[Law] Partial charge down - offsides .

[rugbyslave]

Just checking if correct : Red kick in general play with teammates just in front of kicker, blue player charge down but is only knocked up and behind the charging player, red player who were slightly ahead of kicker now catch the ball and run and score, referee awards red the try. My question is, are the red players put on-side because of the charge down. ?????

4. An offside player may be penalised, if that player:
a. Interferes with play; or
b. Moves forwards towards the ball; or
c. Was in front of a team-mate who kicked the ball and fails to retire immediately to
an imaginary line across the field 10 metres on that player’s side from where the
ball is caught or lands, even if it hits a goal post or crossbar first. If this involves
more than one player, then the player closest to where the ball lands or is caught is
the one penalised. This is known as the 10-metre law and still applies if the ball
touches or is played by an opponent but not when the kick is charged down.

 

[Rich_NL]

I think so.

[LAWS][FONT=fs_blakeregular]10.6 Other than under Law 10.4c, an offside player can be put onside when:
...
c [/FONT][FONT=fs_blakeregular]An opponent of that player:[/FONT]

• • Carries the ball five metres; or
  • Passes the ball; or
  • Kicks the ball; or
  • Intentionally touches the ball without gaining possession of it.

[/LAWS]

 

[menace]

Was offside red player moving forward in between the kick and being touched by blue. (A and c doesnt apply IMO cause a charge down is not waiting to catch and he didnt interfere witj play that instance he was offside). If yes then offside..if no then Id be looking at how red was in that position?
Was he a lazy runner and was offside from a prior ruck/maul or scrum.

It's all situational.

It seems from what is described that a try seems right.

 

[Pinky]

IMO, if the red players in front of the kicker had set off to chase the ball, they are offside and should be penalised. However if the kick was going to go more than 10m, then they do not have to retire (but they must not advance) until it is played by the blue player when they are all onside and can catch the ball and then score.

 

[crossref]

The lazy runner point is important , if the kick is a box kick by green 9 from back of a ruck, I dont think that any offside green lazy forwards are played onside by a charge down ... Or are they ?

 

[Phil E]

In my opinion.

Once the ball is charged down by Blue then all red players are onside.

We are in open play and you can only be offside in open play (ignoring any lazy runner scenario) if you are in front of a team mate who is in possession of the ball or who last played the ball.

So the team without the ball cannot be offside in open play.

HOWEVER if the red player was offside BEFORE the charge down, then he was still offside (and can't advance, or has to retire as appropriate). Being put onside by the charge down doesn't negate the fact that he was offside when the player on his team who last played the ball did so.

 

[ChrisR]

There are two laws (uhder Law 10) that come into play here (points deleted for clarity):

[LAWS]6. Other than under Law 10.4c, an offside player can be put onside when:


c. An opponent of that player:


iv. Intentionally touches the ball without gaining possession of it.
[/LAWS]

and:

[LAWS]4. An offside player may be penalised, if that player:


c. Was in front of a team-mate who kicked the ball and fails to retire immediately to
an imaginary line across the field 10 metres on that player’s side from where the
ball is caught or lands , , , , This is known as the 10-metre law and still applies if the ball
touches or is played by an opponent but not when the kick is charged down.

[/LAWS]

" . . . but not when the kick is charged down."

Naturally, "chargedown" is not in definitions.

I think we can define "chargedown" as any attempt to block the kick, even if the ball still moves forward.

Therefore I think the try should be awarded.

 

[Zebra1922]

I've always interpreted the law as a partial charge down puts everyone onside, even those in front of the kicker who would have been offside had they advanced before being put onside by the kicker (or an onside player).

Once we have a tip, we are now effectively pack in open play and all offsides disappear.

 

[Christy]

a team mate of kicker who was ahead of kicker ,, who catches a ball directly from opponents charge down , would be play on .. { providing he hasnt deliberately kept him self off side , lazy runner , doing up his shoe laces etc }
but in the scenario from #1 .
this is not the case .
he was off side but didnt catch the ball from a direct charge down per say ,, he actually chased to catch ball .

off side penalty only .

 

[crossref]

What a great question ..

 

[ChuckieB]

[FONT=fs_blakeregular]​In [/FONT][FONT=fs_blakeregular]respect of a law clarification back in 2011[/FONT][FONT=fs_blakeregular]​on the 10m law:[/FONT]

"1. The act of a charge down is one where an opposition player not in possession of the ball approaches a kicker at close quarters and makes an attempt to block the kick. In such circumstances players in front of the kicker who are within 10 metres of the kick are not liable to penalty wherever the ball lands.
2. If the ball is not charged down but is played or touches an opposition player and a player from the kicker’s side is within the 10 metre area in front of the kick that player is liable to penalty in accordance with Law 11.4(f).

The deletion of 11.4(f) would require a Law amendment."

[FONT=fs_blakeregular]So applicable in respect of the 10m law, from what I can see. [/FONT]

[FONT=fs_blakeregular]In other situations, similar to players being in front of the kicker for a clearance kick into touch, I would initially view them as being offside and are liable to penalty if they take part in the game.

[/FONT]

 

[crossref]

So in this context are World Rugby adopting the convention
Charged Down = managed to block the ball so that it rebounds back toward the kicker

Played or touched = made contact with it, but ball continues onwards in the direction it was kicked

That wasn't clear to me before , but makes sense

 

[chbg]

So in this context are World Rugby adopting the convention
Charged Down = managed to block the ball so that it rebounds back toward the kicker

Played or touched = made contact with it, but ball continues onwards in the direction it was kicked

That wasn't clear to me before , but makes sense

No - WR were addressing "the act of a charge down" and making "an attempt to block the ball". "Is played or touches" refers to other acts of trying to play the ball, at the end of the kick.

Have a look at the video clip against 2018 LOTG 10.6(c)(iv). That is a charge down; the ball does not re-bound.

ChrisR (Post #7) answered the question.

 

[crossref]

So at a ruck a very lazy runner , making no proper effort to get onside , could catch a box kick by his own Scrum half , that was touched by an opponent trying to charge it down?

 

[ChrisR]

Yes, lucky him! I think ChuckieB has that clarification.

 

[Taff]

So at a ruck a very lazy runner , making no proper effort to get onside , could catch a box kick by his own Scrum half , that was touched by an opponent trying to charge it down?

But the opponent last played (touched) the ball so there are no offside lines for the kickers team anymore. There are now offsides for the player who charged down the ball , but if the ball was just touched in flight and not charged down, it's a bit academic.

 

[beckett50]

The OP suggests that there was no actual charge down, merely an attempt that resulted in the ball being deflected - played in flight.

Under this the Law 10.4c all his team are put onside by this action.

Due to this, the Red players are onside and the try stands.

It is one of those situations that, in realtime, can appear to be totally wrong and contrary to Law. The referee did the correct thing in playing on.

A charge down is not clearly defined in Law, but there is a picture showing contact with the ball and it going toward the ground. Follow this link:-

http://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=11&language=EN

 

[Taff]

The OP suggests that there was no actual charge down, merely an attempt that resulted in the ball being deflected - played in flight.]

Ie touched in flight.

 

[OB..]

I think I have only seen this sort of scenario once.

We had a ruck near the opposition goal line. The scrum half sent out a bad pass and by the time the fly half had gathered it for a drop goal attempt, an opponent was able to charge it down. However he merely deflected the ball into the hands of our prop, who was just getting up from the ruck. He caught it, turned, and fell over the line. The referee awarded the try.

(I think this was around 1970.)

 

[crossref]

But the opponent last played (touched) the ball so there are no offside lines for the kickers team anymore. There are now offsides for the player who charged down the ball , but if the ball was just touched in flight and not charged down, it's a bit academic.

Yes I get that , but it rather conflicts with how we are taught to manage lazy runners .. which is that we shouldn't let them gain an advantage from being one .

Eg red win the ball at a ruck , red scrum half passes to red 10 who is tackled by a lazy blue runner .. who claims he was put onside by red passing the ball.

We don't allow that
But we do say he is put onside by a failed red chargedown attempt ?