[Law] Placing the ball in touch

[crossref]

Whoa there, CR. After a tackle a player may place the ball in an direction.

i was talking about the scenario where he hold the ball in left arm, and reaches out and puts his right hand in touch -- for a line out.
(or perhaps a PK against him for not releasing the ball in the tackle)

 

[JSAK]

If a player holding the ball dived over the touchline and ended up grounding it along with his torso a la scorig a try... would that be placed into touch?

Nope, as long as the ball was not in your hands as it was grounded by the front of your torso "neck to waist inclusive." But I'd probably ping you for it! :smile:

 

[JSAK]

another variation -- a player is tackled very close to the line, retains hold on the ball with his left arm, and reaches out with his right, and touches the touchline with his right hand. Putting himself and therefire the ball in touch. That's OK right?

Right. Or he could cleverly release the ball backwards as he is being tackled, place one foot in touch, then ground the still moving ball with a free hand or his torso. Not only would the ball be in touch, but his side would get the line out!?

 

[didds]

Right. Or he could cleverly release the ball backwards as he is being tackled, place one foot in touch, then ground the still moving ball with a free hand or his torso. Not only would the ball be in touch, but his side would get the line out!��

??????????????

didds

 

[JSAK]

??????????????

See Law 19.5

 

[DocY]

See Law 19.5

I think I see what you're trying to say, but his team would still lose possession - he'd have been the last player to play the ball before it went into touch when he released it backwards in the tackle.

 

[JSAK]

I think I see what you're trying to say, but his team would still lose possession - he'd have been the last player to play the ball before it went into touch when he released it backwards in the tackle.

Sorry, I was being facetious. I was attempting to create a scenario that was even less plausible and less likely to occur, but still based on law, than the two previously described by Didds and Crossref. My intent was to create a “prone” version of Law 19.5 (b): If a player with one or both feet on or beyond the touch-line (or touch-in-goal line), picks up the ball, which was in motion within the playing area, that player is deemed to have picked up the ball in touch (or touch-in-goal). So, as originally written, your analysis is correct. To be “analogous” with 19.5 I should have written “picks up” rather than “ground”. So, if the hypothetical player does as described in my revised scenario in one continuous motion he would successfully take the ball out of play, be deemed to have picked up the ball in touch, and receive the lineout. Yes? Maybe not…?

 

[DocY]

I don't think so. Playing the ball when in touch and it's still moving just means that that action didn't take the ball into touch, so you have to consider the preceding action to determine the outcome; in this case, knocking the ball back. So his playing it with one foot in touch didn't take it out, but his knock back did, so he's lose the put in.

 

[Pinky]

i was talking about the scenario where he hold the ball in left arm, and reaches out and puts his right hand in touch -- for a line out.
(or perhaps a PK against him for not releasing the ball in the tackle)

Once he is tackled he is no longer the ball carrier so him touching the touchline and the ball would not in my view put the ball in touch, so play on, unless U think he was holding on.

 

[ChrisR]

Once he is tackled he is no longer the ball carrier so him touching the touchline and the ball would not in my view put the ball in touch, so play on, unless U think he was holding on.

The BC is still the BC in a tackle until he plays the ball.

 

[didds]

Sorry, I was being facetious. I was attempting to create a scenario that was even less plausible and less likely to occur, but still based on law, than the two previously described by Didds and Crossref. My intent was to create a “prone” version of Law 19.5 (b): If a player with one or both feet on or beyond the touch-line (or touch-in-goal line), picks up the ball, which was in motion within the playing area, that player is deemed to have picked up the ball in touch (or touch-in-goal). So, as originally written, your analysis is correct. To be “analogous” with 19.5 I should have written “picks up” rather than “ground”. So, if the hypothetical player does as described in my revised scenario in one continuous motion he would successfully take the ball out of play, be deemed to have picked up the ball in touch, and receive the lineout. Yes? Maybe not…?

yes, I get that. BUt how does his team get the lineout? (see your #23)


The last person to have touched the ball before he then made it dead "in touch" was himself?

didds

 

[didds]

I don't think so. Playing the ball when in touch and it's still moving just means that that action didn't take the ball into touch, so you have to consider the preceding action to determine the outcome; in this case, knocking the ball back. So his playing it with one foot in touch didn't take it out, but his knock back did, so he's lose the put in.

clear as day


didds

 

[Rawling]

Right. Or he could cleverly release the ball backwards as he is being tackled, place one foot in touch, then ground the still moving ball with a free hand or his torso. Not only would the ball be in touch, but his side would get the line out!?

Penalty for playing the ball while on the ground, presumably. Not on the 15m line, so a bit of an improvement from his point of view.

 

[JSAK]

As I have previously stated my scenario in post #23 was facetious, flippant, tongue-in-cheek (hence the :smile: ). Clearly DocY’s observation appearing in posts #26 and 28 are correct. Also, I agree with Rawling in post #33 re playing the ball while on the ground, and in fact, that is what I would probably call if I ever saw such a ridiculous thing happen. But now that I’m in this deep, let’s see if I can dig myself out by modifying my original scenario (yet again):

“Or he could cleverly release the ball backwards bounce the ball off the head of the tackler as he is being tackled, place one foot in touch, then ground the still moving ball with a free hand or his torso then catch the still airborne ball. Not only would the ball be in touch, but his side would get the line out!”

Well? :biggrin:

 

[JSAK]

Sorry, I used the strikeout feature in my previous post to delete some text and it evidently didn't work. 2nd paragraph should have read:
“Or he could cleverly bounce the ball off the head of the tackler as he is being tackled, place one foot in touch, then catch the still airborne ball. Not only would the ball be in touch, but his side would get the line out!”

 

[didds]

I think this is so esoteric as to be ignored.

There was an bloke from cornwall that used to post here with incredibly convoluted scenarios that would never occur. you are his love child and I claim mynfive pounds.

didds

 

[JSAK]

I think this is so esoteric as to be ignored.

Agreed! Like I said, I was trying to dig myself out of a deep hole.

So I it sounds like I might have family in Cornwall?