Offside ingoal

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
10,840
Post Likes
1,228
I must be missing something. I can;t see any offside by any red player whatsoever. There may be a marginal white offside as two attackers are floundering on the4floor, depending on who actually touched it when they are both initially flopping around but its pretty uncertain if the subseqent attempt to score by one of them is a player in an offside position.

That aside, general offisde being in front of your own playter that last played the ball does exist in goal of course.

didds
 

Dickie E


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
13,457
Post Likes
1,674
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
I must be missing something. I can;t see any offside by any red player whatsoever. There may be a marginal white offside as two attackers are floundering on the4floor, depending on who actually touched it when they are both initially flopping around but its pretty uncertain if the subseqent attempt to score by one of them is a player in an offside position.

Red 13 appears to maybe knock it forward then Red 5 comes in from FoP to ground the ball. I think Gardner was aware of this but not sure what TMO was referring to. I think he (TMO) has concluded by then that Red 13 had grounded the ball.

If Red 13 had knocked it forward and if Red 5 had played the ball from an offside position then a penalty try was on the cards.
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
19,815
Post Likes
2,275
Red player knocks backwards, then knocks forward in goal, and offside red player touches it down.
PK to white, and has to be a YC doesn't it? Perhaps not a PT as the red player who knocked it on might have got there before white anyway

(Ian will be forced by his oen logic to ignore the offside and award the scrum that he maintains is the only possible outcome of a knock on in goal followed by a touchdown)
 

Dickie E


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
13,457
Post Likes
1,674
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
(Ian will be forced by his oen logic to ignore the offside and award the scrum that he maintains is the only possible outcome of a knock on in goal followed by a touchdown)

index.jpg

Really? You wanna go there?
 
Last edited:

Taff


Referees in Wales
Joined
Aug 23, 2009
Messages
6,939
Post Likes
378
Isn't Aiub (no idea if that is spelt right) the TMO who was criticised during the RWC for some "interesting" decisions?
 
Last edited:

Dickie E


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
13,457
Post Likes
1,674
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
George Ayoub.
 

beckett50


Referees in England
Joined
Jan 31, 2004
Messages
2,513
Post Likes
223
Current Referee grade:
Level 6
The way I saw it is that Red #12 loses the ball forward,
then white #9 knocks on and then there appears to be a knock-on by red #13.
Red #5 is clearly off-side - in front of the last red player to have played the ball - but there is no advantage accrued because the 2nd knock-on should bring play back for the red #12 loss forward.
So scrum 5m attacking ball.

However, if the review deems that neither white 9 nor red 13 touched the ball then we start at red #5 being offside and so taking him out of the picture the try would have been scored by white #13 So, then the correct decision IMO should be PT to white and a YC to Red #5
 
Last edited:

FlipFlop


Referees in Switzerland
Joined
Jun 13, 2006
Messages
3,227
Post Likes
226
Amazing what some people see....

  • Red #12 loses the ball BACKWARDS. He is the defender.
  • White #9. Does he knock on, or does he ground it, or is it "stripped". I think that the actions of Red #13 make it clear that the real option here is grounded or stripped. Personally I think he grounds it for the try, but failing that you have to go with....
  • Red #13 knocks it backwards, and then forwards.
  • Red #5 is offside and plays the ball (PK).
  • Red #13 is closer than White #13, so likely to have played the ball before White #13, so try is not probable. So no PT.

So for me the outcome is Try (White #9 scores), but if you rule that he doesn't score, then PK to White for Red #5 offside.
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
10,840
Post Likes
1,228
Red 13 appears to maybe knock it forward then Red 5 comes in from FoP to ground the ball. I think Gardner was aware of this but not sure what TMO was referring to. I think he (TMO) has concluded by then that Red 13 had grounded the ball.

If Red 13 had knocked it forward and if Red 5 had played the ball from an offside position then a penalty try was on the cards.

Ah gotcha... I didn;t even see that as a 13 knock on... I thought it had gone backwards/sideways. See what you mean now.

didds
 

L'irlandais

, Promises to Referee in France
Joined
May 11, 2010
Messages
4,724
Post Likes
325
I honestly thought we had agreed (in this other thread) that there is NO offside in-goal.

[laws]Law 22.16 infringements in-goal[/laws]

:holysheep:
 
Last edited:

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
10,840
Post Likes
1,228
Well I was pretty dashed sure that we had agreed there WAS offside in -goal, just no offside lines for mauls/rucks etc as they cannot exist in-goal?



didds
 

Phil E


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
15,527
Post Likes
1,811
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
I honestly thought we had agreed (in this other thread) that there is NO offside in-goal.

[laws]Law 22.16 infringements in-goal[/laws]

:holysheep:


Not sure how you get to that conclusion?

[LAWS]22.16 INFRINGEMENTS IN IN-GOAL
All infringements in the in-goal are treated as if they had taken place in the field of play.[/LAWS]

So if you are offside in the field of play, you are also offside in-goal.

Plus (as stated) 11.1a

[LAWS]11.1 OFFSIDE IN GENERAL PLAY
(a) A player who is in an offside position is liable to sanction only if the player does one of three
things:
• Interferes with play or,
• Moves forward, towards the ball or
• Fails to comply with the 10-Metre Law (Law 11.4).
A player who is in an offside position is not automatically penalised.
A player who receives an unintentional throw forward is not offside.
A player can be offside in the in-goal.[/LAWS]
 
Last edited:

L'irlandais

, Promises to Referee in France
Joined
May 11, 2010
Messages
4,724
Post Likes
325
Perhaps neither of you took the time to look at either of those linked threads.
Or perhaps your sense of humor is switched off.
 

Phil E


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
15,527
Post Likes
1,811
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
Perhaps neither of you took the time to look at either of those linked threads.
Or perhaps your sense of humor is switched off.

I did look.....maybe the humour got lost in translation?
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
19,815
Post Likes
2,275
Amazing what some people see....

So for me the outcome is Try (White #9 scores), but if you rule that he doesn't score, then PK to White for Red #5 offside.

and a YC to Red 5 ?
 

L'irlandais

, Promises to Referee in France
Joined
May 11, 2010
Messages
4,724
Post Likes
325
Que? As in [pourquoi] why? :shrug:

que ne l'as-tu (pas) dit plus tôt ! why didn't you say so earlier ?, I wish you had said so (or "said that earlier" !)
 
Top