France v Australia: Kuridrani's try

[ChrisR]

NOTE: I still maintain that if the Law makers had followed through with their original plan to place the flag posts on the outside junction of the goal-line and touch-in-goal line (i.e. so that the flag post is completely outside the field of play with the inside of the padding in contact with the outside of the touch line) like it was during the 2008 ELV trials.......then we would not be having this problem. A ball grounded against the flag post would have to be also touching the touchline and the decision would be easy.

^^^^^^^^ This!

 

[ChrisR]

Why not move the flags off the TIG completely? If they are not in play then move them 1 or 2m out.

 

[OB..]

Why not move the flags off the TIG completely? If they are not in play then move them 1 or 2m out.

IIRC that was originally proposed, but was dropped because players find them very useful in marking the actual corner.

 

[talbazar]

Look at this in relation to the goalpost

If a loose ball touches a goal post on the field of play side of the post, the ball is not in goal
If a loose ball touches a flag post on the playing area side of the post, the ball is not in touch

If a ball being held by a player touches part way up the field of play side of a goal post, the ball is not in-goal
If a ball being held by a player touches part way up the playing area side of a flag post, the ball is not in touch

However

If a ball being held by a player touches part way up a goal post and then is slid down, and grounded on the field of play side of the base of the goal post, while still in contact with it, then the ball has been grounded in-goal.

so it stands to reason that,

If a ball being held by a player touches part way up a flag post and then is slid down, and grounded on the playing area side of the base of the flag post, while still in contact with it, then the ball has been grounded in touch.

Fair point!
Even if we "include the goal post & padding into a place we try to reach" and we "exclude the corner post/flag/padding from an area we try to stay in"

To be absolutely honest, I'm not loosing sleep over this one.
It's just that the law is extremely badly worded:
Usage of "not out of play", "first", etc... just add to the confusion
AND
It tells you when to play on but not what to do when you can't play on anymore (no restart)

:dead horse:

Pierre.

 

[Dixie]

and doesn;t that also depend on what we mean by "grounded against a flag post".... now that to me suggests where the p[ost connects to the ground ie the base.

but I appreciate others disagree.

This raises its ugly head in discussions about scoring against a goal post of course.

didds

"[...] unless it is first grounded against a flag post" is ambiguous. IMHO the sensible interpretation of the wording is "unless when first grounded it is touching a flag post". However the most sensible in rugby terms is to ignore the flag post (the aim of the change in the law) and simply say that what matters is where the ball was first grounded.

Sorry to come to this discussion rather late! Let's recall what the law was before it was changed.

The problem to be resolved was that a player in the air who touched the corner flag automatically became in touch - so he could ground the ball well in-goal without any part of his body touching the ground, but the "try" would be disallowed because of the contact with the flag. This was true even if the flag was leaning well in-field at the time. The law was changed to allow the try to stand. In doing so, there was a clear (and often-stated) intent to respect the basic rules relating to the lines. The one that is analogous to this situation is that the goal posts and their pads are part of the goal line - so if you ground against the post, the try stands even though the ball may be well short of the line. But if you simply touch the post without touching the ground, there is no try.

Where you put a flag on the intersection of three lines, there is an obvious issue. By stating that a mere touch of the flag is to be ignored in terms of deciding the status of the ball, that issue disappears - but it remains very relevant in one circumstance and one only - when the ball is grounded against the post. Applying the basic provision relating to goal posts, the ball is then deemed to touch all three lines of the intersection - the goal line, the touch line and the TIG line.

The only rational outcome is no try as the ball was out of play. The determination of whether the restart is a throw-in or a drop-out is much less obvious.