[In-goal] Try yes/no - DBL

[winchesterref]

Afternoon all

Yesterday during my match I had this scenario.

Attacking team (BLUE) vs defending team (BLACK).

BLUE line break from halfway up to 3-4m out from the try line, before a cynical BLACK offside earns a penalty advantage*. BLUE recycle the ball, pass the ball out, and the BLUE 10 puts up a high kick into in goal towards the far corner.

The ball bounces in-goal, and as the on-side BLUE winger chases he jumps from inside the in-goal area, whilst in the air he knocks the ball back, and then lands on his feet beyond the DBL.

Another following up BLUE player gathers the ball and grounds it.

*This was after a team warning, and would have earned a YC, either through repetition/deliberate foul anyway

Questions for any readers:

1. What did I have to consider in terms of:
a) The ball
b) The DBL
c) The player (landing)?

2. I'm on my own, no luxury of ARs or TMO (surprisingly), so where's my running line, where do I want to get to?
(Starting position was approximately 10m in from right hand touchline, 5m out from try line - looking into open field)

3. What would you have done: try yes or no? (based on your answers to Qu 1)

4. If a try is awarded, do you go back and give the YC too?

I'll give what I did and what I considered later.

 

[ChuckieB]

Check out the law 19 law clarification as the first port of call. From what I seem to remember, it has pretty much the perfect example of what is to be applied in NH from July. I don't think it is new. I think it just confirms what we already thought?

The yellow card is a separate question.

 

[Taff]

Right. I'll have a bash. :biggrin:

• BLUE 10 puts up a high kick into in goal towards the far corner. So far - so good.
• The ball bounces in-goal - we're still good.
• and as the on-side BLUE winger chases he jumps from inside the in-goal area - we're still good.
• whilst in the air he knocks the ball back, and then lands on his feet beyond the DBL. - I would say where he lands is irrelevant - as he tapped it back
  
• Another following up BLUE player gathers the ball and grounds it. - Try.

Unless I'm missing something, I can't see any issues.

 

[Camquin]

I would say even if he was in toch /over the dbl a player can knock the ball back and it is play on - so try.
Would the try have been scored in a better place but for the repeated foul play - if s were you heading for the posts?

 

[ChuckieB]

Check out the law 19 law clarification as the first port of call. From what I seem to remember, it has pretty much the perfect example of what is to be applied in NH from July. I don't think it is new. I think it just confirms what we already thought?

The yellow card is a separate question.

from the clarification:

https://youtu.be/TSCC9iHV7cM[FONT=fs_blakeregular] = Try
[/FONT]

 

[chbg]

Law 19 does not apply to the DB Line, however if you want to apply its principles/definitions to the DB Line, then knocking the ball (not forwards) with no part of the body touching the ground on or behind DB Line is play on. This NH season it does not matter whether the ball has crossed the plane of the DB Line.

I hope that you awarded the Try.

And gave a YC to the Black defender for intentional offending (from your description of 'cynical' I assume that it was a high enough level of game that a YC was warranted). The Try outcome should not have a bearing.

 

[ChuckieB]

Law 19 does not apply to the DB Line, however if you want to apply its principles/definitions to the DB Line, then knocking the ball (not forwards) with no part of the body touching the ground on or behind DB Line is play on. This NH season it does not matter whether the ball has crossed the plane of the DB Line.

I hope that you awarded the Try.

And gave a YC to the Black defender for intentional offending (from your description of 'cynical' I assume that it was a high enough level of game that a YC was warranted). The Try outcome should not have a bearing.

As I stated, it will apply for us in NH from July and by virtue of this specific example being specifically referenced in the Law 19 clarification, it is deemed incorporated by reference. Unless things work differently in rugby world of course?

While it might not apply to us yet, it serves to cement an understanding on something we are likely to have applied in this instance anyway, i.e. It's a try.

 

[VM75]

Afternoon all

Yesterday during my match I had this scenario.

Attacking team (BLUE) vs defending team (BLACK).

BLUE line break from halfway up to 3-4m out from the try line, before a cynical BLACK offside earns a penalty advantage*. BLUE recycle the ball, pass the ball out, and the BLUE 10 puts up a high kick into in goal towards the far corner.

The ball bounces in-goal, and as the on-side BLUE winger chases he jumps from inside the in-goal area, whilst in the air he knocks the ball back, and then lands on his feet beyond the DBL.

Another following up BLUE player gathers the ball and grounds it.

*This was after a team warning, and would have earned a YC, either through repetition/deliberate foul anyway

Questions for any readers:

1. What did I have to consider in terms of:
a) The ball -
b) The DBL -
c) The player (landing)?

2. I'm on my own, no luxury of ARs or TMO (surprisingly), so where's my running line, where do I want to get to?
(Starting position was approximately 10m in from right hand touchline, 5m out from try line - looking into open field) able vantage point

3. What would you have done:

4. If a try is awarded, do you go back and give the YC too?

I'll give what I did and what I considered later.

1. What did I have to consider in terms of:
a) The ball - only did it land outside the FoP or DBArea
b) The DBL -
c) The player (landing)?
In previous years I would have said that provided the blue player was 51% within the DBArea when he knocked the ball back then irrespective of landing outside the playing area then everything's good & play on, & if he was 51% over the line then it's dead.

Nowadays - I'd simply reward any brilliant athleticism [from a bonafide participant player] that stops the ball hitting the ground outside the FoP, can't see a downside for doing so.

2. I'm on my own, no luxury of ARs or TMO (surprisingly), so where's my running line, where do I want to get to?
(Starting position was approximately 10m in from right hand touchline, 5m out from try line - looking into open field) able vantage point The best possible viewing angle as your athleticism permits !

3. What would you have done: TRY

4. If a try is awarded, do you go back and give the YC too? YES - always, the inability to prevent a try doesn't negate his attempt at doing so!

 

[winchesterref]

Whoops - forgot to update this, been busy
1. What did I have to consider in terms of:
a) The ball - As per chbg and VM75
b) The DBL - only where was the attacking player
c) The player (landing)? irrelevant

2. I'm on my own, no luxury of ARs or TMO (surprisingly), so where's my running line, where do I want to get to?
(Starting position was approximately 10m in from right hand touchline, 5m out from try line - looking into open field)
I aimed for DBL as close to the action as possible, clear line of vision and good position to judge Qu1

3. What would you have done: try yes or no? (based on your answers to Qu 1) Try

4. If a try is awarded, do you go back and give the YC too? Didn't, but should have - I did 1-3 right, but was impressed with the score and got carried away. It was a point of reflection immediately post match, and I made a mental note to follow up next time

Happy to take any other considerations or alternative views I might have missed?

 

[Pinky]

For me this season there is the question of whether the ball was over the plane of the DBL when it was knocked back by the blue winger. If it was, then he needs to land in the in goal to have kept the ball in play. On that basis, your idea to get to the dbl as fast as possible is correct so as to decide on whether the ball was over the plane of the dbl and thus dead.

Next season it changes and I haven't got my mind round it yet - hopefully the Australians will update "line ball your call" and keep us all right.

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

I posed this question several years ago and the overwhelming response was TRY and "NKW is a nit wit" . I also asked SArefs Duty Ref and response was a try.

I'd have to review my argument against the TRY, But I used the following alternative thoughts.
1. A ball merely crossing the DBL is dead. An arcahic thought but supported by law.
2. A ball crossing the DBL and batted back in toward the opponents DBL is actually by law a knock on. A perversion a way game is played.
3. Touch laws and Touch in goal laws do not apply to area beyond DBL as defined in a figure of the plan. A pedantic view of a lawbook oversight.

As I recall OB presented a RL video clip that the TRY was awarded, recently there was a union video of such a play with try awarded.

I will search this site for those clips, All award the TRY, none have considered any of my arguments as valid.

 

[leaguerefaus]

Here's the RL one NKW - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rN1JN5K-tQs

 

[Phil E]

I'd have to review my argument against the TRY, But I used the following alternative thoughts.
1. A ball merely crossing the DBL is dead. An arcahic thought but supported by law.
2. A ball crossing the DBL and batted back in toward the opponents DBL is actually by law a knock on. A perversion a way game is played.
3. Touch laws and Touch in goal laws do not apply to area beyond DBL as defined in a figure of the plan. A pedantic view of a lawbook oversight.

1. Not until it touches something. If it crosses the dbl in the air and is blown back we would play on.
2. Only if it's a defender that knocks it back.
3. Yes they do. There was a clarification on this some years ago that touch, tig and dbl are all to be treated the same.
4. You're still a nit wit :wink:

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

4. You're still a nit wit :wink:

5. You could serve as a Big Bird impersonator.

 

[didds]

1. Not until it touches something. If it crosses the dbl in the air and is blown back we would play on.
2. Only if it's a defender that knocks it back.
3. Yes they do. There was a clarification on this some years ago that touch, tig and dbl are all to be treated the same.
4. You're still a nit wit :wink:

i presume the nuance of 2 is that an attacker knocking this ball "backwards" is actually propelling this ball TOWARDS the opposition DBL which is now "behind him"

didds

 

[Taff]

i presume the nuance of 2 is that an attacker knocking this ball "backwards" is actually propelling this ball TOWARDS the opposition DBL which is now "behind him"

I see your point, but I think that's stretching things a bit Didds. :biggrin:

 

[ChuckieB]

i presume the nuance of 2 is that an attacker knocking this ball "backwards" is actually propelling this ball TOWARDS the opposition DBL which is now "behind him"

didds

Not a nuance as such if we think of it as, an attacker is always able to play the ball behind him in relation to his direction of travel from his own goal line.

The fact that it is being talked about in relation to the opponents DBL perhaps just serves to make us think a bit more.

 

[didds]

I see your point, but I think that's stretching things a bit Didds. :biggrin:

and I would 100% agree! I was merely trying to explain what I thought was meant by the somewhat left field claim

didds

 

[OB..]

i presume the nuance of 2 is that an attacker knocking this ball "backwards" is actually propelling this ball TOWARDS the opposition DBL which is now "behind him"

didds

In 1871 the definition was[LAWS]Knocking on i e deliberately hitting the ball with the hand and Throwing Forward ie throwing the ball in the direction of the opponents' goal line are not lawful. [/LAWS]
In 1883 "deliberately" was removed, and at one stage "goal line" became "in goal", but it was not until the 1926 re-write that it was changed to "dead ball line".

As for an attacker beyond the dead ball line nowadays, it is a clear case for common sense over pedantry.

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

an attacker is always able to play the ball behind him in relation to his direction of travel from his own goal line.

Not always.