PDA

View Full Version : Knock on into touch



kaypeegee
22-02-15, 19:02
Law Clarification 1 2014 states "If a player rips the ball or deliberately knocks the ball from an opponent's hands and the ball goes forward from the ball carrier's hands, that is not a knock on."

If the ball, once ripped, goes forward and then goes into touch who gets the put in?

Is the "rip" or deliberate knock back by the non-ball carrying team deemed sufficient contact to give line-out possession to the ball carrying team?

Taff
22-02-15, 22:02
Assuming every player is facing the right way, I would say the original ball carriers team get the throw in.

The ball carrier hasn't knocked it on, and effectively the last player to play the ball was the ripper.

I think it was Phil E who said "There is a difference between losing possession, and having possession taken from you". It's always stuck in my mind.

TheBFG
23-02-15, 12:02
I know there was a ruling on this a while back but I can't find it? I also remember some discussions on here too.

Can we just have a look at it?

Thanks

TheBFG
23-02-15, 12:02
Sorry, just realised someone looks to be asking same question.

MOD please join threads with http://www.rugbyrefs.com/showthread.php?18675-Knock-on-into-touch

Thanks



MOD: Done.

TheBFG
23-02-15, 12:02
Bath v NHampton

last few mins of game, Bath attacking bottom left, defender rips ball out of ball carriers hands and it goes into touch, NHampton put in, right?

Browner
23-02-15, 12:02
Bath v NHampton

last few mins of game, Bath attacking bottom left, defender rips ball out of ball carriers hands and it goes into touch, NHampton put in, right?
If I'm picturing it correctly, then its not a knock on by Bath, so the Northampton defender has been responsible for it going into touch not the BC.

Phil E
23-02-15, 13:02
Bath v NHampton

last few mins of game, Bath attacking bottom left, defender rips ball out of ball carriers hands and it goes into touch, NHampton put in, right?

Which way does the ball travel in relation to the players?
Does the Saints defender rip it towards his own DBL (backwards from Saints, not a knock on by Bath (see second point below), just a lineout to Bath), or towards the Bath DBL? (knock on by Saints, options to Bath).

If Saints ripped it, I can't see how they get the put in since they were the last ones to touch it. If they dislodged it in the tackle however, thats different.

Video please?

Clarification in Law by the Designated Members of the Rugby Committee
If a player in tackling an opponent makes contact with the ball and the ball goes forward from the ball carriers hands, that is a knock on.

If a player rips the ball or deliberately knocks the ball from an opponent's hands and the ball goes forward from the ball carrier's hands, that is not a knock on.

TheBFG
23-02-15, 14:02
yep, NHampton player rips it towards his own DBL, AR gives LO to NHampton :wow: I was half watching at the club where I'd just reffed, there were more than a few looking in my direction I just :shrug:

Phil E
23-02-15, 14:02
yep, NHampton player rips it towards his own DBL, AR gives LO to NHampton :wow: I was half watching at the club where I'd just reffed, there were more than a few looking in my direction I just :shrug:

Did he offer them the option (which would indicate he thought Bath knocked on into touch).

If he didn't offer the option, then it must have been ripped, so should have been a Bath ball.

That's my take on it anyway.

TheBFG
23-02-15, 14:02
can't get a link as I can never get the Aviva website to work while I'm at work? It's in the last few mins of the game.

I couldn't hear what was being said, but NHampton took the LO???

crossref
23-02-15, 15:02
perhaps it was a failure of communication : the referee took the view that the ball was ripped, but the AR thought it had been lost forward and so signalled a Saints throw (as you would) ...

Taff
23-02-15, 23:02
perhaps it was a failure of communication : the referee took the view that the ball was ripped, but the AR thought it had been lost forward and so signalled a Saints throw (as you would) ...
Fair point, but why didn't the TMO pick up on it?

OB..
24-02-15, 12:02
perhaps it was a failure of communication : the referee took the view that the ball was ripped, but the AR thought it had been lost forward and so signalled a Saints throw (as you would) ...In which case the referee should have noticed that the AR was not awarding the throw to the side he expected, and so should have queried it.

crossref
24-02-15, 12:02
In which case the referee should have noticed that the AR was not awarding the throw to the side he expected, and so should have queried it.

I agree.
But I can also see that it's easily done, especially with the modern fashion where AR puts flag up but doesn't initially signal whose throw it is, so the misundersatanding is not instantly revealed. Then attention shifts elsewhere.

Anyway - it's just a possibiity.

Taff
24-02-15, 23:02
I agree. But I can also see that it's easily done, especially with the modern fashion where AR puts flag up but doesn't initially signal whose throw it is, so the misundersatanding is not instantly revealed. Then attention shifts elsewhere. Anyway - it's just a possibiity.
My understanding is that ARs only do this while the QTI option was still "on".

I thought that once the option of a QTI had died (eg the ball had been touched, or the LO had formed) that's when they indicate whose throw in it is.

crossref
24-02-15, 23:02
Indeed, but that is quite often