Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 43

Thread: another touch incident ...

      
  1. #31

    Advises in England
    OB..'s Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Glos & District
    Grade
    Adviser (grass roots)
    Join Date
    07 Oct 04
    Posts
    21,923
    Thanks (Received)
    86
    Likes (Received)
    1229

    Default Re: another touch incident ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Dickie E View Post
    what an effing mess . Is Humphrey Appleby on the law writing committee?
    I believe he delegated it to Bernard.
    He trudg’d along unknowing what he sought,
    And whistled as he went, for want of thought.
    The Referee by John Dryden

  2. #32
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Select Grade
    Join Date
    28 Feb 17
    Posts
    965
    Thanks (Received)
    4
    Likes (Received)
    98
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: another touch incident ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarrod Burton View Post
    For me, a player coming from off the FoP is not in the FoP until they have contact with it, so jumping from outside to in, the player is still "out" until they make contact with their foot (provided they aren't still in contact the line, etc, etc).

    Netball does this rule well. A player who starts from on-court is considered on court until any part of their body touches the off court area. Conversely, a player who is off court is not considered on court until their foot touches the floor on-court (with no other part still touching the off court area). The position of the ball is not important and this makes it much easier for an umpire to judge when a throw in should occur. Last night at state league trials I had a girl who caught the ball while on her toes, leaning over the line and the ball half a meter or more outside the plane of the line.
    With netball there are no tactical/territorial benefits to be had by putting/allowing the ball out of play. As such the rule seems proportionate to the requirements of the game.

    That's not to say that the rugby laws are any more reasonable. They have just evolved into something that, were you starting form scratch, you wouldn't likely seek to end up at the place we are now at.

  3. #33
    Player or Coach ChrisR's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Select Grade
    Join Date
    14 Jul 10
    Posts
    2,967
    Thanks (Received)
    21
    Likes (Received)
    252

    Default Re: another touch incident ...

    When I responded in this thread with entries 23, 26 & 29 I had mistakenly got out of bed to let the dog out thinking it was 5 or 6 in the am, not closer to midnight. I followed my usual routine of making a strong pot of coffee and checking emails and the latest drivel from RR. Hey, just joking on the "drivel" bit.

    It wasn't until I was reading the OpEds in yesterdays Post that I realized it wasn't getting light outside and . . . Bingo! . . . it's only 3:30 so I go back to bed. Only I'v had 3 mugs of very strong coffee.
    So, instead of getting more sleep I start thinking about the Laws making process and how we end up with this haphazard mess of Law 19.

    And . . . another Bingo! . . . it's clear that the Law Makers don't have a Law Making Process other than: Someone has a Bright Idea, the Others nod their collective head over a couple of gins, scribble something on the back of an envelope and pass it to the 12 years old for editing before posting it to the Rugby World.

    Working out the Rules for the Law Making Process was enough to get me off to sleep again until that damn dog . . .

    So, now that I'm really awake and have another pot of strong coffee, I'm gonna start thinking about them rules.

  4. #34
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    Cambridge and St Neots
    Grade
    I am a Fan
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Posts
    1,063
    Thanks (Received)
    15
    Likes (Received)
    146

    Default Re: another touch incident ...

    Not to Bernard - probably to one of the 219 Assistant Secretaries - who would find an PO to instruct an EO to get a CO to do the work.
    And I know those terms are no longer used.

    I am the Permanent Under Secretary of State, known as the Permanent Secretary. Woolley here is your Principal Private Secretary,
    I too have a Principal Private Secretary and he is the Principal Private Secretary to the Permanent Secretary.
    Directly responsible to me are ten Deputy Secretaries, eighty-seven Under Secretaries and two hundred and nineteen Assistant Secretaries. Directly responsible to the Principal Private Secretaries are plain Private Secretaries, and the Prime Minister will be appointing two Parliamentary Under-Secretaries and you will be appointing your own Parliamentary Private Secretary.
    I am hoping that someone will publish the Hacker papers when they are released under the thirty year rule in 2019.

  5. #35

    Referees in Ireland


    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Level 1
    Join Date
    25 May 16
    Posts
    377
    Thanks (Received)
    5
    Likes (Received)
    32

    Default Re: another touch incident ...

    from our pre season .
    we covered many scenarios in irfu land .
    this was also 1 of them .

    for me , black should of still got line out .
    from cross video . liam williams { im sure it was liam from memory }
    had clearly left field of play & then came from out to with in field { it looks to me that the ball had also crossed plane of touch }

    so 2 things
    1} if ball has not left plane of touch ,, then well done liam williams & play on is correct
    2} if ball had crossed plane of touch ,then line out should of been awarded .
    purely because the catcher left field of play to start a run up to ball whilst still out , to allow himself effectively jump from out side field towards inside field & at this moment he caught ball .

    this is not the same scenario , where a player can be out side field of play & whilst out knock or kick a ball that was still inside field of play .

    we were told very clearly the player must jump from field of play . to play a ball that had also left field of play .

    see also wayne barnes explanation of same 6 mins 30 secs into video . https://youtu.be/HfEz8lCj4BE
    Last edited by Christy; 17-10-17 at 15:10.

  6. #36
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Select Grade
    Join Date
    28 Feb 17
    Posts
    965
    Thanks (Received)
    4
    Likes (Received)
    98
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: another touch incident ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Christy View Post
    from our pre season .
    we covered many scenarios in irfu land .
    this was also 1 of them .

    for me , black should of still got line out .
    from cross video . liam williams { im sure it was liam from memory }
    had clearly left field of play & then came from out to with in field { it looks to me that the ball had also crossed plane of touch }

    so 2 things
    1} if ball has not left plane of touch ,, then well done liam williams & play on is correct
    2} if ball had crossed plane of touch ,then line out should of been awarded .
    purely because the catcher left field of play to start a run up to ball whilst still out , to allow himself effectively jump from out side field towards inside field & at this moment he caught ball .

    this is not the same scenario , where a player can be out side field of play & whilst out knock or kick a ball that was still inside field of play .

    we were told very clearly the player must jump from field of play . to play a ball that had also left field of play .

    see also wayne barnes explanation of same 6 mins 30 secs into video . https://youtu.be/HfEz8lCj4BE
    Very clear direction on the part of the IRFU, Lucky you!

    WB only goes so far as "as long as they are jumping from the field of play..." To that end, we can reasonably infer that what the IRFU are suggesting as being correct even though it is not expressly stated in the law changes.

    I wouldn't choose to argue about it in a laws committee. Especially if you could argue that allowing a player to jump form outside is also something that might be deemed worthy of reward for successfully keeping the ball in play. Conversely you might argue that the kicker needing to bury it in the stands to be sure of touch is not something we want either, so you have to draw the line somewhere.

  7. #37

    Referees in Ireland


    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Level 1
    Join Date
    25 May 16
    Posts
    377
    Thanks (Received)
    5
    Likes (Received)
    32

    Default Re: another touch incident ...

    Quote Originally Posted by ChuckieB View Post
    Very clear direction on the part of the IRFU, Lucky you!

    WB only goes so far as "as long as they are jumping from the field of play..." To that end, we can reasonably infer that what the IRFU are suggesting as being correct even though it is not expressly stated in the law changes.

    I wouldn't choose to argue about it in a laws committee. Especially if you could argue that allowing a player to jump form outside is also something that might be deemed worthy of reward for successfully keeping the ball in play. Conversely you might argue that the kicker needing to bury it in the stands to be sure of touch is not something we want either, so you have to draw the line somewhere.
    hi chuckie
    i must be honest & acknowledge that the amount of work that goes into all four ref society's in irfu land
    is of a very high standard & the access to elite referees we have { purely as a bonus } is very help full .
    the committees are excellently run with a chosen topic to discuss each week .
    this also includes positioning / similar on pitches .
    they have a policy of no question is a silly question & the willingness of more experienced referees who take time to make all referees feel worthy & welcoming at each weekly meeting that is held .

    your point about laws committee is interesting . { as some laws i agree arent in law book }
    however a law guidance would be given separately { guidance isnt correct word , but you know what i mean }
    also interesting is that the law book 2017 / 18 { a lot of it is now wrong miss information } as trials at moment have preceded same .

    but , all of our advice given by selected speakers , elite refs etc .
    has all come from world rugby .

  8. #38
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Level 1
    Join Date
    01 May 16
    Posts
    16
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    2

    Default Re: another touch incident ...

    Do they all type?
    No only Mrs. McKylie types. She's the secretary

  9. #39

    ELRA/Club Referee


    Soc/Assoc
    rotherham rugby club
    Grade
    school ref
    Join Date
    29 Aug 09
    Posts
    77
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    2

    Default Re: another touch incident ...

    If the player was already in touch when he jumped and the ball crosses the plane before he knocks it back, then even if he was in mid air he is still in touch , so to me it should be his teams throw in, as both player and ball were clearly in touch . If he had taken off inside the field of play and did the same , then he would not be in touch until he landed there, so play on.

  10. #40
    Player or Coach ChrisR's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Select Grade
    Join Date
    14 Jul 10
    Posts
    2,967
    Thanks (Received)
    21
    Likes (Received)
    252

    Default Re: another touch incident ...

    The Simplified Laws now cover this scenario explicitly.

    See "Simplified Laws - Touch & lineout"

    PS How do you link directly to that thread?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •