[Law] Quiz #7 tackle in goal

[crossref]

Same as usual .. quick answer , A or B

I will come back later and suggest an answer and then you can tell me how it was different in the old days ..

Here we go ..

Blue 11 carries the ball into his own in goal and attempts to run it back

Still inside the in goal he is tackled by Red 7 and both players hit the deck heavily .

The ball spills loose, in the direction of the goal line, and Red 7 , still on the floor, rolls over, reaches out and grounds the ball.

A Try
B PK to Blue

 

[Taff]

A. Try.

 

[Flish]

Try, in that no obvious reason not too.

 

[Rich_NL]

A. But I feel far more certain of it than my knowledge of the laws can justify, so I suspect a trick.

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

I will come back later and suggest an answer and then you can tell me how it was different in the old days ..

Well played, always know ur audience

A, unless Red 7 is in touch or touch in goal.

 

[SimonSmith]

The "tackle" happens in-goal, so doesn't meet the criteria of a tackle in law.
Does that leave Red as a player on the ground in open play?

I'd award the try, I think, because I'm not sure that this is covered in law, and so I'm betting with the attacking team.

 

[tewdric]

Blue seems to have lost the ball forward (towards the goal line from behind the goal line) so initial sanction is scrum 5 red although, assuming advantage applies in-goal I cant see a reason not to give the try.

 

[Dickie E]

Law 13 might provide the fly for this ointment:
[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.
Sanction: Penalty.
[/LAWS]

although if a player on the ground in TiG can reach out to score, surely a player in-goal can too.

 

[didds]

the OP doesnt specifically say so but potentially blue grounded the ball when brought to ground prior to losing the ball towards red's DBL ? so 5m scrum.

Otherwise try.

didds

 

[Flish]

the OP doesnt specifically say so but potentially blue grounded the ball when brought to ground prior to lofing the ball towards red's DBL ? so %m scrum.

Otherwise try.

didds

Considered the grounding (thinking Wasps vs Saints) but not clear, and correct about the knock on but wasn't an option. If nothing else try as I can't think of a reason to award a penalty. Closest I can get is playing the ball on the ground, but it is red preventing
blue from playing it (who is also not on feet?)?

Still sounds like a try

 

[crossref]

For clarity . The ball wasn't grounded in the tackle , it was knocked loose / lost forward from the ball carrier

 

[didds]

For clarity . The ball wasn't grounded in the tackle , it was knocked loose / lost forward from the ball carrier

Then it's try.

didds

 

[Jz558]

I would award the try because I believe that is what would be expected and I suspect I can sell the decision more easily than explaining that as Red 7 was on the ground he was out of the game and not entitled to play the ball until he regained his feet. That said, if that scenario was replayed in the field of play and 7 gathered the ball in similar circumstances I would penalise him. Double standards I appreciate. In an attempt at justification - without the absolute backing of the laws though in one scenario I am rewarding positive play whilst in the other I am de-incentivising negative play.

 

[didds]

I missed the "rolls over" bit.

Hmmm.

nah, award the try. works for me.

didds

 

[Jz558]

Whilst not wanting to sidetrack too much, a more interesting scenario would be if the defender in this scenario rolled over and touched down ahead of the attacker. Would you give the 5m scrum to Red, a penalty to Blue or a penalty try on the basis that the nearest player to the Blue defender was Red 7 who only needed to regain his feet to score the try?

 

[crossref]

Bingo ...if you are going to allow one of the players to roll along the ground and touch the ball down , then both of them must be allowed to do it....

Either they both can, or neither .. so now see Law 13

 

[Taff]

... although if a player on the ground in TiG can reach out to score, surely a player in-goal can too.

Genuine question, but can a player on the ground in TiG reach out to score?

I know a player on his feet but over TiG or the DBL can score by dabbing the ball down, but off his feet? :chin:

 

[Jz558]

I guess that if the dynamics of the situation were such that I could persuade myself that either player touching down was part of the same fluid movement as the tackle, even though they technically hadn't regained their feet before playing the ball I'd be satisfied with that. In the case where both were scrabbling round to find the ball which had been lost in the tackle and then crawling or rolling towards it before touching down I would be likely to use Law 13 to justify a sanction against either player.

 

[crossref]

In this scenario, oddly enough , he had to roll over to reach the ball .. so PK ?

 

[Rich_NL]

Since we're looking at the laws in detail, 7.2.c - knock-on advantage over, go back for red scrum 5?