But still not sure why it's so hard to simply say yes, yes, yes (or whatever)I submit.
@Marc Wakeham , you liked Buds post , so you obviously have noticed the thread, do you have a yes/no view on the three scenario?
Last edited:
But still not sure why it's so hard to simply say yes, yes, yes (or whatever)I submit.
Do you have a video of that? Was there separation between player and ball?And yet we saw Maro Itoje score a try in similar circs, remember? TMO said backwards off his hands and then scored a try with with his stomach
I've read that page twice and I don't see where he specifically addresses scenario 3 (hands, chest , ground)... Help me out with a copy/paste, please.Here is Paul Dobson discussing the knock on Law
"The knock-on would probably be regarded as the easiest of law applications, bread-and-butter stuff for a referee.
This may well not be the case and it may just be that the knock-on is the most abused law in the book - the one that regularly produces wrong decisions, which lead to stoppages when there should be none."
He specifically addresses scenario 3 (hands, chest , ground) for him that is NOT a knock on
Law Discussion: Knock-on application
SPOTLIGHT: @rugby365com law guru Paul Dobson, in the fourth of this law discussion series, takes a look at aspects he feels should be changed and which should remain unchanged.rugby365.com
It’s the ball that comes his way from a team-mate’s pass or from a kick that is of interest
For a knock-on to occur in both of these cases the ball needs to go forward from the catcher’s hand or arm.
Forward: Towards the opposition’s dead-ball line.
It is what the hand or arm does to the ball that counts, not what the ball does because it is oval. If the hand or arm does not knock the ball forward, but it bounces forward, it is not a knock-on.
For a knock-on, the ball must come off hand or arm, not any other part of the body – not the head, not the chest, not the stomach, not the thigh, not the knee
It is what the hand or arm does to the ball that counts, not what the ball does because it is oval. If the hand or arm does not knock the ball forward, but it bounces forward, it is not a knock-on.
For a knock-on, the ball must come off hand or arm, not any other part of the body – not the head, not the chest, not the stomach, not the thigh, not the knee
I cant' find one = perhaps some else will remember it ?Do you have a video of that? Was there separation between player and ball?
indeed, it would be good to have a video.@crossref it's hard to comment on that one without seeing it... if, for example, Itoje lost the ball as he was diving for the line and dropped from 12 inches above the ground, then it may be more practical/feasible to determine a knock-on by examining whether the ball went backwards from the hands; whereas if he lost control while upright and running, the focus should be on whether the ball travelled towards the try line after losing control, irrelevant of direction from his hands.
1 | 2 | 3 | |
FrtP / BrtG | BrtP / FrtG | Hand/Chest | |
Stu | No | KO | |
Dickie | <blow whistle> | ||
Harry | No | ||
Didds | No | ||
Volun | No | ||
Rish_NL | No | KO | KO |
let's wrap this one up then --
I was exploring two issues where the Law isn't too well written.
KNOCK ON When a player loses possession of the ball and it goes forward, or when a player hits the ball forward with the hand or arm, or when the ball hits the hand or arm and goes forward, and the ball touches the ground or another player before the original player can catch it.
First - does 'forwards' mean relative to the player (as it does in the context of a throw forward) or relative to the ground. This is quite fundamental, but the Law book doesn't say
Second - this 'lose possession and it goes forwards' does this apply when it goes backwards off the hand, but subsequently bounces off a different part of the body.
Again we didn't get as many people as I hoped willing to actually make a call, but the voted we got were (please correct me if I misunderstood)
1 2 3FrtP / BrtG BrtP / FrtG Hand/Chest Stu No KO Dickie <blow whistle> Harry No Didds No Volun No Rish_NL No KO KO
For me, with no TMO, in real time, I I'd blow the whistle for all three. But I think they could cause the TMO some head scratching.
But it appears that it is to everyone else.Ok, sorry if I am being thick
But I am *still* not clear what is your view on my original question in post #1 . (The bold text doesn't seem to apply to that?)
It doesn't really matter though - my purpose wasn't to show that it is or is isn't a knock on, but to demonstrate that the Law on knock ons isn't as clear as one might suppose. Your confusing posts are very helpful in that !
The fact that you dream up hypothetical and ever more convoluted arguments and get twisted around when people try to add clarification and discount it as just lots of words is unhelpful in getting well reasoned and engaging discussion.Bud , after this whole thread, you haven't even managed to call the three scenarios
I am not convinced you have even read them carefully
It is covered clearly in the definitions section of the lawbook, as is the specific meaning of throw forward.First - does 'forwards' mean relative to the player (as it does in the context of a throw forward) or relative to the ground. This is quite fundamental, but the Law book doesn't say
Throw forward yes (it's relative to the player, "arms of the player move forward")It is covered clearly in the definitions section of the lawbook, as is the specific meaning of throw forward.