When is a ball in the air in touch?

[crossref]

And what about this scenario, put forward in the aforementioned brochure from the Australian Rugby Referees Union? It makes no sense at all!!!

View attachment 3239

I think that in that scenario the ARU are wrong.

 

[OB..]

I think you'll find a lot of referees agree that The touch line laws are a mess and too complex.

:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

Here you are - here's the matrix (I think!)

View attachment 3238

Note
*if the player has one foot in FoP and one foot in touch, then this is treated as feet in touch

The "in air" line is your view. All the law says about a player in the air is[LAWS]If a player jumps and catches the ball, both feet must land in the playing area otherwise the ball is in touch or touch-in-goal.[/LAWS]
This means a player may stand 5m in touch, run, jump, and catch a kick, and then land in the field of play in order to prevent the ball going into touch - despite the fact that both player and ball were 2m the wrong side of the touchline when he played it.

It is clear that the law regards a player as being in touch if he has a foot in touch, but there is nothing to define when a player in the air is in touch.

The ARU document provides guidelines for their referees (well done the ARU), but there is no way we can say they are either right or wrong in law.

Some sports define in touch by where a player takes off, others by where he lands. Either makes the decision easier, but produces some effects that will look odd to spectators (and most players).

Some years ago I got a ruling from the RFU referee's department that a player jumping across the touchline to knock the ball back before he landed was deemed to put the ball in touch because he was in touch

Somewhere on this site is my own effort at re-writing the Law 19 definitions, but to make it complete I had to take a view: mine is that the referee/TJ/AR needs to judge if a player in the air has crossed the plane. If he has, he is in touch and the rest follows.

 

[Ian_Cook]

I think you'll find a lot of referees agree that The touch line laws are a mess and too complex. But that's what we have.

As I have suggested before, I believe the RU touch laws with regard to when the ball is in touch and who put it there ought to be ditched and the RL Laws adopted in their entirety, minus those aspects which relate only to how their game is played, and plus some aspects that apply to RU

For the purposes of this description the "boundary line" is a collective term for the touch line, the touch in goal line and the dead ball line

1. Ball in Touch or Touch-in-goal or Dead-in-goal
The ball is in touch, touch-in-goal or dead-in-goal (as applicable) when it, or a player in contact with it, touches the boundary line, or the ground or any object outside the playing area.

2. Jumping player knocks ball back
The ball is in touch, touch-in-goal or dead-in-goal (as applicable) if a player jumps from outside the playing area and knocks the ball back while off the ground.
The ball is not in touch, touch-in-goal or dead-in-goal if, during flight, it crosses the boundary line but is knocked back by a player who is off the ground after jumping from the playing area.

3. Point of Entry to Touch
When a ball has entered touch, the point of entry shall be taken as the point at which the ball first crossed the touch line.

4. Stationary/Moving Ball
When a ball which is stationary in the playing area, comes in contact with a player outside the playing area, the ball is deemed to have be put in touch, touch-in-goal or dead-in-goal (as applicable) by that player.
When a ball which is moving in the playing area, comes in contact with a player outside the playing area, the ball is deemed to have be put in touch, touch-in-goal or dead-in-goal (as applicable) by the last person to have touched the ball before that player.

 

[Maxwell House]

I have updated the past on my blog to incorporate some of the discussion here if anyone is interested in reading it...

http://devin-maxwell.blogspot.ca/2015/06/world-rugby-laws-ball-in-touch.html

 

[Browner]

Better to write for yourself and have no public, than to write for the public and have no self... OPINIONS ARE MY OWN

Interesting article Devin, i presume the Shades are necessary in your neck of the woods !

 

[Maxwell House]

Thanks. The shades are sometimes necessary here, but they were definitely necessary in Mexico, where that picture was taken.

 

[Camquin]

If I kick the ball and it crosses the plane of touch between the goal lines, play restarts with a line out below the point the ball crossed the plane of touch, or a QTI somewhere between there and the dead ball line.

If I kick the ball and it does not cros the plane of touch and lands beyond the dead ball line, there is the option of a scrum at the point I kicked it.

If I kick the ball and it crosses the plane of touch but does not land until it crosses the extension of the dead ball line, I would rule it has not passed through the in goal, so no option of a scrum back.


However, if the ball crosses the plane of touch but is blown back and crosses the dead ball line between the two touch lines, is there an option of a scrum back? I tend to think that touch happens first so we should stick with that.

But in the boondocks, where my eyes are going to be checking whether the flanker who is about to clatter the kicker is committed to the tackle, I might miss the fact the ball crossed the plane of touch, but would spot it crossed the dead ball line, so would offer the option of 22 or scrum, and I doubt I would be questioned.

But, given this is a freak occurence, I suppose I might just by freak have a touch judge who knows the laws and indicates touch.

Camquin