The Laws do not contradict eachother
You can score a try from TIG but only if you are on your feet
The quiz question does contradict 13.3
[Law] Question from World Rugby law quiz
- Thread starter tewdric
- Start date
The Laws do not contradict eachother
You can score a try from TIG but only if you are on your feet
The quiz question does contradict 13.3
So a stationary player on the ground is different from a sliding player on the ground?
No, a player who goes to ground to gather a ball (13.1) is different from a player who happens to be on the ground when the ball comes near (13.3)
Come on OB we have been making that distinction for years
Last edited:
Going back to my point about ‘intention’ in an earlier post. The answers given by WR in the OP scenario and in post 52 would suggest what the WR intention is in relation to the laws. If anyone disagrees then it has to be taken up with WR directly. They are their laws afterall!
It's a funny thing - when 13.3 was introduced I highlighted on the forum saying it would have a big impact.
The general response was : it makes no difference, we have always reffed it like that.
As the impact has become apparent the response has shifted 180 degrees into : it's never been reffed like that before, and we're not going to start now
The general response was : it makes no difference, we have always reffed it like that.
As the impact has become apparent the response has shifted 180 degrees into : it's never been reffed like that before, and we're not going to start now
The problem is that a player who is on the ground in touch-in-goal may have gone to get the ball and been initially deceived by the bounce.
Moreover 13.1 requires him to aim to gather the ball, but his intention is obviously to ground it.
I think there is a useful distinction between a player who is on the ground for reasons unconnected with playing the ball (eg injured) and one who is on the ground in an attempt to play the ball. If the ball comes to the former we all (i think?) agree he cannot play it.
Indeed there is such a distinction: it's right there in the Law Book
This is
[LAWS]13.3 A player on the ground without the ball is out of the game [/LAWS]
In the community game other common reason, apart from injured, is simply that he was left on the ground from a previous phase in play and hasn't got back to his feet yet. In the pro game - not so much!
This is
[LAWS]13.1 Players, who go to ground to gather the ball or who go to ground with the ball,
[/LAWS]
So going back to the quiz question : to provide a full answer to the question we do need to know how the player got to the ground.
Scenario 1 - the ball is loose in the in goal. An attacker dives for it, his foot crosses into TIG, and then he reaches out and touches down the ball. Try, 13.1
Scenario 2 - a player is lying on the ground in touch in goal, the loose ball rolls near and he reaches out and touches it -- not a try 13.3
In the WR quiz question , the wording of the question is most like scenario 2
Last edited:
menace
Referees in Australia
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2009
- Messages
- 3,657
- Post Likes
- 633
- Current Referee grade:
- Level 2
It's a funny thing - when 13.3 was introduced I highlighted on the forum saying it would have a big impact.
The general response was : it makes no difference, we have always reffed it like that.
As the impact has become apparent the response has shifted 180 degrees into : it's never been reffed like that before, and we're not going to start now
Perhaps you'll find that a great majority of us can successfully referee in the 'grey'...not referee in the pure 'black and white' (to the exact letter of the law). You either get it...or you don't. I think I can guess where you sit.
This is one of those...it is for me nonsense to think that at a 'scoring' situation (the ultimate aim of the game) that a player in touch can only score or touchdown when if and only if they are on their feet. You've not pick up on the intention of the 13.3 law you've clamped onto and wont let go.
For me, and it seems a majority here, it's a try everyday of the week and twice on Sundays! But you can go right ahead and be the martyr and go against the grain. But when on TV a try is disallowed for this exact scenario and WR come out and say it is correct...then you can say "I Fricken told you so". Until then...you're on your own. Good luck convincing the team denied, what is IMO, a fair try.
Are we talking Laws or Practial Advice?
In terms of practical advice : your answer is, whatever it says in the Law Book, I am going to allow a player off their feet to score a try, because that's the convention. Well OK, I can't argue with that, that's what you'd do.
In terms of the what the Law actually IS (if we are talking Laws, and this is a thrread about the Laws Quiz, and is the answer correct) then the answer is dictated by Law 13.
It's either a Law 13.1 scenarion (Try)
Or it's a Law 13.3 scenario (PK)
and that will depend on how he ended up on the ground
If you are saying that's not the Law - we can have a discussion about that.
Last edited:
L'irlandais
, Promises to Referee in France
- Joined
- May 11, 2010
- Messages
- 4,724
- Post Likes
- 325
I think that if several laws change when they reach the ingoal, it is simply for reasons of player safety. Ruck, maul and scrum in particular. The idea being in the frenzy to score, or deny the opposition a score it is safer for all if the ball is made dead asap. To this end, the situation in the OP is a try, for my money; despite players off their feet being out of the game. And this for two very simple reasons, 1. I feel it has been added specifically to the LoTG to facilitate having the ball grounded. Slim chance of a lazy player lying in touch ingoal from a previous phase of play. The second reason is that for better or for worse 21.10 doesn’t specifically mention that the player must be on their feet. My copy of the Law book doesn’t have an image showing a player on their feet grounding the ball either.
[LAWS]21.10 If a player is in touch or touch-in-goal, they can make a touch down or score a try by grounding the ball in in-goal provided they are not holding the ball.[/LAWS]So a player in touch-ingoal is specifically allowed to ground the ball. When the 13.3 change was introduced, did they imagine it would affect our interpretation of 21.10. I doubt it. There are alot of other grey areas to address, without making a rod for our own backs, reading too much into cross-interpretations of various Laws.
The answer WR reward as correct is “You may award the Try!” Because for them it is a question about 21.10 and not at all 13.3. So they have not yet received a copy of the same hymn sheet as yourself @crossref
[LAWS]21.10 If a player is in touch or touch-in-goal, they can make a touch down or score a try by grounding the ball in in-goal provided they are not holding the ball.[/LAWS]So a player in touch-ingoal is specifically allowed to ground the ball. When the 13.3 change was introduced, did they imagine it would affect our interpretation of 21.10. I doubt it. There are alot of other grey areas to address, without making a rod for our own backs, reading too much into cross-interpretations of various Laws.
The answer WR reward as correct is “You may award the Try!” Because for them it is a question about 21.10 and not at all 13.3. So they have not yet received a copy of the same hymn sheet as yourself @crossref
Last edited:
well, that's the answer the WR quizmaster gave - - but I posted a number of examples of out-of-date questions in the quiz....
L'irlandais
, Promises to Referee in France
- Joined
- May 11, 2010
- Messages
- 4,724
- Post Likes
- 325
What you fail to appreciate is that the blazers in World Rugby's headquarters in Dublin, have little time to error check all this documentation. Torn as they are between Jameson’s distillery tour or the Guinness storehouse tour. Your understanding in this matter would be much appreciated.
Even if they get barred from these establishments, because stuff happens on tours; then the Teeling Whiskey Distillery is only a short walk from their offices. So much choice for lunching out, so few hours in the working day.
Even if they get barred from these establishments, because stuff happens on tours; then the Teeling Whiskey Distillery is only a short walk from their offices. So much choice for lunching out, so few hours in the working day.
Last edited:
Yes, that's why the quiz contains numerous errors.
The Law Book, however, contains the Law. When they write in the Law Book that a player off his feet cannot play the ball, that becomes the Law....
menace
Referees in Australia
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2009
- Messages
- 3,657
- Post Likes
- 633
- Current Referee grade:
- Level 2
Both.
It's just as much about interpretation and application of the 'entire' laws...not just the individual words written on the page.
You think 13.3 trumps 21.10....the majority don't.
It's ok to be wrong. :wink:
but I don't -- the two Laws work beautifully together - you can score a try from TIG but only when you are on your feet
Consider a parallel example : what are the requirements for making a tackle ?
[LAWS]REQUIREMENTS FOR A TACKLE
14.1 For a tackle to occur, the ball-carrier is held and brought to ground by one or more opponents.
14.2 Being brought to ground means that the ball-carrier is lying, sitting or has at least one knee on the ground or on another player who is on the ground.
14.3 Being held means that a tackler must continue holding the ball-carrier until the ball-carrier is on the ground.[/LAWS]
Note it doesn't say anything about having to be on your feet. So can you make a tackle from the floor? Yes ?
No, because of 13.3
[LAWS]A player on the ground without the ball is out of the game and must:
Allow opponents who are not on the ground to play or gain possession of the ball.
Not play the ball.
Not tackle or attempt to tackle an opponent.[/LAWS]
It's the same thing
Players on their feet can play the ball and make tackles
Players off their feet can not play the ball and cannot make tackles