Knocking from touch . .

[Davet]

C first

Yes he did deliberately and legally put the ball onto touch.

B - he caught the ball while he was in touch. If his opponent last played it the then the catchers team get the throw, as they would if he got out of the way of the ball. By catching it he may be able to take a quick throw.

 

[chopper15]

C. If he put the ball deliberately into touch with his hand, Davet, how can that be lawful?

B. If he got out of the way of a ball dropping into the FoP it would be play on?

If he caught it in touch he was the last player to have played it when he knocked it falling into the FoP. Kicker's throw?

 

[OB..]

C. If he put the ball deliberately into touch with his hand, Davet, how can that be lawful?

I quoted the law and pointed out that it says nothing about putting your hand on the ball.

 

[chopper15]

I quoted the law and pointed out that it says nothing about putting your hand on the ball.

True. Law 10.2 (c) Throwing into touch. A player must not intentionally knock, place, push, or throw the ball with the arm or hand into touch, touch-in-goal, or over the dead-ball line.

And an opinion or answer to my query, OB? C. So, by temporarily placing his hand on the ball, did he, in effect, 'put' the ball deliberately into touch?. Anybody?

 

[Davet]

Yes he did deliberately put the ball on touch

That is NOT illegal.

Your opinion may vary, but if so you are wrong.

You keep repeating your view that deliberately putting the ball on touch by using your hand is illegal.

You keep getting told that this us not the case under all circumstances.

If he knocked (or pushed, or threw) the ball over the line and it landed in touch that is illegal.

If he is in touch but then places a hand on the ball and deliberately therefore puts the ball onto touch he had done nothing wrong. Placing a hand on the ball is not knocking, or pushing, or throwing.

You seem to want to derive a general principle from a specific Law. Tough, it won't work.

Try to understand the simple truth I have explained to you, several times over. Frankly, this is getting a little wearing.

 

[4eyesbetter]

I have a different question. Does anyone know why it's illegal to throw or knock the ball into touch?

 

[chopper15]

I have a different question. Does anyone know why it's illegal to throw or knock the ball into touch?

Law10.2(c)

My query concerns deliberately putting the ball into touch with the hand whether by knock, push or throw which I consider unlawful.

I accept it's not unlawful to knock the ball deliberately into touch if it's not done with the hand.

Davet, however, is adamant that deliberately putting the ball into touch with the hand is not unlawful under all circumstances.

What law justifies that opinion, Davet, anyone?

 

[Davet]

The Law.

If you still fail to understand then I give up. You may cleave to your notions, everyone else will simply get on with the game.

 

[chopper15]

I merely tried to answer 4eb's query with 10.2(c) and your opinions, Davet.

 

[L'irlandais]

I have a different question. Does anyone know why it's illegal to throw or knock the ball into touch?

Hello,
Why this particular law (10.2 c) came into being might be difficult to pin down.
In the spirit of the game of Rugby putting the ball out of play to avoid contact is to be frowned upon.
For example the team kicking the ball to touch, is denied the throw-in. If the same fullback is closed down by several attacking players, such that he has no time to kick. Then instead of taking the ball into contact (which he will likely loose, if tackled) he kills the attackers' chance of winning the ball by throwing, or pushing it out of play. Unfair on his opponents, since they are entitled to win the ball in a fair contest.

Backs often drive attacking ball-carriers in to touch, their team is rewarded with the throw-in since such contact is seen as good play.

 

[OB..]

I have a different question. Does anyone know why it's illegal to throw or knock the ball into touch?

I can't tell you why, but I can tell you when: 1912.

 

[chopper15]

The Law.

If you still fail to understand then I give up. You may cleave to your notions, everyone else will simply get on with the game.

So, can we now put this one to bed, please? Anyone?

ie., Regarding lying on the ground in touch (say, accidentally slid there) then reaching out to place a hand on a stationary ball.

Is it then put into touch . . attacking LO?

Or is it play on . . . particularly if it was intenteded to frustrate an on-coming opponent likely to score? :chin:

I ask, prompted by OB's comment to the query, 'I quoted the law and pointed out that it says nothing about putting your hand on the ball.'

 

[OB..]

He is playing the ball while off his feet. In-goal is a specific exception. In touch is not.

 

[Davet]

If he is laying in touch or touch in goal he can score a try by applying downward pressure on a ball lying in goal.

OB probably has picture from the law book illustrating this.

I think the notion that the game is to played only by those on their feet can be over used. If it works for a try then why not for in touch?

In the case if a player in touch, on or off his feet, I would have no issue with him placing a hand on the ball and thus rendering it in touch. Good thinking sez I.

 

[Pinky]

As I said before, if he is lying in touch and is not the ball carrier, then touching the ball does not put it in touch, the ball needs to cross the touchline to be in touch.

 

[chopper15]

If he is laying in touch or touch in goal he can score a try by applying downward pressure on a ball lying in goal.

In the case if a player in touch, on or off his feet, I would have no issue with him placing a hand on the ball and thus rendering it in touch. Good thinking sez I.

.

I recognize that picked-up is lawfully 'taken into touch' and deliberately knocking it there with a hand would receive a sanction. So, a hand placed on the ball I can now accept as lawfully 'put' there.

Thanks for your positive opinion, Davet, because, as you know, I wondered if it may've been deliberately put there and warranted a sanction.

Sorry Pinky, have now read your opinion.

So, which is it to be, (i) LO (ii) Play on, or as I wondered (iii) PK, deliberately putting a ball into touch? :shrug: . . . care to offer an opinion, OB? Anybody?:hap:

 

[Davet]

As I said before, if he is lying in touch and is not the ball carrier, then touching the ball does not put it in touch, the ball needs to cross the touchline to be in touch.

Garbage

The ball is in touch if it touches anything on or beyond the touchline.

It does not need to cross the line to be in touch. Indeed even if it is not touching anything over the line it is in touch if it merely touches the line, it absolutely does not have to cross the line.

Any referee must be aware of basic law, and an insistence on the ball crossing the line would result in a grade of SD.

 

[Pinky]

In the circumstances that Chopper described, that is the ball is lying in the fop and it is touched by a player lying partly in touch, then I think the ball is not in touch. OK, I accept I should have said touches the touch line, but what I meant was crossing the plane of the line of touch. It is only if the ball is picked up by a player that it is assumed tobe taken into touch by that player. Check out the Australian Line Ball Your Call resource.

Specifically the ball is not in touch if it touches a player standing in touch who knocks it if the ball has not crossed the plane of the line of touch, so to say the ball is in touch if it touches anything on or beyond the touchline is garbage.

 

[chopper15]

Garbage

The ball is in touch if it touches anything on or beyond the touchline.

.

Not quite, Davet. You can knock it.

And as there is nothing in the LoG about touching it deliberately with the hand was the reason I asked for an opinion in the first place. I thought that it could possibly be a PK . . . it being deliberately put in touch as if he had knocked it there.

 

[menace]

In the circumstances that Chopper described, that is the ball is lying in the fop and it is touched by a player lying partly in touch, then I think the ball is not in touch. OK, I accept I should have said touches the touch line, but what I meant was crossing the plane of the line of touch. It is only if the ball is picked up by a player that it is assumed tobe taken into touch by that player. Check out the Australian Line Ball Your Call resource.

Specifically the ball is not in touch if it touches a player standing in touch who knocks it if the ball has not crossed the plane of the line of touch, so to say the ball is in touch if it touches anything on or beyond the touchline is garbage.

Pinky - That particular example in the "your call" is, I think, to demonstrate the in touch definitions "a player in touch may kick or knock the ball, but not hold it". I also believe what chopper describes is effectively and example of holding the ball (by pushing it down or grabbing it).

What is interesting to me though is now applying 19.5(b) (can someone explain and easy way of getting the law text here without copy and pasting from another applications - is there an easy way to get to within this site?). If the player as chopper describes puts his feet over the line (deliberately or otherwsie) BEFORE he touches/holds the ball which is in FOP AND still in motion then that player didn't take it into touch - it is the player that last touched it that put it into touch. :wtf:. therefore is it was his own team mate that last touched it then throw in to other side - if it was opposition then he gets the throw in (can hear the howls from the spectators when i signal that one!!!). Hence the 'deliberate' into touch = PK argument that chopper is pushing doesn't fly with me due to the possibility of applying that law. As there is is law that allows deliberate action to put it into touch which can gain your team an advantage.