[Law] . . . or if an opponent plays the ball . . .

[ChrisR]

From a match video I was watching:

White kick off and the ball lands at about the 6m mark and takes a funny bounce forwards. It strikes a Blue player in the chest, who had stepped forward over the 10m line, and bounces back toward White. The referee orders a FK at center as the Blue player had not played the ball and the ball had not gone 10m.

I would have played on. Here's the video:

https://youtu.be/dj17LC5ROJ4?t=293

Here's the law:

[LAWS]6. The ball must reach the 10-metre line. Sanction: The non-kicking team has the option of the kick being retaken or a scrum.
7. If the ball reaches the 10-metre line but is then blown back or if an opponent plays the ball before it reaches the 10-metre line, play continues.
[/LAWS]

 

[Camquin]

I would definitely have played on - I would say that the Blue player tries to catch the ball.

Being 7s clause 6 is amended.

The ball must reach the 10-metre line. Sanction: Free-kick.

Clause 7 still applies.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Agreed 7s variations apply not 15s laws.



You need to give full information in the scenario as if just reading the OP we would not have known it was 7s and given an incorrect call.

 

[Zebra1922]

Agreed with the above in both 7s and 15s. If it strikes his chest, to me that is him playing the ball, so play on. He chose to go over the 10m line towards the ball, therefore takes the risk of the knock on, play on call.

 

[Dickie E]

Play on for me. Seems to be standard interpretation these days that "ball striking player" = "ball played by player"

 

[ChrisR]

Agreed 7s variations apply not 15s laws.



You need to give full information in the scenario as if just reading the OP we would not have known it was 7s and given an incorrect call.

Call would be the same, only the sanction changes.

At first I thought he (the referee) had not seen the ball strike Blue then I realized he was applying "plays" in a very specific sense. What are the criteria for for the difference?

 

[Zebra1922]

Call would be the same, only the sanction changes.

At first I thought he (the referee) had not seen the ball strike Blue then I realized he was applying "plays" in a very specific sense. What are the criteria for for the difference?

There aren't any. Personal judgement. As per my earlier post my view would be no matter where it hits you, if you've gone beyond the 10 and touch the ball, you have played it. Others will have different interpretations and no-one can say for sure who is right or wrong. Another one of those 'laws' which ultimately comes down to convention or even expectation. What would the average player, crowd member etc. expect to happen in that situation?

 

[damo]

That decision made me a little mad.

The ball would have gone 10m but it hit a player who had moved forward beyond the 10m line. No way am I doing anything other than playing on.

 

[Jolly Roger]

Altering the scenario slightly, what if white kicks the ball at a KO or restart and it reaches 6m before bouncing. It then bobbles slowly along the ground towards the blue 10m line continiusly losing speed. We then get white forwards advancing behind the ball and blue forwards waiting to see if it will eventually reach 10m line.

At what point do you call “ball not 10” and offer options. Should we wait until the ball eventually loses all momentum and stops?

If the ball eventually reaches the 10m line after, say, 10seconds of watching and waiting we then have players from both sides waiting to pounce, creating a very messy and potentially dangerous situation.

 

[TigerCraig]

"Played: The ball is played when it is intentionally touched by a player. " To me stepping forward is enough "intent" - play on

 

[Ian_Cook]

"Played: The ball is played when it is intentionally touched by a player. " To me stepping forward is enough "intent" - play on

Hmmmm.

2017 Law Definitions

[LAWS]Played: The ball is played when it is touched by a player.[/LAWS]

2018 Law Definitions

[LAWS]Played: The ball is played when it is intentionally touched by a player.[/LAWS]

So under 2017 and before, "played" = "touched" = "touched by"

in 2018, they are different

Oh dear, looks like WR boo booed again. This will make a huge difference to the outcome of some scenarios in a lot of Laws, especially in the offside law, where it would seem that a player unintentionally touching the ball might not put an opponent onside.

Can-o-worms comes to mind.

 

[crossref]

That is a good spot. I am surprised we hadn't noticed that before

[LAWS]A player is offside in open play if that player is in front of a team-mate who is carrying the ball or who last played it.[/LAWS]

I guess in practice the ball doesn't very often hit someone completely accidentally , so it won't make that much difference , but there will be edge cases

My other thought was touch, but Law makers were a step ahead of me and the Laws make it clear that when the ball comes off blue, it's always a red throw regardless of whether blue played the ball, or the ball happened to hit him

 

[damo]

Altering the scenario slightly, what if white kicks the ball at a KO or restart and it reaches 6m before bouncing. It then bobbles slowly along the ground towards the blue 10m line continiusly losing speed. We then get white forwards advancing behind the ball and blue forwards waiting to see if it will eventually reach 10m line.

At what point do you call “ball not 10” and offer options. Should we wait until the ball eventually loses all momentum and stops?

If the ball eventually reaches the 10m line after, say, 10seconds of watching and waiting we then have players from both sides waiting to pounce, creating a very messy and potentially dangerous situation.

Personally, I play on. I don't see any reason in law to stop the game if the ball might travel 10m. I agree it creates a messy situation but I don't think this is grounds to stop either team from choosing the options they have under law. I wait until the ball stops completely, or it is clear that the ball won't travel 10m AND it is clear to me that the receiving team don't want to play it.

This isn't really a hypothetical question either. I see this at least once or twice per season, particularly in the lower school grades.

 

[Jolly Roger]

Thanks Damo,

I have come across this in 7s when teams are trying play a short KO and chase down.

 

[thepercy]

Altering the scenario slightly, what if white kicks the ball at a KO or restart and it reaches 6m before bouncing. It then bobbles slowly along the ground towards the blue 10m line continiusly losing speed. We then get white forwards advancing behind the ball and blue forwards waiting to see if it will eventually reach 10m line.

At what point do you call “ball not 10” and offer options. Should we wait until the ball eventually loses all momentum and stops?

If the ball eventually reaches the 10m line after, say, 10seconds of watching and waiting we then have players from both sides waiting to pounce, creating a very messy and potentially dangerous situation.

I'd wait a bit even after the ball stops moving to see if the receiving team want to play it. Only when it was clearly obvious that neither team will play the ball, will I blow the whistle.