Offside Following Chargedown

[RussRef]

Watched a videotaped match last night and saw a much better ref than I get something wrong, I think. Here's the scenario:

1. Red 10 kicks forward following recycle from ruck.

2. Blue 7 charges kick down.

3. Ball careens back against Red 10's body, then reverses direction back downfield as originally intended.

4. Red 8, standing in front of Red 10, fields ball in air. No call.

Seems to me that Red 8 is offside once ball comes off Red 10's body (but not before, as Blue 7's chargedown puts Red players onside). Agree that should've been PK on Red 8 for offsides?

Also, how would you call this:

5. Red 10 kicks forward.

6. Blue 7 puts hand on ball but only diverts it slightly, so that it continues downfield.

7. Red 8, standing in front of Red 10, plays the ball.

Would you ping Red 8 for violating the 10-meter law or would you decide that Blue 7's deflection of the ball put Red 8 onside before Red 8 played it?

 

[crossref]

A - agree he is offside. if it was totally instinctive in a confuisng situation, might well just go for accidetally offside and a scrum

 

[Taff]

... Also, how would you call this:

5. Red 10 kicks forward.
6. Blue 7 puts hand on ball but only diverts it slightly, so that it continues downfield.
7. Red 8, standing in front of Red 10, plays the ball.

Would you ping Red 8 for violating the 10-meter law or would you decide that Blue 7's deflection of the ball put Red 8 onside before Red 8 played it?

Play on IMO.

Red 8 (originally offside) was put onside by Blue 7 touching the ball in flight.

 

[Dickie E]

A - agree he is offside. if it was totally instinctive in a confuisng situation, might well just go for accidetally offside and a scrum

[LAWS]11.6 Accidental offside
(a) When an offside player cannot avoid being touched by the ball or by a team-mate carrying it, the player is accidentally offside. If the player’s team gains no advantage from this, play continues. If the player’s team gains an advantage, a scrum is formed with the opposing team throwing in the ball.[/LAWS]

I have always found the wording of this law a bit curious.

White win a ruck and SH attempts a box kick. It is a shocker and hits a teammate at the back of the ruck. One could hardly say White has gained an advantage so play on. White SH picks up ball and runs to score try. Hmmm?

 

[Dickie E]

Also, how would you call this:

5. Red 10 kicks forward.

6. Blue 7 puts hand on ball but only diverts it slightly, so that it continues downfield.

7. Red 8, standing in front of Red 10, plays the ball.

Would you ping Red 8 for violating the 10-meter law or would you decide that Blue 7's deflection of the ball put Red 8 onside before Red 8 played it?

It depends whether Blue 7 was attempting a charge down or attempting to catch the ball

 

[crossref]

yes it's an odd law. I guess they are just being explicit that materialty is to be applied to this Law.

We have lots of odd laws
- blue launches a high kick, and red 15 and red 11 are both going for it, until 15's loud call of 'mine' and 11 hesitates
- no blue players anywhere near

- red 15 catches the ball and runs into red 11 = accidental offside, no blue player anywhere near, play on
- red 15, distracted by red 11, fumbles and ball goes forward and hits ground = knock on is always material (why?) scrum blue

- red 15, distracted by red 11, fumbles and ball goes forward and hits red 11 ..

 

[Dixie]

Play on IMO.

Red 8 (originally offside) was put onside by Blue 7 touching the ball in flight.

While your explanatory sentence is true, contributors so far have argued with considerable cogency that it was overtaken by events. After Red 8 had been put onside by Blue 7's chargedown, Red 10 again played the ball (debate to be had there, surely?), meaning that Red 8 who was in front of a team mate who last played the ball, was thus offside.

So let's look at whether the ball bouncing off Red 10 counts as Red 10 playing the ball - particularly as Blue 7 was close enough to Red 10 for his action to count as a chargedown. In short, Red 10 had no way of avoiding the ball touching him - does that count as him playing the ball for the purposes of the definition to Law 11:

[LAWS]In general play a player is offside if the player is in front of a team-mate who is carrying the ball, or in front of a team-mate who last played the ball.[/LAWS]

We've kicked around the idea of "playing the ball" before. Anyone remember what was decided? I have to go to a funeral now, so can't research

 

[Dickie E]

We've kicked around the idea of "playing the ball" before. Anyone remember what was decided? I have to go to a funeral now, so can't research

I think we concurred that any contact, accidental or deliberate, met the requirement of "played", "put", "caused", etc

 

[OB..]

I think we concurred that any contact, accidental or deliberate, met the requirement of "played", "put", "caused", etc

I think we wanted a distinction between "play" being deliberate and "touch" being accidental; in which case various laws needed to be modified to specify which applied (or both). Trying to decide a meaning and then applying it to the current wording is not likely to work sensibly.

 

[Browner]

Harlequins kick, charged down by an onside Saracens player ....

Ball was caught by a saracen who was adjudged to be 1m in front of the chargee player (although I wasn't convinced he was in front when he caught the ball !)

So, Q?.... If you're retreating and get to an onside position before you catch a ricochet ball is this play on?

 

[Ian_Cook]

I thought offside was forever :sarc: :biggrin:

 

[Browner]

Yaapt

 

[RobLev]

I thought offside was forever :sarc: :biggrin:

Shirley you're thinking of diamonds...

 

[FlipFlop]

I think in this case, the player was off side from the ruck. He was in front of the back foot when the ball exited the ruck, was still there when the kick was made, still in front when the charge down happened, and was in front when he caught the ball.

I think this is why the TMO can clearly say the player was 1m in front.

Was he in front of the chargedown - can't tell from the angles we saw. But - was he offside from the ruck? Yes.