Player on ground plays the ball

[OB..]

Leicester thought they had scored a try in the first minute yesterday, but it was cancelled because a replay showed that after the ball came out of a tackle/ruck thingy, a Leicester player on the ground flipped the ball up to a team mate. The officials agreed he had "played the ball on the ground", and Saracens were awarded a penalty instead.

The point has been argued previously, under various scenarios, but in this case, no further criteria were considered, and it was open play.

 

[The Fat]

Didn't see the game but from the description, sounds like a correct decision.

 

[Blackberry]

In open play it depends on HOW he got to ground. If it was a tackle, he can't play it, any other way...he can play it.

 

[OB..]

In open play it depends on HOW he got to ground. If it was a tackle, he can't play it, any other way...he can play it.

That was the whole point of previous discussions. My point was that the officials did not bring in any such criteria.

It is of course possible that they thought it unnecessary to state that he was brought to ground in a tackle (was he? or was he just part of a collapsed ruck?). Or they may be of the opinion that he cannot play the ball when on the ground unless a law specifically allows it (eg 14 or 15).

 

[Ian_Cook]

In open play it depends on HOW he got to ground. If it was a tackle, he can't play it, any other way...he can play it.

If he is the ball carrier brought to ground in a tackle, he can play it by flipping it up to a team-mate provided he does so immediately. Once he releases it he cannot grab it again and do so.

If he goes to ground to gather a loose ball, he can flip the ball up to a team mate. (Law 14)

Any other circumstance where the is already on the ground and grabs the ball, e.g. he his on the ground from a previous tackle, and the ball is dislodged in a second tackle and rolls up to him, if he grabs or kicks the ball without first getting to his feet, he is playing the ball off his feet... PK

 

[Rich_NL]

Any other circumstance where the is already on the ground and grabs the ball, e.g. he his on the ground from a previous tackle, and the ball is dislodged in a second tackle and rolls up to him, if he grabs or kicks the ball without first getting to his feet, he is playing the ball off his feet... PK

What's the law for that? I had this discussion offline with refs here, and this was the initial feeling - but when we looked at the law, we couldn't find support for it. So we concluded it was OK.

 

[crossref]

What's the law for that? I had this discussion offline with refs here, and this was the initial feeling - but when we looked at the law, we couldn't find support for it. So we concluded it was OK.

It isn't in the Law

we have discussed this many times
- one school of thought is Ian's, a player who happens to be on ground must get up before he can play the ball (the game is to be played by players on their feet)

- the other school of thought is that the player on the ground who is lucky enough for the ball to happen to head his way is allowed precisely the same freedoms as a player who went to ground (to get up with it or pass it)

I prefer the second, but the decision in the Semi-Final seems to bolster the first interpretation

 

[DocY]

It isn't in the Law

we have discussed this many times
- one school of thought is Ian's, a player who happens to be on ground must get up before he can play the ball (the game is to be played by players on their feet)

- the other school of thought is that the player on the ground who is lucky enough for the ball to happen to head his way is allowed precisely the same freedoms as a player who went to ground (to get up with it or pass it)

I prefer the second, but the decision in the Semi-Final seems to bolster the first interpretation

I had a situation a couple of years ago where a player crawled (as quickly as it's possible to crawl) to a ball and played it. I'm not sure I'd consider that to be lucky.

 

[Phil E]

It isn't in the Law

- the other school of thought is that the player on the ground who is lucky enough for the ball to happen to head his way is allowed precisely the same freedoms as a player who went to ground (to get up with it or pass it)

So would you also be happy for a player on the floor to tackle a ball carrier without getting to his feet first?

 

[crossref]

So would you also be happy for a player on the floor to tackle a ball carrier without getting to his feet first?

no because
[LAWS]14.1 Players on the ground
A player on the ground must not tackle or attempt to tackle an opponent.[/LAWS]

but if a player is on the ground and the ball happily arrives ....

If it's after a tackle he can't touch it
[LAWS]
15.6 Other players
After a tackle, all other players must be on their feet when they play the ball. Players are on their feet if no other part of their body is supported by the ground or players on the ground.[/LAWS]

but otherwise looks like he can ..

[LAWS]14.1 Players on the ground
(a)
A player with the ball must immediately do one of three things:
Get up with the ball
Pass the ball
Release the ball.[/LAWS]


but obviously we have discussed this before and there are two schools of thought. I wasn't really having another go to convince anyone, but Ian's answer made it seem like it was a settled consensus, and I don't think it is.

 

[Ian_Cook]

no because
[LAWS]14.1 Players on the ground
A player on the ground must not tackle or attempt to tackle an opponent.[/LAWS]

but if a player is on the ground and the ball happily arrives ....

If it's after a tackle he can't touch it
[LAWS]
15.6 Other players
After a tackle, all other players must be on their feet when they play the ball. Players are on their feet if no other part of their body is supported by the ground or players on the ground.[/LAWS]

but otherwise looks like he can ..

[LAWS]14.1 Players on the ground
(a)
A player with the ball must immediately do one of three things:
Get up with the ball
Pass the ball
Release the ball.[/LAWS]

Well what you are doing extracting the bit of Law you want to support your case but ignoring the other bits that give it context.

[LAWS]DEFINITIONS
This situation occurs when the ball is available on the ground and a player goes to ground to gather the ball, except immediately after a scrum or a ruck.
It also occurs when a player is on the ground in possession of the ball and has not been tackled.
The Game is to be played by players who are on their feet. A player must not make the ball unplayable by falling down. Unplayable means that the ball is not immediately available to either team so that play may continue.
A player who makes the ball unplayable, or who obstructs the opposing team by falling down, is negating the purpose and Spirit of the Game and must be penalised.
A player who is not tackled, but who goes to ground while holding the ball, or a player who goes to ground and gathers the ball, must act immediately.[/LAWS]

The argument is over whether a player who falls down in order to gather the ball on the ground has less rights to play the ball than a player who was already on the ground. By stating clearly in the Definitions "The Game is to be played by players who are on their feet" I think its obvious that anyone off their feet is out of the game.

but Ian's answer made it seem like it was a settled consensus, and I don't think it is.

I have seen this a few times now, in club rugby, NPC and Super Rugby , where players have toe poked the ball into touch or grabbed a loose ball while on the ground and they have been PK. Now its happened in a high profile NH Club match. If not settled consensus, that at least makes it seem like settled practice.

 

[crossref]

Ian, yes, that clip does indeed bolster your point of view, and I take that new observation on board (I am a Bayesian ) .. HN

 

[ChrisR]

DEFINITIONS

This situation occurs when the ball is available on the ground and a player goes to ground to gather the ball, except immediately after a scrum or a ruck.

It also occurs when a player is on the ground in possession of the ball and has not been tackled.

The Game is to be played by players who are on their feet. A player must not make the ball unplayable by falling down. Unplayable means that the ball is not immediately available to either team so that play may continue.

A player who makes the ball unplayable, or who obstructs the opposing team by falling down, is negating the purpose and Spirit of the Game and must be penalised.

A player who is not tackled, but who goes to ground while holding the ball, or a player who goes to ground and gathers the ball, must act immediately.

Ian, you have chosen to hi-lite one sentence of a paragraph the addresses making the ball unplayable.

I have chosen to hi-lite the sentence that addresses the general situation of a player on the ground in possession of the ball.

I like my cherry picking better than your cherry picking.

As to the frequency and level at which this being PKd we'd have to determine the frequency of when it is not PKd to get any meaning from it.

 

[OB..]

DEFINITIONS

This situation occurs when the ball is available on the ground and a player goes to ground to gather the ball, except immediately after a scrum or a ruck.

It also occurs when a player is on the ground in possession of the ball and has not been tackled.

The Game is to be played by players who are on their feet. A player must not make the ball unplayable by falling down. Unplayable means that the ball is not immediately available to either team so that play may continue.

A player who makes the ball unplayable, or who obstructs the opposing team by falling down, is negating the purpose and Spirit of the Game and must be penalised.

A player who is not tackled, but who goes to ground while holding the ball, or a player who goes to ground and gathers the ball, must act immediately.

Ian, you have chosen to hi-lite one sentence of a paragraph the addresses making the ball unplayable.

I have chosen to hi-lite the sentence that addresses the general situation of a player on the ground in possession of the ball.

I like my cherry picking better than your cherry picking.

As to the frequency and level at which this being PKd we'd have to determine the frequency of when it is not PKd to get any meaning from it.

Both sentences are in the same Definition, so we need an interpretation that makes sense of both. It clearly covers a player on his feet who goes to ground to recover the ball. It also covers a player in possession who goes to ground.

However a player on the ground who gains possession was not on his feet.The only reason given in the clip for awarding the penalty was that the player was on the ground when he first played the ball. It was a highly significant decision, yet the officials showed no doubt. No commentators queried it, nor any journalists that I have seen. I find it pretty compelling, and would therefore go with it unless there was something authoritative to the contrary.

 

[Ian_Cook]

DEFINITIONS

This situation occurs when the ball is available on the ground and a player goes to ground to gather the ball, except immediately after a scrum or a ruck.

It also occurs when a player is on the ground in possession of the ball and has not been tackled.

The Game is to be played by players who are on their feet. A player must not make the ball unplayable by falling down. Unplayable means that the ball is not immediately available to either team so that play may continue.

A player who makes the ball unplayable, or who obstructs the opposing team by falling down, is negating the purpose and Spirit of the Game and must be penalised.

A player who is not tackled, but who goes to ground while holding the ball, or a player who goes to ground and gathers the ball, must act immediately.

Ian, you have chosen to hi-lite one sentence of a paragraph the addresses making the ball unplayable.

I have chosen to hi-lite the sentence that addresses the general situation of a player on the ground in possession of the ball.

I like my cherry picking better than your cherry picking.

As to the frequency and level at which this being PKd we'd have to determine the frequency of when it is not PKd to get any meaning from it.

"It also occurs when a player is on the ground in possession of the ball and has not been tackled." covers a ball carrier tripping or falling over with the ball in his possession, or a ball carrier who is brought to ground legally by the actions of an opponent other than by a tackle, e.g. ankle tapped or pushed.

It does NOT cover a player on the ground gaining possession of the ball while he is on the ground... because...

The Game is to be played by players who are on their feet.

This is a mantra that we try to drum into the players' heads; that if you are off your feet you are out of the game, Going against that mantra for the sake of nitpicking over Law wording serves only to confuse new referees to this site, and frankly, its something that personally am sick to death of seeing here, and is one of the reasons why I don't post here as often as I used to.


As for the number of times I have seen it not penalised? None that I can immediately recall.

 

[didds]

I've much sympathy with ian's point.

But i do think its a valid discussion point because the laws choose (!!) to not address the circumstance of player on ground RECEIVING the ball.

hence no-one person's personal beliefs are any better than anybody else's.

If only the WR 12 year old could address it.

didds

 

[DocY]

TBH, I wouldn't expect them to choose to omit something - forgetting is quite another thing though.

To me, it's one of those "well that doesn't look right" situations, so if the law book is vague, I'll look for it to allow whatever-it-is, rather than to prohibit it.

 

[crossref]

serves only to confuse new referees to this site,
.

by which you mean it's something you don't agree with!

 

[Ian_Cook]

by which you mean it's something you don't agree with!

No, by which I mean that the game is difficult enough to referee as it is without some referees inventing their own interpretation because current practice clashes with their personal beliefs about fairness, for example, using a clever dick subversion of the advantage law to award a 22 DO instead of a 5m scrum after a knock-on in or into in-goal.

 

[The Fat]

I don't understand why some referees/people (that's not to suggest that referees aren't people:wink on here still want to argue that a player who is off their feet can play the ball other than those who
(a) are tackled
(b) have gone to ground whilst in possession
(c) have gone to ground to gain possession

We don't allow a tackler to play the ball.
We don't allow the tackled player to play it again once he has released the ball
We don't allow a player on the ground to "kick" the ball (i.e. play it)

We have had clarification on this one from the referee's boss at SANZAR previously.
It is obviously convention amongst top level refs to penalise a player on the ground who then plays the ball.
It is how all of my referee coaches/assessors have instructed me over the years.
It is how "those in high places" within the ARU & NSWRU have interpreted the law whenever the question has popped up (no pun intended).

For those who claim allowing the man who is off his feet and plays the ball that "comes to him" lets the game flow, try this. Penalise the bugger as per the LoTG and let the non-infringing team to take a quick tap and get on with things.

I'm with Ian on this one, don't confuse inexperienced referees who come to this site to sharpen their knowledge by trying to make the wording of the LoTG fit an unconventional minority interpretation.