Thow to avoid touch

[Ian_Cook]

Just watching the Shute Shield match this afternoon, Randwick (Green) v Easts (Blue).

Green 15 (Lachie Anderson) receives an inside pass from Green 11 (Reece Robinson) just inside the left hand touchline. Green 11 fell into touch, and because of the direction Green 15 was going when he received the pass, he cannot avoid going into touch also. However, before he touches the touchline (and before the ball crosses the plane) he throws the ball up and inside, regains his balance, runs back infield and catches his own pass a la Brian O'Driscoll, and scores in the left wing corner. The try is disallowed; the referee rules he was in touch.

The question I ask is why?

1. The player was not holding or in contact with the ball when he went into touch.
2. The ball never crossed the plane of touch
3. We now have a Law that says a player does not have to land in the field of play after playing the ball.

So, what makes the ball in touch?

 

[ChuckieB]

A belief that throwing to himself, backwards presumably, constitutes possession (in the context of the way the they now define bringing the ball under control constitutes possession) and by hitting touch, he is in then deemed in touch with possession?

Not it a fan myself , a la Ben Foden for Northampton knocking the ball up meaning he was in possession and so could be tackled.

if this is an example of them wanting to keep the ball in play and is a correct decision, it has backfired.

 

[damo]

Just watching the Shute Shield match this afternoon, Randwick (Green) v Easts (Blue).

Green 15 (Lachie Anderson) receives an inside pass from Green 11 (Reece Robinson) just inside the left hand touchline. Green 11 fell into touch, and because of the direction Green 15 was going when he received the pass, he cannot avoid going into touch also. However, before he touches the touchline (and before the ball crosses the plane) he throws the ball up and inside, regains his balance, runs back infield and catches his own pass a la Brian O'Driscoll, and scores in the left wing corner. The try is disallowed; the referee rules he was in touch.

The question I ask is why?

1. The player was not holding or in contact with the ball when he went into touch.
2. The ball never crossed the plane of touch
3. We now have a Law that says a player does not have to land in the field of play after playing the ball.

So, what makes the ball in touch?

Where were you watching the Shute Shield? When I lived in Sydney I went to a few games at Gordon. Is it streamed somewhere?

Anyway, it seems to me that the ref was probably applying the following law amendment:

[FONT=fs_blakeregular]A player who is attempting to bring the ball under control is deemed to be in possession of the ball.


[/FONT]

 

[beckett50]

Brain f*rt

 

[ChuckieB]

Brain f*rt

I'd prefer that analogy.

 

[Ian_Cook]

Where were you watching the Shute Shield? When I lived in Sydney I went to a few games at Gordon. Is it streamed somewhere?

The Rugby Channel on Sky TV has been having the 3pm AEST Saturday match live every weekend at 5pm since the first round at the beginning of this month. Next Saturday its Eastwood v West Harbour but its delayed to 6:30 because the there is live coverage of the Schools 1st XV matches

I've enjoyed watching it. It seems very grassroots like, and the standard is pretty good... not quite up to NPC, but about on a par with NZ Premier grade Club rugby in the bigger cities.

Anyway, it seems to me that the ref was probably applying the following law amendment:

[FONT=fs_blakeregular]A player who is attempting to bring the ball under control is deemed to be in possession of the ball.


[/FONT]

I guess that is probably the right answer.

 

[OB..]

I remember watching Marcus Rose, England full back in the 1980s, running to collect a kick close to the touchline, but having the quick wits to put the ball down in the field of play before his momentum took him into touch. He had time to return and pick it up again before any opponents arrived.

I strongly agree that for the purposes of a tackle, trying to retain possession is sufficient, but I do not see the need to extend that idea to this situation.