Knocking from touch . .

[chopper15]

With Red standing in touch are the following decisions correct please?

If in the ref's opinion Red accidentally knocks a ball in the FoP (i) forward in FoP (ii) fwd into touch (iii) not fwd into touch (iv) not fwd in FoP (v) into chest and holds.

(i) scrum blue (ii) scrum blue (iii) LO blue (iv) play on (v) LO blue.


If in the ref's opinion Red deliberately knocks a ball in the FoP (a) fwd in FoP (b) fwd into touch (c) not fwd into touch (d) not fwd in FoP (e) into chest and holds.

(a) PK blue (b) PK blue (c) PK blue (d) play on (e) PK blue

 

[Dickie E]

Assuming ball has not crossed plane of touch and has been kicked by Blue:

With Red standing in touch are the following decisions correct please?

If in the ref's opinion Red accidentally knocks a ball in the FoP (i) forward in FoP (ii) fwd into touch (iii) not fwd into touch (iv) not fwd in FoP (v) into chest and holds.

(i) scrum blue YES (ii) scrum blue YES(iii) LO blue YES(iv) play on YES(v) LO blue.NO - LO red


If in the ref's opinion Red deliberately knocks a ball in the FoP (a) fwd in FoP (b) fwd into touch (c) not fwd into touch (d) not fwd in FoP (e) into chest and holds.

(a) PK blue YES(b) PK blueYES (c) PK blue YES(d) play on YES(e) PK blueNO - LO red

 

[Davet]

Assuming ball kicked by Blue

With Red standing in touch are the following decisions correct please?

If in the ref's opinion Red accidentally knocks a ball in the FoP (i) forward in FoP (ii) fwd into touch (iii) not fwd into touch (iv) not fwd in FoP (v) into chest and holds.

(i) scrum blue (ii) scrum blue (iii) LO blue (iv) play on (v) LO blue.


If in the ref's opinion Red deliberately knocks a ball in the FoP (a) fwd in FoP (b) fwd into touch (c) not fwd into touch (d) not fwd in FoP (e) into chest and holds.

(a) PK blue (b) PK blue (c) PK blue (d) play on (e) PK blue

Not sure about your differentiation between accidental and deliberate.

I would assume that the player in touch intentionally plays the ball, and you are suggesting that I'm the first case the outcome of the ball being knocked forward is accidental, but on the second case the ball was deliberately knocked forward. If do I would agree with you. Though I struggle to see a scenario where a deliberate knock forward in such a situation would ever be attempted.

With regard to the deliberate scenario c) again I cannot envisage any player in touch being in a position to knock the ball into touch when it was not already destined for touch, other than that I suppose you would be right.

However you are incorrect with deliberate scenario e) this is not a PK there is no offence, ball in touch, throw to Red.

 

[OB..]

chopper - knocking the ball into your chest and holding it is usually know as a catch. Do you have something else in mind?

 

[chopper15]

chopper - knocking the ball into your chest and holding it is usually know as a catch. Do you have something else in mind?

Because he knocked the ball deliberately from the FoP into 'in-touch' (his chest)?

This particular query was prompted by an incident in the France v Wales game.

The Red player was lying with his legs in touch and reached to the loose ball.

If it was near his GL and he deprived a fast approaching Blue of scoring a try by actually doing that . . . a PT?

Dickie, why LO Red for (v),(e) please?

Thanks to you all for the info'.

 

[Pinky]

Chopper, 'cos red was standing in touch when he caught the ball and as soon as he caught it it is regqarded as in touch and put there by the kicker, blue, so lo red. Same as picking up the ball in motion while you have a foot in touch is put out by the kicker, but picking up a stationary ball then you have taken it out.

 

[Dickie E]

Because he knocked the ball deliberately from the FoP into 'in-touch' (his chest)?

Chopper, you've got a funky way of looking at the world. I love it.

 

[chopper15]

Chopper, 'cos red was standing in touch when he caught the ball and as soon as he caught it it is regqarded as in touch and put there by the kicker, blue, so lo red. Same as picking up the ball in motion while you have a foot in touch is put out by the kicker, but picking up a stationary ball then you have taken it out.

But he deliberately knocked it from the FoP (permissible) into touch, Pinky . . . namely his chest.

. . . funky may be, Dickie, but do you agree? :hap:

 

[Pinky]

Chopper, he caught it (knocked into his chest?) hilst standing in touch. Presumably deliberately as it is difficult to accidentally catch a ball. But that is allowed and as I said line out blue.

 

[chopper15]

Chopper, he caught it (knocked into his chest?) hilst standing in touch. Presumably deliberately as it is difficult to accidentally catch a ball. But that is allowed and as I said line out blue.

What is allowed, Pinky, is knocking a ball in the FoP from touch. If he reached out over the TL and deliberately knocked the ball into touch, even forward, it would, as you are aware, be a PK not a LO. Touch in our scenario is his chest. :hap: PK?

 

[Dickie E]

But he deliberately knocked it from the FoP (permissible) into touch, Pinky . . . namely his chest.

. . . funky may be, Dickie, but do you agree? :hap:

Chopper, I understand your logic but do not agree with it nor would I apply it.

 

[OB..]

But he deliberately knocked it from the FoP (permissible) into touch, Pinky . . . namely his chest.

. . . funky may be, Dickie, but do you agree? :hap:

It's a catch, and we all know that is permissible. Why do you want to complicate a very simple matter? How would the game benefit? The referee's job is to make sense of the laws, not look for obscure and useless ways of interpreting them.

If the player is lying on the ground, I don't see wy he is entitled to play the ball at all except for scoring a try or touch down (specific exceptions).

 

[OB..]

Touch in our scenario is his chest. :hap: PK?

It's a catch. If not, please explain why.

 

[Dickie E]

It's a catch. If not, please explain why.

Is there a word for explaining logic without agreeing with it? If so, that word applies to the below:

1. Red player with foot in touch intentionally attempts to catch the ball.

2. in so doing he fails to take the ball cleanly and the ball bounces off his hands and into his chest

3. as he allowed to knock the ball with foot in touch, the ball is not yet in touch

4. in the nano-second that the ball hits his chest but prior to him catching it the ball becomes 'in touch'

So, he has intentionally played at the ball while the ball is not in touch and subsequently the ball has gone into touch.


In reality I see this as no different to an attempted catch where the catch isn't completed.

 

[Davet]

Chopper, you really need to stop thinking about the laws as words on paper.

They are a means of extracting a game from chaos. Your tendency to pick them apart almost syllable by syllable and then reconstruct them as something unrecognisable seems not to be designed to help anyone ref the game, but rather to display your own cunning at pointless analysis.

 

[didds]

I have an idea.

Why doesn;t chopper work out all ghis little bizarre inferences, then go and ref a game based on them

Somebody could video this game and stick it up on youtube and we could all watch it.

Then we will know if it worked or not.

A club internal Boxing day fixture might be appropriate.

didds

 

[Pinky]

Dickie, I think you spend too much time imagining what Chopper thinks. I like Didds idea, but as I was silly enought to take Chopper on, then, as OB says it is a catch. Red player is standing, knocks it into his chest and held. Sounds like a catch to me, and if so LO red.

For me, anything that looks like a serious attempt at a catch that is subsequently dropped or knocked is a scrum if forward, play on if back. I am not going to call this a deliberate ko. If the ball goes back and then into touch, then that is a LO.

 

[chopper15]

It's a catch. If not, please explain why.

Thanks for the invitation, OB. Delghted to oblige.:hap:

At a drop-out the ball is falling into the FoP approx. 2m short of the TL.

Fielder positions himself where he considers he can reach out and catch the ball with one foot placed back behind him on the TL . . . .are you all with me so far?

Hopefully Yes, so I will continue to the denoument . . . :hap:

The ball is just about out of reach so, with his boot still on the TL, he reaches out with the finger tips of one hand and knocks the ball in a small arc back to his chest for the catch.:clap:

As I understand it, you refs now deem the ball to be put directly into touch by the kicker with a three choice option allowed for the fielder's team?

I think the LoG's literal interpretation is that he, the fielder, not only knocked it into it touch ( because Law19 Definitions last para. allows him to) but knocked it into touch ie., his chest, deliberately which the LoG sanctions with a PK.:hap:

Those in support of my interpretation please say 'AYE'. :horse: :clap:

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

Thanks for the invitation, OB. Delghted to oblige.:hap:

At a drop-out the ball is falling into the FoP approx. 2m short of the TL.

Fielder positions himself where he considers he can reach out and catch the ball with one foot placed back behind him on the TL . . . .are you all with me so far?

Hopefully Yes, so I will continue to the denoument . . . :hap:

The ball is just about out of reach so, with his boot still on the TL, he reaches out with the finger tips of one hand and knocks the ball in a small arc back to his chest for the catch.:clap:

As I understand it, you refs now deem the ball to be put directly into touch by the kicker with a three choice option allowed for the fielder's team?

I think the LoG's literal interpretation is that he, the fielder, not only knocked it into it touch ( because Law19 Definitions last para. allows him to) but knocked it into touch ie., his chest, deliberately which the LoG sanctions with a PK.:hap:

Chopper. Are you pissed?:chin:

 

[Phil E]

but knocked it into touch ie., his chest, deliberately which the LoG sanctions with a PK.:hap:

Best of luck selling that one to the cornish faithful on the touchline. :chair: