In touch?

[Flish]

This one doesn’t seem to tick any of the in-touch or not in-touch examples.

Ball is kicked, crosses the plain of touch where a player (who starts and finishes outside the playing area) jumps up, and whilst off the ground bats the ball backwards and into the the field of play.

To be clear, at no point has the ball touched anyone or anything outside of the field of play other than a briefly levitating player?

I played on

 

[Volun-selected]

Since it doesn’t match any of the “the ball is not in touch” examples, I think it is in touch and possession passes to the non-kicking team.

 

[Dickie E]

It has to be in touch otherwise you could have the absurd situation of a player in the 3rd tier of the grandstand doing that. Ie jumps up, and whilst off the ground bats the ball backwards and into the the field of play.

The way I view touch is that once the ball has crossed the plane it is in touch unless 11.2 a, b or c occur

 

[Flish]

It has to be in touch otherwise you could have the absurd situation of a player in the 3rd tier of the grandstand doing that.

If they are in the grandstand then the ball has touched something beyond the touch line, so in touch, unless I’ve misinterpreted?

In my example it only touched someone in the air?

The way I view touch is that once the ball has crossed the plane it is in touch unless 11.2 a, b or c occur

What if the wind blows it back without it touching something?

I was always taught not to blow the whistle until it touched something / someone in the ground in touch

 

[Dickie E]

If they are in the grandstand then the ball has touched something beyond the touch line, so in touch, unless I’ve misinterpreted?

In my example it only touched someone in the air?

I've updated my post for clarity

 

[Flish]

I've updated my post for clarity

Ah, yes, technically the same I suppose

 

[Phil E]

Law 18.2.d says the ball is NOT in touch if....

d. A player, who is in touch, kicks or knocks the ball, but does not hold it,
provided it has not reached the plane of touch.

Unfortunately they don't then extrapolate that to say

The ball is IN touch if...

A player, who is in touch, kicks or knocks the ball, but does not hold it,
after it has reached the plane of touch

But there is no other explanation.

 

[buff]

I would apply 18.2b. It covers the player standing in touch, and requires that player to jump and land in the playing area to keep the ball from being in touch. Once the ball has crossed the plane of touch, a player who jumps from outside the playing area and lands outside the playing area can't keep the ball in play.

 

[Flish]

Cheers all, it looked wrong at the time, probably because I could actually see the plane of touch for once to judge it, this moves to the top of the list for 'should be easier' for me

 

[Dickie E]

The touch laws are clearly written with the assumption that there is a competent team of 3 on the day

 

[didds]

The touch laws are clearly written with the assumption that there is a competent team of 3 on the day

and therein lies the fallacy of modern law making.
Bugger the 99% of rugby played at a level where if there are two touch judges they are the subs for each of the teams with no training whatsoever

 

[Stu10]

For this example, if the ball "lands" outside the playing area and the player is outside the playing area from start to finish, then the ball is out. That all lines up and should be easy to remember.

The other parts of 18.2 are arguably harder to remember, however, there is consistently some aspect of being within the playing area, be it the player starts or finishes within the playing area, or the ball remains within the playing area.

 

[Volun-selected]

What if the wind blows it back without it touching something?

For me - not in touch, play on.

 

[crossref]

The touch laws are clearly written with the assumption that there is a competent team of 3 on the day

Go back to the olden days and the touch laws were the opposite, they were written very much with the solo referee in mind.
So the plane of touch wasn't really used, instead it was all about where the players feet were (much easier to see for the ref) and whether a ball was still or moving (ditto)

 

[tim White]

So many of the current laws are to "enhance" TV rugby -they only make life more difficult for the Mortals -particularly those of us who used to be "Piano Shifters". If only all refs had ultra slo-mo replay available we might get more accurate decisions (as long as there was only one person making the decisions).

 

[Stu10]

I do appreciate that the current laws reward catchers that aim to keep the ball in play, rather than catch with one foot in and one out with the aim of both making the ball dead and gaining possession as per the older laws.