TJ error

[ChrisR]

From a PK Blue kick to touch. Red reaches into touch and catches the ball. Touch judge (not an AR) puts up the flag. Red protests that he had both feet in the FOP.
Your view is from 30m and somewhat obscured by Red players. You ask the TJ: "Was either foot in touch?" and the TJ replies: "No, Sir, his feet were not in touch but the ball crossed the line".

How would you restart?

 

[crossref]

[LAWS]20.4.d
(d) Scrum after any other stoppage. After any other stoppage or irregularity not covered by Law, the team that was moving forward before the stoppage throws in the ball. If neither team was moving forward, the attacking team throws in the ball[/LAWS]

who was moving forward?

- blue kicked it (presumably forward) so arguably they were moving forward.
- but I think it would be lacking in empathy to give a blue scrum

At the moment play was wrongly stopped by the TJ, red had the ball, so I'd give scrum to red, 5m in

 

[didds]

From a PK Blue kick to touch. Red reaches into touch and catches the ball. Touch judge (not an AR) puts up the flag. Red protests that he had both feet in the FOP.
Your view is from 30m and somewhat obscured by Red players. You ask the TJ: "Was either foot in touch?" and the TJ replies: "No, Sir, his feet were not in touch but the ball crossed the line".

How would you restart?

scrum to red. they were denied the opportunity to attack mthrough an error.

didds

 

[DocY]

Scrum to red - they were in possession when you blew your whistle. Maybe not strictly by the book, but it's the only fair thing to do.

 

[Pegleg]

Red Scrum.

 

[beckett50]

Level of the game?

The only reason I ask is that there is an argument - Equity - that the kick is taken again.

 

[Dickie E]

I wouldn't have asked the TJ. "Flag up, lads, lineout Blue"

 

[Andrew1974]

I wouldn't have asked the TJ. "Flag up, lads, lineout Blue"

I've only ever refereed with volunteers running touch to 'help'. I would always do this...flag up..in touch..move on.

why ask, just makes your life difficult

 

[Nigib]

I wouldn't have asked the TJ. "Flag up, lads, lineout Blue"

Agree. You can check with the TJ if you think there's something amiss, or overrule if you are sure of what you've seen, but if you consult the TJ when a player objects you risk losing authority.

 

[ChrisR]

Agree. You can check with the TJ if you think there's something amiss, or overrule if you are sure of what you've seen, but if you consult the TJ when a player objects you risk losing authority.

You lose authority when you fail to correct a mistake, yours or the TJs.

 

[crossref]

Agree. You can check with the TJ if you think there's something amiss, or overrule if you are sure of what you've seen, but if you consult the TJ when a player objects you risk losing authority.

touch can be very complicated (all those different scenarios of players jumping from one side of the line to the other cathching and knocking balls that have / haven't crossed the plane of touch)

In one of those scenarios if the player is saying 'I don't think the TJ applied the Law correctly' I don't see a problem of talking to the TJ about what he saw, and then make the ruling appropriately. I don't think the TJ would feel at all undermined.

If a player is just questioning a TJ's view of the facts : eg TJ thought foot touched the line, player thought it didn't, then I wouldn't allow a player to question that - just go with TJ.

 

[ChrisR]

In one of those scenarios if the player is saying 'I don't think the TJ applied the Law correctly' I don't see a problem of talking to the TJ about what he saw, and then make the ruling appropriately. I don't think the TJ would feel at all undermined.

If a player is just questioning a TJ's view of the facts : eg TJ thought foot touched the line, player thought it didn't, then I wouldn't allow a player to question that - just go with TJ.

This ^^^^^

 

[Pinky]

I have on occasion asked a TJ if the ball bounced directly in touch - they may not have been aware that it was kicked from outside the 22.