[Law] Quiz # 7 (of 10)

menace


Referees in Australia
Joined
Nov 20, 2009
Messages
3,657
Post Likes
633
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
Oh yes it is (in touch)

Touch or touch-in-goal

The ball is in touch or touch-in-goal when:
a. The ball or ball-carrier touches the touchline, touch-in-goal line or
anything beyond.

I bit ridiculous, but remember this is rugby not brain surgery. It is intentionally absurd. Trying to make sense of it is a fool's endeavor


Yes the ball is dead, why is it dead? the ball has touched anything beyond


Ain't it great, comedy. Alas we our again its (rugby) fools

Except for the bird that just sh@t on the ball out of the ruck and the #9 box kicks him up the arse.(over field of play)...he's not touching anything beyond or in touch???

Plus if a ball.is already dead at the moment it hits that object...it doesn't matter what happened next even if it does go across.plane of touch. Can a ball be dead twice???
 
Last edited:

menace


Referees in Australia
Joined
Nov 20, 2009
Messages
3,657
Post Likes
633
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
An interesting follow up to this question is scenarios such as

Red kick long for touch , the ball travels 40m upfield and just inside the touchline it makes a glancing contact with the spider cam , and continues into touch .

Decision ?

(a clue - this law is not properly thought through )

Same as before...scrum..kickers feed. 5m line adjacent where it hit the drone .
But in fairness i would probably set the scrum from where the kick was. Equity and all that. Seems unfair for kicker to get gain in ground and feed. Seems enough that kicking team retains possession (and hope like hell they dont have a weak scrum!)
 

Not Kurt Weaver


Referees in America
Joined
Sep 11, 2008
Messages
2,292
Post Likes
159
Except for the bird that just sh@t on the ball out of the ruck and the #9 box kicks him up the arse.(over field of play)...he's not touching anything beyond or in touch???

Plus if a ball.is already dead at the moment it hits that object...it doesn't matter what happened next even if it does go across.plane of touch. Can a ball be dead twice???

It is only dead once, when it hit the object beyond touch. in this case a camera suspended to wire connected beyond touch, no need to cross the plane

your bird example would be a scrum to the bird's opponent, the attacking team, or team last in possession or RPS
 

menace


Referees in Australia
Joined
Nov 20, 2009
Messages
3,657
Post Likes
633
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
Yes...i see what you mean...the hip bone is connected to the thigh bone , connected to the leg bone, connected to the foot bone...and the foot is in touch!!!:hap:
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,824
Post Likes
3,159
I think notion that 6.9.f isn't meant to cover the spider cam is far fetched , to say the least.
I am sure that 6.9.f was invented specially BECAUSE of the spider cam .. they have become ubiquitous and it suddenly occurred to WR that one day the ball will hit one, and they should have a Law to cover it
 

Not Kurt Weaver


Referees in America
Joined
Sep 11, 2008
Messages
2,292
Post Likes
159
I think notion that 6.9.f isn't meant to cover the spider cam is far fetched , to say the least.
I am sure that 6.9.f was invented specially BECAUSE of the spider cam .. they have become ubiquitous and it suddenly occurred to WR that one day the ball will hit one, and they should have a Law to cover it

good point, but yet they (from above quote) did not include a specific sanction
 

OB..


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
22,981
Post Likes
1,838
I think notion that 6.9.f isn't meant to cover the spider cam is far fetched , to say the least.
I am sure that 6.9.f was invented specially BECAUSE of the spider cam .. they have become ubiquitous and it suddenly occurred to WR that one day the ball will hit one, and they should have a Law to cover it
It has already happened.

2009 Wales v France
One of the most bizarre incidents to have happened on a pitch then unfolded, scrum-half Mike Phillips' kick hitting the overhead camera, albeit without any direct impact on the contest.
Referee was Mark Lawrence.

2016 Australia v England
Wallabies coach Michael Cheika's dissatisfaction over the officiating in his team's 3-0 series defeat by England has hit overdrive after the referee failed to intervene when the ball hit an overhead camera wire.
Referee Nigel Owens https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-26/wallabies-michael-cheika-cry-foul-england-spidercam/7544234

In the 2017 book, "dead" was only defined in the Definitions[LAws]Dead: The ball is out of play. This happens when the ball has gone outside the playing area and remained there, or when the referee has blown the whistle to indicate a stoppage in play, or when a conversion kick has been taken.[/LAws]
There was nothing in Law 6.

2019 [LAWS]Dead: The ball is dead when the referee blows the whistle to stop play or following an unsuccessful conversion.[/LAWS]
The link in the on-line version takes you to a list of places where the word "dead" is used in the laws. (Why else would you look in Law 6?)

6.9 (f) does not say what should happen, but since the ball is now dead, presumably we cannot just play on.

Scrum? 19.1 [LAWS]The referee awards a scrum for any other reason not covered in law[/LAWS] on the basis that the consequence is not covered even though the reason is.

Free Kick? 20.1 requires an infringement.
"While the ball is dead"? Maybe.
"Any infringement that takes place outside the playing area while the ball is in play"? The ball is outside the playing area, but no longer in play.
 
Last edited:

Not Kurt Weaver


Referees in America
Joined
Sep 11, 2008
Messages
2,292
Post Likes
159
White are losing by one point with two minutes to go, when black give away a PK on the half way line.

Let me reanswer to OP. Lineout to black on halfway, same touchline as sidemost from where was kicked.

Yes. It's not an infringement. The ball is just dead

Yep it is not an infringement, well maybe it is. I agree the ball is dead upon hitting overhead.

Well i know it is a far, far, far reach. But there is a law that does kinda indicate that it is dead because it is in touch. It did touch anything beyond the touchline. A tree branch or a spectator reaching for the ball whilst over the field would result in a l/o. This is not vastly different especially when this offers a way to restart the dead ball. 6.9f does not offer a restart. TBH with the feeds that take place, a l/o is just as equitable as a scrum. A l/o is not an unreasonable form of restart.

Now as to the possible infringement. The PK kicker used a place kick that, by my far, far, far reach went directly to touch. Directly to touch from a PK would normally be a white throw, however it wasn't kick as per.

Now to add further folly to the foolishness of rugby law. We have to define overhead. Is a player with his arms raised actually putting his hands in this overhead status.

I could go on. Making sense of this folly is part of the game.

"We are all prisoners here of our on device." Glenn Frey, I believe, circa 5th grade so 1975 ish

This was brilliant question. Thought provoking for some and a real strain of decency for others. Pure gold for me.

"Remember boys, we all think we know what we are doing, but really ain't a one of us has a clue" NKW circa 2019
 
Last edited:

Not Kurt Weaver


Referees in America
Joined
Sep 11, 2008
Messages
2,292
Post Likes
159
Now to add further folly to the foolishness of rugby law. We have to define overhead. Is a player with his arms raised actually putting his hands in this overhead status.

9

This line is a total f up on my part

Oh my it is worse than I thought. The law has the the ball hitting anything above playing area.

Geez players are above the playing area. A player jumping would definitely be above the playing area. A player lifted in the l/o is above the playing area. How are we going to restart these dead ball events.

Does WR have any editors on staff?

Is NKW drinking again?
 

OB..


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
22,981
Post Likes
1,838
Can we agree that "anything" is not the same as "anyone"? Then all we have to do is exclude the ball from our (a)musings. That can achieved by noting that the ball cannot hit itself.
 

Not Kurt Weaver


Referees in America
Joined
Sep 11, 2008
Messages
2,292
Post Likes
159
Can we agree that "anything" is not the same as "anyone"? Then all we have to do is exclude the ball from our (a)musings. That can achieved by noting that the ball cannot hit itself.

Yes we can agree

Anything includes anyone. A human is a thing.

Anyone does not include anything. Anyone requires human being.

this rugby law is evident:

The ball or ball-carrier touches the touchline, touch-in-goal line or anything beyond.

If the ball touches a human beyond the touch line it is in touch as well. There is an exception that a player (anyone and an anything) to knock the ball to remain in play with specific criteria.
 
Top