Materiality .. The knock on

[crossref]

In rugby there is one offence that is ALWAYS considered material .. the knock on. No matter how small or how far away from the action it happens , we always blow our whistle

We take it for granted so much we don't even notice

QU what would he the impact on the game if WR ruled that immaterial knock on, where the team knocking on gained no advantage from it, should be ignored , play on

We'd have fewer scrums

Woukd we also have a faster, more fluid, more exciting game ?

Or would it be TEOTWAWKT ?

 

[CrouchTPEngage]

Er.. Must be slow here but isnt that the case now ?
If the team knocking on didnt gain an advantage then we ( at some point fairly quickly ) say "Advantage Over for the Knock on!". ?

 

[crossref]

No the opposite I am saying

Blue knock it on , but it's immaterial knock on , and blue gain no advantage from it .. play on

For instance blue 15 miles from anyone fumbles a catch, blue 9 fumbles a pick up .. why do we stop the game

Blue are 5cm offside, but gain no advantage we ignore it
Blue knock on 5cm and gain no advantage , we penalise it

It's odd, when you think about it

 

[Flish]

It’s exactly how you play and coach the game under the NROP in RFU land, pretty much the first line states that if not material (doesn’t disadvantage the opposition) then play on, so if some kid knocks on in open play and no oppos around it’s play on, lots of positive game play and lots of tries. Of course as the kids get older we’re stricter and stricter (although I think technically the same directive is there for all age grade NROP) till we get to where we are with Adults

The challenge of course is judging materiality as always, someone will always disagree with you, and I’ve no doubt some smart ass will find a way of ‘accidentally’ knocking on to their advantage!

 

[crossref]

Exactly so .. so what would be the impact of playing adult rugby like that ...

 

[Flish]

Faster (not always a good thing, see my Vets games!), more ball in play, a lot less scrums, which in turn may lessen the need for some aspects of forwards skillsets. Of course if we apply this to knock ons, why not forward passes too, those are even less material, a pass that’s gone slightly forward is probably putting the ball closer to the defender thus easier to intercept.

 

[Dickie E]

to go a step further. I used to ref with a chap who held the hypothetical view that a knock on was its own punishment so play on in all situations.

 

[Dickie E]

why not forward passes too, those are even less material, a pass that’s gone slightly forward is probably putting the ball closer to the defender thus easier to intercept.

it would be too difficult to gauge the slightly forward pass from the Tom Brady pass

 

[SimonSmith]

Because some things are integral to rugby, and not propelling the ball forwards by hand is one of them.

It's also a black and white line, unlike much of the game.
How far away should the opposition be for it to be immaterial and play on? How about that porr full back who runs to collect it and knocks it and then in Keystone Kops stylee knocks it again - and again, all while the opposition are 40 yards away. Still play on?

The idiosyncrasies of our sport should be treasured and not dumped.

 

[chbg]

Because it started as a ball-handling skill sport?

 

[didds]

Er.. Must be slow here but isnt that the case now ?
If the team knocking on didnt gain an advantage then we ( at some point fairly quickly ) say "Advantage Over for the Knock on!". ?

Not sure I follow that at all?

If team A knocks on, then it for team B to gain an advantage. "Advantage over" is only for the non knocking team anyway?

didds

 

[Rich_NL]

I think materiality is often oversold as a universal concept, while practically it's only applicable in certain cases, to allow the game some breathing room and competitiveness in the complexity of a match. Offside, maybe lineout throws/getting a restart over and done with, getting a ball out of a ruck.

Most other offences are either material by definition, safety-related (hence also material), or simply definitive for rugby. The last group includes things like: knock-ons, forward passes, releasing the ball when tackled, not playing off feet, kicking off 10m with a dropkick... You might be lax if the level of the game is so low you can't hope to maintain minimal standards, but materiality doesn't enter into it.

 

[CrouchTPEngage]

Not sure I follow that at all?

If team A knocks on, then it for team B to gain an advantage. "Advantage over" is only for the non knocking team anyway?

didds

Yeah, sorry. I'm not great at explaining but I''ll try...

Rugby is a zero-sum game. If one team gets and advantage then, by definition, their opponents must be disadvantaged.
So, if team A knocks on and gets and advantage then I blow the whistle.
Also, if team A knocks on and does NOT gain an advantage then I call "Advantage Over" at some point.
I do this because the lack of advantage to team A must mean that there is an advantage to team B.

( Of course, one could argue that there has been no advantage to either A or B but I can;t think of an example where that would realistically happen )

 

[OB..]

I do this because the lack of advantage to team A must mean that there is an advantage to team B.

[LAWS]7.1 d

• Advantage:
  • [...]
  • Must be clear and real. A mere opportunity to gain an advantage is not sufficient.

[/LAWS]

 

[menace]

In rugby there is one offence that is ALWAYS considered material .. the knock on. No matter how small or how far away from the action it happens , we always blow our whistle

We take it for granted so much we don't even notice

QU what would he the impact on the game if WR ruled that immaterial knock on, where the team knocking on gained no advantage from it, should be ignored , play on

We'd have fewer scrums

Woukd we also have a faster, more fluid, more exciting game ?

Or would it be TEOTWAWKT ?

You think too much. Slow day in the office???:biggrin::biggrin:

 

[Zebra1922]

There are ways round this. If it goes forward a minuscule amount, shout "backwards-play on" and everyone gets on with the game. There might be a grumble or two but apply this to both sides throughout the game and you'll get no complaints.

Also lots of use of the "off the body" "off the legs" can help minimise stopping for a knock on. Now I know this will get lots of complaints about not enforcing the laws etc, but I'd rather not punish a minuscule knock on than have all the stop/start and scrums from applying the law incredibly strictly.

 

[crossref]

There are ways round this. If it goes forward a minuscule amount, shout "backwards-play on" and everyone gets on with the game. There might be a grumble or two but apply this to both sides throughout the game and you'll get no complaints.

Also lots of use of the "off the body" "off the legs" can help minimise stopping for a knock on. Now I know this will get lots of complaints about not enforcing the laws etc, but I'd rather not punish a minuscule knock on than have all the stop/start and scrums from applying the law incredibly strictly.

So there you go .. this is what I am talking about
I don't condone that approach (I think you will be losing credibility every time you do that... a knock on is just a knock on and the knocking team *have* to lose possession ) but I am (idly) wondering if the game wouldn't be better if the Laws changed in this direction ..

But it's such a strange idea most people won't pause to even think about it

 

[SimonSmith]

So there you go .. this is what I am talking about
I don't condone that approach (I think you will be losing credibility every time you do that... a knock on is just a knock on and the knocking team *have* to lose possession ) but I am (idly) wondering if the game wouldn't be better if the Laws changed in this direction ..

But it's such a strange idea most people won't pause to even think about it

The reason it isn't considered isn't because it's "strange"

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

Not so long ago, there was a law trail that knock on resulted in a FK. Not such a strange idea, now that scrums are becoming league like.

Although unique to union, scrumaging has set itself on the road to extinction. It has become the remnants of a tail, aka the coccyx.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

There are ways round this. If it goes forward a minuscule amount, shout "backwards-play on" and everyone gets on with the game. There might be a grumble or two but apply this to both sides throughout the game and you'll get no complaints.

Also lots of use of the "off the body" "off the legs" can help minimise stopping for a knock on. Now I know this will get lots of complaints about not enforcing the laws etc, but I'd rather not punish a minuscule knock on than have all the stop/start and scrums from applying the law incredibly strictly.

Just making it up to get an easy life? No No and NO again!