NZ RL try Vs England

wrighty


ELRA/Club Referee
Joined
Aug 29, 2009
Messages
81
Post Likes
0
Did anyone see the flick back by the NZ player who lept into the air,crossed the touch line,flicked the ball which was also in mid air,in touch, back into play?The player eventually landed still in touch,but the ball was adjudicated in play.
Same decision in union ?
IMHO as the player landed in touch,then the ball must be a judged to be in touch.
Can anyone confirm?
 

Ian_Cook


Referees in New Zealand
Staff member
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
13,652
Post Likes
1,719
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
Did anyone see the flick back by the NZ player who lept into the air,crossed the touch line,flicked the ball which was also in mid air,in touch, back into play?The player eventually landed still in touch,but the ball was adjudicated in play.
Same decision in union ?
IMHO as the player landed in touch,then the ball must be a judged to be in touch.
Can anyone confirm?

In RU, only if the ball had already crossed the plane when it was flicked back in.

In RL, correct decision
 

OB..


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
22,971
Post Likes
1,832
This happened twice in my match yesterday. On the first occasion the referee was on the spot and immediately ruled that the ball was in touch.

Despite this, on the second occasion the TJ did not flag. Since it was from a cross-field kick, the referee was too far away to see, so played on. Fortunately it did not matter too much.
 

wrighty


ELRA/Club Referee
Joined
Aug 29, 2009
Messages
81
Post Likes
0
Last week , black kicked,ball crossed plane of touch, white wing jumps and knocks ball back into play,but lands with one foot in play and one out.I judged the ball to have been kicked out.
 

4eyesbetter


Referees in England
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
1,320
Post Likes
86
For us this is very simple; all that matters (assuming the player was airborne when he touched the ball) is where he came from. That's all you have to worry about.
 

OB..


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
22,971
Post Likes
1,832
For us this is very simple; all that matters (assuming the player was airborne when he touched the ball) is where he came from. That's all you have to worry about.
It's also a much less significant part of the game.
 

4eyesbetter


Referees in England
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
1,320
Post Likes
86
So wait, is there actually a good reason for needing to consult a flowchart before you can confidently make a touch decision that nobody's told me? I follow every one of those threads in the hope that someone will finally come up with one.
 

Rushforth


Referees in Holland
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
1,300
Post Likes
92
So wait, is there actually a good reason for needing to consult a flowchart before you can confidently make a touch decision that nobody's told me? I follow every one of those threads in the hope that someone will finally come up with one.

Yes there is, the good reason is that an AR is directly responsible for making a referee level call, so there had better be consistency within the game at hand.

As opposed to philosophical discussions about consistency in a wider context.
 

OB..


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
22,971
Post Likes
1,832
So wait, is there actually a good reason for needing to consult a flowchart before you can confidently make a touch decision that nobody's told me? I follow every one of those threads in the hope that someone will finally come up with one.
You may have noticed that I think the Definitions in Law 19 are badly written. Fortunately the flaws are not common occurrences (though as I said, I did get 2 yesterday - 17 lineouts should have been 18).
 

wrighty


ELRA/Club Referee
Joined
Aug 29, 2009
Messages
81
Post Likes
0
For us this is very simple; all that matters (assuming the player was airborne when he touched the ball) is where he came from. That's all you have to worry about.

Thats the RL definition, the RU is where you land,assuming we are talking about a ball that has crossed the plane of touch.
 

4eyesbetter


Referees in England
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
1,320
Post Likes
86
You may have noticed that I think the Definitions in Law 19 are badly written. Fortunately the flaws are not common occurrences (though as I said, I did get 2 yesterday - 17 lineouts should have been 18).

I did; but I'm still not sure how "ball in touch is more important to Union" is a justification for having Heath Robinson write the law that deals with it...
 

OB..


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
22,971
Post Likes
1,832
I did; but I'm still not sure how "ball in touch is more important to Union" is a justification for having Heath Robinson write the law that deals with it...
I have never tried to justify the way the law is written, but I do like many of the ideas eg a player in touch being able to knock the ball helps to keep the game flowing and constrains the kicking game. Lineouts play a significant role in the contest for the ball.
 
Top