[6N] Tmo farce

[Flish]

Is “ground” (the verb) defined in the 2018 Laws? I couldn’t find it with a quick look. I think it’s feasible to say that some people watching the footage would doubt whether there was downward pressure, or whether the ball was in the process of bouncing up and towards the dead ball line at the point when the Welsh hand touched it.

I don’t agree with that, but since it was the first TMO question, I can understand the doubt if that was the TMO’s thought process.

[FONT=fs_blakeregular]21 In-goal

• GROUNDING THE BALL
  
  
  
  Grounding the ball​
• The ball can be grounded in in-goal:
  • By holding it and touching the ground with it; or
  • By pressing down on it with a hand or hands, arm or arms, or the front of the player’s body from waist to neck.

[/FONT]

 

[Flish]

I have to admit I thought that there was a law variation or guidance that the ball had to be ‘under control’, now, and that merely touching a blade of grass wasn’t enough, but can’t actually find it (was it one of those internet myths?) and assumed that was what it was disallowed (couldn’t hear), have to say I was expecting it to be given regardless on watching the replays.

In my world without an AR or TMO it would be a try.

 

[didds]

It's a myth about control. It's not cricket which requires control when taking a catch.

Didds

 

[ChuckieB]

In the context of the thought process and the laws I can understand the outcome. If we are debating it here: was it grounded, was it under control,, etc...., it is not that clear and obvious and the outcome via the laws was correct.

I think of those moments when a ball is most probably grounded and yet the ref's view is occluded by a pile of bodies. I know what I think would be a reasonable outcome but the laws don't allow me to give a grounding I can't see.

 

[crossref]

In the context of the thought process and the laws I can understand the outcome. If we are debating it here: was it grounded, was it under control,, etc...., it is not that clear and obvious and the outcome via the laws was correct.

I think of those moments when a ball is most probably grounded and yet the ref's view is occluded by a pile of bodies. I know what I think would be a reasonable outcome but the laws don't allow me to give a grounding I can't see.

but that's what the TMO for !

 

[damo]

I don't think it is a terrible decision, certainly not as bad as some are making out. I can certainly see how a TMO might rule that a knock on by Red. Honestly if I was the TMO I probably say it's a try, but the decision is not an implausible one.

 

[menace]

It's a myth about control. It's not cricket which requires control when taking a catch.

Didds

It's a stupid rugby league requirement.

 

[Christy]

It was a 100% try.
It was a 100% cock up by tmo.

It is a farce .
The rules of grounding a ball are there in black & white for occasions when the ball is on the floor .
It met them loud & clear .

 

[Skids]

I was there too, was confused by TMO call and the apparent lack of diligence taken in the decision and after having watched it on tv this morning still think it was a try.

 

[didds]

Ii watched it again this morning, and note I think it's a knock on!

Lol

Didds

 

[L'irlandais]

epper: Karma?
(Links to discussion thread in archives.)

“Was it the correct ball?” match referee Kaplan asked.
“Yes,” said Peter Allan (AR) when it *patently wasn’t.

*TV replays showed that in taking a quick throw-in, Rees had used a different ball - handed to him by a ball-boy - to the one that Jonny Sexton had sliced into touch, which is against rugby's Law 19.2.

“It does not take the shine off the win. I couldn’t care less.”

And with those words about Mike Phillips’ controversial match-winning try, Warren Gatland spoke for the entire Welsh nation. Source

 

[shnipvanwinkel]

epper: Karma?
(Links to discussion thread in archives.)

Blimey, have the Welsh managed to cause the English and Irish to find common cause?

 

[L'irlandais]

Ask me on March 18th.

 

[Ian_Cook]

Loose ball has to have a player press down on the ball for it to be grounded.

[LAWS]Law 21 GROUNDING THE BALL
1. The ball can be grounded in in-goal:
a. By holding it and touching the ground with it; or
b. By pressing down on it with a hand or hands, arm or arms, or the front of the
player’s body from waist to neck.
[/LAWS]

Even though the Welsh player got there first, I don't think he pressed down on the ball, and the English player did so no try IMO.

ETA; OK, I've just seen another angle I didn't see before. From that angle, it looks like both players grounded the ball together (both had their right hand on the ball when it touched the ground). If that is the case, it is still no try.

[LAWS]Law 21 DOUBT ABOUT GROUNDING
20. If there is doubt about which team first grounded the ball in in-goal, play is restarts with a
five-metre scrum, in line with the place where the ball was grounded. The attacking team
throws in.[/LAWS]

 

[Christy]

Loose ball has to have a player press down on the ball for it to be grounded.

[LAWS]Law 21 GROUNDING THE BALL
1. The ball can be grounded in in-goal:
a. By holding it and touching the ground with it; or
b. By pressing down on it with a hand or hands, arm or arms, or the front of the
player’s body from waist to neck.
[/LAWS]

Even though the Welsh player got there first, I don't think he pressed down on the ball, and the English player did so no try IMO.

ETA; OK, I've just seen another angle I didn't see before. From that angle, it looks like both players grounded the ball together (both had their right hand on the ball when it touched the ground). If that is the case, it is still no try.

[LAWS]Law 21 DOUBT ABOUT GROUNDING
20. If there is doubt about which team first grounded the ball in in-goal, play is restarts with a
five-metre scrum, in line with the place where the ball was grounded. The attacking team
throws in.[/LAWS]

Hi ian .
Your getting closer .
Watch it for a 3rd time & see where wales player got there 1st .

Not that its needed ,,but there is a photo of it , in most papers .
Welsh hand 1st ,,also downward pressure for a bonus = welsh try .

 

[Marc Wakeham]

epper: Karma?
(Links to discussion thread in archives.)

It's a try because that is the call. Karma? Well yes in a sense. However the point comes back to why we have a TMO. Surely that is to get the call right. If it fails to do so then why bother? WE have two decisions reference in your post that were BOTH wrong and the TMO etc failed t oproduce the correction needed. It's ulitmately about the cerdibility of our game.


From what I read, the right result occured yesterday with England being the better team. So no harm done. But we all know, sport is not aboutwhich was the best team it is about the score at the end of the game.

 

[oliver]

In the margins of error we look at, how much contact with a hand would you consider for a knock on?
If a finger can ground the ball can a finger knock on a ball if it otherwise hits a different part of your body?

 

[Taff]

... Even though the Welsh player got there first, I don't think he pressed down on the ball, and the English player did so no try IMO.

That's what I thought at the time. It will be interesting to see the replays later today with a clearer head.

 

[L'irlandais]

It's a try because that is the call. Karma? Well yes in a sense. However the point comes back to why we have a TMO. Surely that is to get the call right. If it fails to do so then why bother? WE have two decisions reference in your post that were BOTH wrong and the TMO etc failed t oproduce the correction needed. It's ulitmately about the cerdibility of our game.


From what I read, the right result occured yesterday with England being the better team. So no harm done. But we all know, sport is not aboutwhich was the best team it is about the score at the end of the game.

Hi Marc,
i should have qualified my statement, it is Karma for the loudmouthed Warren Gatland. It is harder to take for Welsh fans.

To paraphrase Joy Neville «*Mistakes happen; we need to let go of all this perfectionism to start to really enjoy the game.*»

 

[Flish]

So, anywhere else on the pitch it’s a knock on, dived for ball, hand pushes down at an angle and the ball squirts out forward - are we generally agreed on that?

So, for it to be a try it needs to fulfill the pressing down criteria in 21 1b, which is open to interpretation, does ‘pressing down’ exclude the ball squirting out? I would suggest not as there would have to be an element of ‘pressing down’, or do we assume the ‘under control’ myth as a component of pressing down?

Looking again I think he had pressed down, not a lot, but probably a bit so can understand the frustration