[Law] Question from World Rugby law quiz

[menace]

There is no doubt you make a compelling case for your interpretation.

But like other parts of the laws there's exceptions....I see.21.10 as an exception. It was an exception in the old laws for playing the ball while player in touch so that the ball is not in touch! And an exception to scoring/touchdown while in touch.

 

[SimonSmith]

Can I ask when the last time anyone saw this happen and had to pass judgement?

 

[crossref]

Can I ask when the last time anyone saw this happen and had to pass judgement?

So far as I am aware it has never happened ! epper:

 

[menace]

Can I ask when the last time anyone saw this happen and had to pass judgement?

Closest I have had a couple of years ago is a chase as player overran his own long kick ball as it bounced at right angles near try line and he slipped over trying to change direction and slide and feet were well into touch...ball then rolled towards him and before support players arrive he reached out and touched ball down. I awarded the Try.

(and yes CR I would award it today too)

 

[crossref]

Closest I have had a couple of years ago is a chase as player overran his own long kick ball as it bounced at right angles near try line and he slipped over trying to change direction and slide and feet were well into touch...ball then rolled towards him and before support players arrive he reached out and touched ball down. I awarded the Try.

(and yes CR I would award it today too)

I would as well!

As you describe it I would give him the benefit of the doubt and judge that he went to ground in order to play the ball (which is OK 13.1) .

It doesn't sound like a 13.3 scenario which deals with player already on the ground when the ball happens to come to him


(The TIG bit is really a red herring , we can have exactly the same debate about a player in goal))

 

[menace]

I would as well!

As you describe it I would give him the benefit of the doubt and judge that he went to ground in order to play the ball (which is OK 13.1) .

It doesn't sound like a 13.3 scenario which deals with player already on the ground when the ball happens to come to him

But technically he was on the ground before the ball came to him! He didn't go to ground to get the ball...overran the bouncing ball then slipped then the ball rolled to him.

 

[crossref]

But technically he was on the ground before the ball came to him! He didn't go to ground to get the ball...overran the bouncing ball then slipped then the ball rolled to him.

Well perhaps we are within one of those a grey areaa.. was it a 13.1 scenario or a 13.3 scenario ?
I wasn't there so I don't know , but from your description it sounds to me like it was a13.1 scenario

I

 

[menace]

Well perhaps we are within one of those a grey areaa.. was it a 13.1 scenario or a 13.3 scenario ?
I wasn't there so I don't know , but from your description it sounds to me like it was a13.1 scenario

I

you tell me - what's your distinction assessing between the two?

is there a time, distance or player intention difference?

 

[crossref]

you tell me - what's your distinction?

The law book makes the distinction ..
13.1 is someone going to ground to play the ball (and when you do this your options are limited)
13.3 is someone on the ground already when the ball comes near

It's just like a tackle

Red attempts to tackle Blue, gets a good grasp, but Blue is strong and Red ends up with his knees on the floor . Does he have to let go ? No. Can he hang on and complete the tackle from a kneeling position ? , yes.

Red is kneeling on the ground as blue happens to run past , can he tackle him ? No

 

[didds]

What is it with rugby refs, that people wont beleive what's written in the Law Book unless they have also had an email about it

I think the answer to that is demonstrated in this very thread. People have read the law book because they are quoting it.

And quoting it to come up with radically differing interpretations.

Hence my own confusion because I come here as much as anything to try and keep up with laws. interpretations etc to aid me in coaching players "legally" etc. Five years ago I felt I had a decent enough grasp of what I needed to know to help them. These days I'm increasingly confused. Here is just yet another example. Hey ho!

didds