Ruck / Maul in touch

[Pegleg]

The law you quote cover what to do if the ball is in touch and there is doubt as to who gets the throw. I am covering the situation where two player have their hands on it how do you dicide who the ball carrier is and therefore is the ball in touch or not.

I would argue that the original ball carrier must be consider to be that person UNTIL they lose possession to another player. I am prepare to be corrected.

So If white and black have hold of the ball but only one is in touch we have to decide if the one in touch IS the ball carrier or not. Or do we go with two ball carriers?

If we assume both are the ball carrier the one in touch is the relevant one here. So the law you quote does not apply.

 

[chbg]

Or do we go with two ball carriers?

If both have "hold" of the ball (a word used in Law 19 Definitions) then why not? Three or four if appropriate to the situation. It is the one who is in Touch who causes it to be in touch.

So the law you quote does not apply.

I thought that I said "extrapolate from".

 

[Pegleg]

You can't extrapolate from a situation to an untrelated one. Your law refers to a ball in touch. The question here is "is the ball in touch?". that they are both regarding touch does not automatically allow an extrapolation.

So moving on to the issue of one or more ball carriers, let's consider the in goal situation:


White carries the ball into Red's in goal. As white goes to ground Red gets both hands on the ball. The ball is grounded. What is your call?

A)Try

B) Minored by Red = 22 drop out

C) Doubt about grounding = scrum attacking ball (White)

D) No doubt about grounding (neither side was first to ground the ball) but ball not held up = Scrum after any other stoppage not covered in law So side going forward or attacking side (White)

 

[chbg]

New thread please Mods.

It depends on what I (or possibly an AR) saw, since I am fortunate enough never to have a TMO. I cannot recall an attacker retaining control of the ball having a grounding disallowed at any level. We frequently have to judge occasions when the ball is grounded (or not) by a mass of hands. But if you wish to suggest that both White and Red had full control of the ball off the ground, such as can be found in a maul that is being 'suffocated' by the defence, then there may well be "doubt about which team first grounded the ball" for which the remedy is an attacking 5m scrum (Law 22.15).

Law 22 doesn't actually address a doubt as to whether the ball was grounded or not. But if grounding is not clear and obvious then it is judged that the ball has been held up (22.10).

 

[Pegleg]

This is getting a waste of time. I'll leave it here.