Professional foul/intentional infringement?

[chrismtl]

So I might be a bit biased as I am Canadian and this happened in a Canada-Samoa match, but wouldn't this be considered a professional foul? The guys is getting treated 5 or so meters behind the offside line, play goes towards him, he stands up, disrupts the Canadian attack and then lies back down for more treatment. I mean Canada did take the quick tap and make solid ground before DTH got taken out by the sniper, but still, the guy got up as he was being treated, made a weak attempt at a tackle, clearly disrupting the play (all in an offside position) and then got right back down on his knees to get more treatment. IMO :yellow:

 

[Phil E]

I don't see an offside line?
First breakdown is a tackle not a ruck, then play moves over to him.
Open play, no offsides.

But yes, he should be out of the game, so :noyc: for me.

 

[ChrisR]

No ruck, just tackle, good point, Phil E. That raises the question as to why are the Samoans not advancing beyond the tackle? If they did who here would ping them for it?

Is the player being treated really out of the game? Does he need your permission to re-enter?

 

[Blackberry]

Good spot Phil!! Hadn't thought of that.

 

[chrismtl]

There was a ruck formed. I just took a bad cut from the video. Gimme a sec and I'll try to get another one uploaded. Samoan 9 went to poach and was taken out by a Canadian player. That constitutes the formation of a ruck.

 

[chrismtl]

 

[Pegleg]

It's wrong for me. What was the PK for? That offence or something else. I'd be looking at a card too.

 

[FightOrFlight]

I don't see an offside line?
First breakdown is a tackle not a ruck, then play moves over to him.
Open play, no offsides.

But yes, he should be out of the game, so :noyc: for me.

They'll be standing off in the rucks next! All standing in backfield wherever they like! Don't compete at mauls, rucks and feed the ball crooked at scrums/lineouts....we'll be in the NRL before we know it!:wtf:

Anyway he's offside so :noyc: but if the PK is not for the offside tackle I would guess the referee does not know if he was on or offside from the last breakdown.

 

[Dickie E]

Forget about the offside for the moment. Why can't an injured player rejoin the game as & when he feels fit to do so?

 

[chrismtl]

Forget about the offside for the moment. Why can't an injured player rejoin the game as & when he feels fit to do so?

Here's an example according to your logic...there's a breakdown about 2-3 meters behind an "injured" player (he's in an offside position). He then stands up, takes 2 steps, grabs the ball and passes it to one of his onside teammates. So according to you, this is fine and should be allowed to happen? What's the difference between that and the play I just posted except for it being more obvious.

 

[Dickie E]

Here's an example according to your logic...there's a breakdown about 2-3 meters behind an "injured" player (he's in an offside position). He then stands up, takes 2 steps, grabs the ball and passes it to one of his onside teammates. So according to you, this is fine and should be allowed to happen? What's the difference between that and the play I just posted except for it being more obvious.

In that case he is offside so liable to penalty - same as in the OP. :shrug:

That is why I suggested taking the offside out of the discussion for a moment and just consider the act of an injured player rejoining the game.

 

[Dickie E]

Here's an example according to your logic...there's a breakdown about 2-3 meters behind an "injured" player (he's in an offside position). He then stands up, takes 2 steps, grabs the ball and passes it to one of his onside teammates. So according to you, this is fine and should be allowed to happen? What's the difference between that and the play I just posted except for it being more obvious.

hey, chrismtl, reading your phraseology it seems there is some venom in there: "accoding to your logic", "according to you", etc. What has brought that on? I'm not expousing a view, just looking for enlightenment.

If I ask "why can't a rooster lay an egg?" don't take that to mean that I think a rooster can lay an egg

 

[crossref]

Forget about the offside for the moment. Why can't an injured player rejoin the game as & when he feels fit to do so?

It seems to me that, if he is not offside, an injured player is entitled to get to his feet at any time and join in the play.

 

[Jacko]

I'd give the illegal neck roll on Samoa 9 to avoid the issue of whether he's offside or not....

 

[Dixie]

Forget about the offside for the moment. Why can't an injured player rejoin the game as & when he feels fit to do so?

Good question. I think there may be a difference between a player down clutching an ankle, and a player receiving treatment from a guy with a bag and sponge - though that is obviously not set out anywhere. With the latter, we've got extraneous people on the field. The ref would normally stop play for that, but we give licence to a medic to enter tfield of play in the interests of player safety. All on the pitch treat that scenario as nothing - just an area of bad ground that if play gets too close we'll stop. Otherwise carry on. With players not considering it necessary to bring the "nothing" into their tactical analysis, it would be inequitable to allow the player on the ground to take part in the play while hiding behind his sponge man.

I'd see this as contrary to good sportsmanship. YC

 

[crossref]

Good question. I think there may be a difference between a player down clutching an ankle, and a player receiving treatment from a guy with a bag and sponge - though that is obviously not set out anywhere. With the latter, we've got extraneous people on the field. The ref would normally stop play for that, but we give licence to a medic to enter tfield of play in the interests of player safety. All on the pitch treat that scenario as nothing - just an area of bad ground that if play gets too close we'll stop. Otherwise carry on. With players not considering it necessary to bring the "nothing" into their tactical analysis, it would be inequitable to allow the player on the ground to take part in the play while hiding behind his sponge man.

I'd see this as contrary to good sportsmanship. YC

obviously the player on the ground would have to get to his feet, you wouldn't allow grab at the ankle from a prone position.

if he is recovered are we saying he can only rejoin the play if the ball is a certain distance away? I don't think that can be right.

 

[ChrisR]

I think it should be blown up and a scrum to Red as the ball enters the treatment area and before the player gets up to make the tackle.

As to the off-sides question: Even if a ruck had formed the "injured" player would have been put on-sides by the opponents passing the ball.

 

[chrismtl]

In that case he is offside so liable to penalty - same as in the OP. :shrug:

That is why I suggested taking the offside out of the discussion for a moment and just consider the act of an injured player rejoining the game.

I have no issue with an injured player rejoining a game at any time whatsoever as long as he does so without infringing the laws in the process. It happens all the time where a player is down for a bit of open play, then gets up, gets back to his teams defensive line and resumes play. Sure, he was offside for a bit, but he wasn't affecting the play and therefore his offside is immaterial. My OP was purely that in this situation there should have been a YC, right? My issue is with an injured player in an offside position getting up, making a tackle and lying back down.

As for the intent of my post, it had nothing to do with venom or personal attacks. It was just the way I understood your post. It seemed like you thought there was nothing wrong with the infringement. I therefore went ahead and set a situation where it seemed you would have thought that there would be no issue but that would have refs scratching their heads if it was allowed to happen. Clearly I incorrectly interpreted your statement and if you were offended, I apologize.

 

[crossref]

My issue is with an injured player in an offside position getting up, making a tackle and lying back down.
.

The injury is a red herring
- if he's offside, then he can't make a tackle : PK and YC
- if he's onside then he can get to his feet and then make a tackle.

 

[chrismtl]

The injury is a red herring
- if he's offside, then he can't make a tackle : PK and YC
- if he's onside then he can get to his feet and then make a tackle.

If there's a player a few meters offside and being lazy retreating, you rarely see a YC. The issue is that the player was on the ground for a while and while I agree that the injury is not the only thing to look at in this situation I would, however, say it's an important factor to look at. The player was clearly not capable of taking part in play, was in an offside position and removed a potential chance at a break or open play. If players got a YC every time they were offside, we'd be playing short quite a bit.