quick question

[Browner]

Watch this clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52uEftzABAQ

What is your decision? Who put the ball into touch?

My decision is the catcher did based on the catcher was in the FoP when he took off, caught the ball in mid-air and landed in touch.

The plane of touch? Pure guesswork and taken out of the equation by judging on take-off and landing of the catcher.

I rest my case.

I can see your point, but its easier to see where the feet landed than the exact plane when it was caught. In this case the catcher never touches the FoP so its as if he caught the ball with one foot in touch, the kicker put it there.

The catcher and his teammate were law savvy, as the congrats followed his agile decision.

 

[ChrisR]

So ... if he takes off from FoP but lands in touch you'd deem him to have caught it in touch. OK, not my choice but it's one approach.

Continuing the thought ... if he takes off from FoP, lands it touch but plays the ball back into the FoP before he lands then ...?

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

I refer my learned friends to the thread headed "which laws would you like to change".

Law 19 with reference to touch is a nightmare not least because we tend to use two "untrained" assistants to help administer it.

http://www.rugbyrefs.com/showthread.php?17939-What-law-changes-would-you-like&highlight=Change

I'd bet on any particular Saturday in England 95% of TJs won't have seen a law book, of the 5% who have, 95% of those won't have seen ARULBYC.

There are club touch judges courses run in Yorkshire (and elsewhere I'd guess) I wonder what they'd suggest for the OP scenario?

Given all the above with reference to the OP I'd probably be advised/give a red throw and like PhilE suggests, sell it as such,

 

[ChrisR]

LL-P, what I find interesting about Law 19, specifically touch/not touch rulings of a player in the air, is that one can arrive at very different results based simply how you want to apply the law rather than interpretations.

We've drifted from the OP which I find rather straightforward (attempted catch put the ball into touch) to a player jumping across the PoT as they play the ball. Is it the PoT that matters? Feet position (in the air) as he plays the ball? Where he takes off from? Where he lands?
You can make a case for any of these.

As I've previously stated deadhorse I want a method that doesn't rely on a TJ (biased, ignorant and inattentive)which rules out the PoT as a reference and maximizes the opportunity for the player to keep the ball in play. by skill and athleticism.

This thread may have run its course but I think it raises some larger philosophical issues.

 

[Adam]

My rule of thumb is if they catch the ball then their status is determined by where they land. If they play the ball (e.g. tap) then all that matters is whether the ball has crossed the plane of the touchline.

 

[Browner]

So ... if he takes off from FoP but lands in touch you'd deem him to have caught it in touch. OK, not my choice but it's one approach.

Continuing the thought ... if he takes off from FoP, lands it touch but plays the ball back into the FoP before he lands then ...?

Granted it could do with simplification, but for fun I'll answer your question, and IIULC if 51% of him is beyond the FoP when he releases the ball the the other team took it into touch, if 49% of him is, then he did , I'm certain, I think (Shrug)

If not, or if its exactly 50% I give up and merely award the throw to the less gobshite 9's team !

What I can testify in support, is that a confident explanation will always placate grassroots players who've rarely seen a LoTG let alone LBYC reference guide, but its not able to quell feelings of bemusement when the next call looks very similar but isn't!

Re: OP title
Quick question yes, quick answer? No chance!

 

[ChrisR]

Why don't you just toss a coin? At least the players will get it. Arbitrary calls and then 'selling' it to the players? You seem to have a profound lack of respect for players who deserve better.