 above. Clear and obvious forward pass. First offence. Scrum.

.

I think both of these are good decisions.

So then I am starting to think that perhaps Barnesy should have given a scrum for his one ....

 

[thepercy]

At grassroots both your scenarios are easy. What is clear and obvious?
Scenario 1 in previous post. Ball knocked on and hit floor before anything else, therefore knock on. The ref saw the knock on and so did the thirty players.
Scenario 2 above. Clear and obvious forward pass. First offence. Scrum.

It gets tricky if it is not C&O and we get down to management as usual. The ref has to decide. Tricky if - scenario 1 - what if the ball had come off the chest and no arms involved - or maybe? Scenario 2 - Long pass llegal to start but blown forward by wind.

Don't we judge if a pass is forward or not based on how it comes out of the hands? And we don't take into consideration the pass ends up due to momentum or wind?

 

[thepercy]

Why? If there was a punch or kick to the face then you would give the PK? But unfair play isn't real foul play, it's just listed there in the book?