[Law] MARK - Is this a valid mark ?

CrouchTPEngage


Referees in England
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
497
Post Likes
57
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
Blue kicks a penalty kick which misses the posts and is heading towards the red defender who is standing in his own in-goal area.
Red defender ( shouts "MARK!" ) and tries to catch the ball but it rebounds of his chest and arms and bounces up into the air and forward about 1 metre. He successfully regathers the ball before it hits the ground. Basically its a fumbled catch but the ball has never touched the ground nor another player. He didnt intentionally knock the ball forward. He's just not that good at catching.
Do you award the mark ?

Has there been a law-wording change around this area recently ?
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,805
Post Likes
3,145
[LAWS]. means of stopping play within a player’s own 22 by directly catching an opponent’s kick.

[/LAWS]

I would give it
 

Dickie E


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
14,106
Post Likes
2,131
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
even if he fumbles it forwad, hits goal post & then regathers, looks OK

[LAWS]A player may claim a mark even if the ball hits a goal post or crossbar before being caught. [/LAWS]
 

CrouchTPEngage


Referees in England
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
497
Post Likes
57
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
OK reason I asked is several refs think that it has to be a "clean catch" and that this phrase used to be in the law wording.
i.e. he cannot fumble it.
I've seen a video of a game where such a mark was denied as not a "clean catch" too. I need to find that video reference for you all.
Although I notice the new law book doesnt qualify the nature of the "catch". Hence I wonder if there has been an intended change.
 

OB..


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
22,981
Post Likes
1,838
2017[LAWS]18 Definition The player must make a clean catch direct from an opponent's kick[/LAWS]
2018[LAWS]17.1 (b) [FONT=fs_blakeregular]Catch a ball that has reached the plane of the 22-metre line directly from an opponent’s kick before it touches the ground or another player[/FONT][/LAWS]
The law appears to have changed so that the referee no longer needs to decide if it was a "clean" catch.

The bit about touching a post first was in the 2017 law as well, where it clearly meant that touching a post did not make the catch indirect.
 

Taff


Referees in Wales
Joined
Aug 23, 2009
Messages
6,942
Post Likes
383
OK reason I asked is several refs think that it has to be a "clean catch" and that this phrase used to be in the law wording. i.e. he cannot fumble it.
I must admit, that's what I thought too. My understanding was that a fumble wasn't a "clean catch" and meant we couldn't give a Mark.
 

CrouchTPEngage


Referees in England
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
497
Post Likes
57
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
Thanks OB. So that does it for me. And I guess its helpful to no longer have to judge what is a "clean" from an "unclean" catch.
Just a catch from now on and I will give you a mark.
 

Taff


Referees in Wales
Joined
Aug 23, 2009
Messages
6,942
Post Likes
383
Thanks OB. So that does it for me. And I guess its helpful to no longer have to judge what is a "clean" from an "unclean" catch. Just a catch from now on and I will give you a mark.
Sorry to be picky, but aren't we just back to the new lawbook / 2017 lawbook problem again?

Ie the 2017 lawbook said it had to be a "clean catch" but the new "simplified" 2018 lawbook just says it must be a "catch" but at the same time we are told that there are no law changes. :sad:
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,805
Post Likes
3,145
We can't keep harking back to the Law Book before last

It's 2019 .. .ref to the 2019 Laws
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,033
Post Likes
1,775
is there a link to the 2019 laws?

didds
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,033
Post Likes
1,775
that's there all the time.

That IS an official 2019 release then? as opposed to being the 208 version available during 2019? WR have said this is superceding all previous editions (or some syuff about maybe just improving on the 1923 law book or whatever...)

didds
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,805
Post Likes
3,145
Yes if you follow the download link and download the pdf you will find that you have the 2019 Law Book

The online pages have also been updated where appropriate.

There aren't many changes from 2018 to 2019 .. tjere is a thread in the Laws forum that lists them (do keep up , didds!) :)
 

Taff


Referees in Wales
Joined
Aug 23, 2009
Messages
6,942
Post Likes
383
Yes if you follow the download link and download the pdf you will find that you have the 2019 Law Book. The online pages have also been updated where appropriate.
So, if it's meant to be a change why isn't it marked as a change?
 
Last edited:

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,805
Post Likes
3,145
So, if it's meant to be a change why isn't it marked as a change?

They have marked the changes from 2018 to 2019

(well most of them, see the thread, a couple of corrections were unmarked)

The Law on Mark is unchanged from 2018 to 2019
 

Taff


Referees in Wales
Joined
Aug 23, 2009
Messages
6,942
Post Likes
383
They have marked the changes from 2018 to 2019 The Law on Mark is unchanged from 2018 to 2019
And we know there was no change from 2017 to 2018, so it should still be a "clean catch". :chin:
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,805
Post Likes
3,145
It's 2019, taff, we have to finally put the 2017 Law Book behind us now.. what does it matter what it said?

They made a couple of corrections to the 2018 book and published the 2019 Laws ..that has to be the end of it all..

In 2019 we must all ref to the 2019 Law Book .. anything else is madness
 
Last edited:

leaguerefaus


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
1,009
Post Likes
248
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
even if he fumbles it forwad, hits goal post & then regathers, looks OK

[LAWS]A player may claim a mark even if the ball hits a goal post or crossbar before being caught. [/LAWS]

Almost certain this part of the law means the ball can be kicked, hit a post, and then caught for a mark. It's not meant to allow a knock forward to be claimed as a mark.
 

Dickie E


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
14,106
Post Likes
2,131
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
Almost certain this part of the law means the ball can be kicked, hit a post, and then caught for a mark. It's not meant to allow a knock forward to be claimed as a mark.

well, its not a knock on cos ball hasn't hit ground or another player. So it's just a fumble (aka an unclean catch).
 

leaguerefaus


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
1,009
Post Likes
248
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
well, its not a knock on cos ball hasn't hit ground or another player. So it's just a fumble (aka an unclean catch).

Interesting - I didn't realise in union that the posts don't count for the purpose of ruling a knock-on.
 
Top