[Law] two knock ons

[crossref]

an odd one from Saturday's game

- blue knock on, and ball goes loose, I call advantage,
- the first player to get to the ball is a second blue player (from an onside position, so all OK) who fumbles it, knocking it on into touch
- I blow my whistle
- red player gathers the ball and takes a QTI

Obviously a QTI is a valid option after a knock on directly into touch - but in this scenario ? what do you think play on, or back to the first knock on...

 

[Guyseep]

Go back to the first knock on. As soon as the second blue player picked it up there was no advantaged gained.

 

[beckett50]

Toughie.

In reality one should penalise the offence that is most advantageous to the non-offending team. Counter that with a knock-on into touch being an option call for the captain then your options are limited.

I would call it back unless you spot the that the receiver of the QTI is the Captain )

 

[crossref]

Toughie.

In reality one should penalise the offence that is most advantageous to the non-offending team.

well, that would be the second one, right as it gives them the option to take an unexpected QTI..

 

[DocY]

I'd allow the QTI - assuming you hadn't already blown your whistle for no advantage.

If you can let play continue fairly without blowing your whistle, do so. The non-offending team were clearly happy to play on.

 

[Paule23]

I'd allow the QTI as well, you are playing advantage from the first knock on, I would say the most advantageous position is effectively fee ball from the QTI.

you could decide to bring it back for the scrum as it would most likely be in better field position (from the first knock on), but as long as we're not talking 40m away, I'd probably go with the QTI, and for good measure call advantage over.

 

[Elpablo73]

You backed yourself into a corner by calling advantage, and so really you should have gone back for the first offence - I've been caught in the same trap! :redface: I was advised to make a mental note of the first knock-on, but not call advantage immediately, and see what develops. If no advantage occurs you can still go back for the knock-on. If something else occurs, as in this case, you have left yourself the option to penalize this without any concerns. :biggrin:

 

[crossref]

I don't agree with that - in general terms you can call 'new advantage' for a second offence (if appropriate)
and if in general terms if blue knock on, and then knock on again, then if advantage was still to be had, we'd all play on right?


anyway what I did on the day was : I went back for the first knock on.

But in retrospect I think that a better decision would have been to have allowed the QTI and played on.

 

[Nigib]

You backed yourself into a corner by calling advantage, and so really you should have gone back for the first offence - I've been caught in the same trap! :redface: I was advised to make a mental note of the first knock-on, but not call advantage immediately, and see what develops. If no advantage occurs you can still go back for the knock-on. If something else occurs, as in this case, you have left yourself the option to penalize this without any concerns. :biggrin:

So you are calling a 'private' advantage?! How long do you let that run before you make it public? If it's an obvious offence then it will be noticed that you've done nothing, especially if you let play rumble on if you think your private advantage is over. And that may give you issues with player trust/rapport.

I'm fine with letting it run for a second or so, but the sooner you make it clear that you've seen something, the less likelihood you will get questions from players, and the more likely you are to defuse flashpoints as players take things into their own hands because they think you won't.

 

[Pinky]

I think that once you have blown your whistle, the QTI is off. You have stopped play and the ball is dead.

 

[didds]

I'm fine with letting it run for a second or so, but the sooner you make it clear that you've seen something, the less likelihood you will get questions from player.

This.

Rightly or wrongly if you don't make a pretty quick indication that you've seen the knock on, you can bet your bottom dollar somebody from the other side will start shouting "knock on ref!" etc.

And soon you've now got s player discipline area to deal with too.

didds

 

[The Fat]

crossref,

I'd have done the same as you on the day and taken it back for the original knock-on.

I can see the point that others are making about allowing the non-offending team, who seem happy to play on via a QTI, to continue however, when are you going to call advantage over?
Let's say you allow the quick throw as their advantage and call advantage over after their winger/full-back/whoever throws a 20m pass infield to open up some space.........................and the receiver fumbles and knocks on? Now I know that some will say, "I'd wait to see if the receiver catches the ball before calling advantage over".
All well and good except that by the time he catches the ball, we may now be 20m behind where the original knock-on occurred so do we now wait until they make at least 15m upfield (to a place where the #10 would have received the pass from a scrum) before deciding, "OK, they have now gained some advantage i.e. the advantage is real.

Let's look at the "simple" way of managing the situation.

Scenario 1.
Team A knock on at the junction of their own 10m line and the 15m line. Ref signals knock-on advantage. A 2nd player from Team A comes from an onside position and knocks on again 5m short of the halfway and the ball crosses the touch line on the halfway. Team B player gathers the ball in touch but now 5m his side of halfway and throws a long 20m pass to a team mate who is on his own 10m line. Ref calls advantage over. Has Team B's decision to take the QTI delivered an advantage? Even worse if the catcher fumbles and knocks-on.

Scenario 2.
Team A knock on at the junction of their own 10m line and the 15m line. Ref signals knock-on advantage. A 2nd player from Team A comes from an onside position and knocks on again 5m short of the halfway and the ball crosses the touch line on the halfway.
Ref calls, "No advantage, scrum". and Team B now get a scrum on Team A's 10m line with approximately 16+ metres between each set of backs.

Unless the scrums had been absolutely shite all day, I know which option I would favour with the added bonus of everyone on the park knowing what is happening.

 

[Ian_Cook]

I'd allow the QTI - assuming you hadn't already blown your whistle for no advantage.

If you can let play continue fairly without blowing your whistle, do so. The non-offending team were clearly happy to play on.

First of all, I agree with this from an "empathy for the game" standpoint.

Imagine the scenario where the Blue have knocked the ball on twice close to their own goal line, and a red player picks the ball up, and before you have a chance to realise what has happened, he breaks two tackles and scores under the black dot.

Are you really going call it back for a scrum to red for the first knock on?

However, there is a technicality which seems to imply that you cannot play on

[LAWS]8.3 WHEN THE ADVANTAGE LAW IS NOT APPLIED
(e) After the ball has been made dead. Advantage cannot be played after the ball has been
made dead.[/LAWS]

We're back to the old argument about whether a ball in touch is dead.

 

[crossref]

Except we know specifically that after a knock on into touch a QTI can be taken

 

[DocY]

However, there is a technicality which seems to imply that you cannot play on

[LAWS]8.3 WHEN THE ADVANTAGE LAW IS NOT APPLIED
(e) After the ball has been made dead. Advantage cannot be played after the ball has been
made dead.[/LAWS]

We're back to the old argument about whether a ball in touch is dead.

I see what you're saying, but I'm not sure it's exactly the same situation.

Assuming there was no QTI you'd offer the choice of a lineout or scrum, right? Or at least if they asked for the lineout from the second knock on. And they're entitled to take a QTI in such cases.

I suppose the question then becomes whether they could ever come back for either knock on in the situations The Fat lists. I don't think they could.

 

[talbazar]

I can see the point that others are making about allowing the non-offending team, who seem happy to play on via a QTI, to continue however, when are you going to call advantage over?

In line with the explanation below, the moment the QTI is taken.

However, there is a technicality which seems to imply that you cannot play on
[LAWS]8.3 WHEN THE ADVANTAGE LAW IS NOT APPLIED
(e) After the ball has been made dead. Advantage cannot be played after the ball has been
made dead.[/LAWS]

We're back to the old argument about whether a ball in touch is dead.

Maybe we are not: if anything, just because the Law doesn't tell us what to do when advantage is over because it has arisen.
So you may have secretly decided that advantage was over just before the ball went into touch. So cool to be clairvoyant, isn't it?
:biggrin:

Let me run that through slowly based on The Fat Scenario...

Team A knock on at the junction of their own 10m line and the 15m line. Ref signals knock-on advantage. A 2nd player from Team A comes from an onside position and knocks on again 5m short of the halfway and the ball crosses the touch line on the halfway. Team B player gathers the ball in touch but now 5m his side of halfway and...

[LAWS]8.1(b) Advantage can be either territorial or tactical.
8.1.(c) Territorial advantage means a gain in ground.
8.1.(d) Tactical advantage means freedom for the non-offending team to play the ball as they wish.

8.5.(a) When there is more than one infringement by the same team:
If advantage cannot be played or does not accrue to the second offence, the referee applies the appropriate sanction to the offence which is most advantageous to the non-offending team.[/LAWS]

Continuing above Scenario:
Scenario 1: Team B does not go for a QTI.
Territorial Advantage: Scrum for the first KO seems the most advantageous.

Scenario 2: Team B takes the QTI
Tactical Advantage: Team just played the ball as they wish, advantage over


Over simplistic?

Cheers,
Pierre.

 

[Camquin]

A side taking a QTI, assuming it is on, has chosen the tactical advantage from doing so.

 

[talbazar]

A side taking a QTI, assuming it is on, has chosen the tactical advantage from doing so.

That's my opinion too.. But it's not a free ball, the moment the QTI is taken, advantage over for me.

After all, the team taking the QTI:
1. Decides to take the advantage on the first knock on
2. Decides to take the Line Out instead of the scrum on the second knock on
3. Decides to take the QTI instead of the LO

Gosh, that's a lot of decisions taken for still having a free ball after all that thinking epper:

 

[Taff]

... what do you think play on, or back to the first knock on...

Play on for me.

You are effectively playing advantage from both Blue knock-ons. Red obviously prefer the QTI because nobody forced them to take it.