Page 11 of 17 FirstFirst ... 789101112131415 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 165

Thread: Inadvertent touch down

      
  1. #101

    Referees in Scotland


    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Select Grade
    Join Date
    20 Dec 17
    Posts
    417
    Thanks (Received)
    4
    Likes (Received)
    91

    Default Re: Inadvertent touch down

    Quote Originally Posted by crossref View Post
    Normally that would be what was intended

    But not necessarily .. see post 29
    Intent has nothing to do with this law. There may be some areas of the game where we infer intent, this is not one of them.

  2. #102

    Referees in England


    Soc/Assoc
    --
    Grade
    Grassroots
    Join Date
    14 Sep 09
    Posts
    16,823
    Thanks (Received)
    127
    Likes (Received)
    1615

    Default Re: Inadvertent touch down

    Quote Originally Posted by Zebra1922 View Post
    Intent has nothing to do with this law. There may be some areas of the game where we infer intent, this is not one of them.
    In fact the very opposite isn't it ?

    This area is one where intent is enshrined in the law ... For this is what 21.2 is saying : it's not a grounding when it happens with the intent to pick the ball up.
    Last edited by crossref; 12-01-19 at 09:01.

  3. #103

    Referees in Australia
    The Fat's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    FNCRRA
    Grade
    L1 Ref & L2 AR
    Join Date
    15 Jul 10
    Posts
    4,199
    Thanks (Received)
    51
    Likes (Received)
    444

    Default Re: Inadvertent touch down

    Quote Originally Posted by crossref View Post
    In fact the very opposite isn't it ?

    This area is one where intent is enshrined in the law ... For this is what 21.2 is saying : it's not a grounding when it happens with the intent to pick the ball up.
    A player may not intend to knock the ball on but it is still a knock on.
    Reading PHIL E’s description of the incident in question, it is clearly a scrum and the officials clearly bottled it. You seem to be basing your argument on the premise that the referee never makes a mistake and therefore you are assuming that intent is king. That is simply not the case
    When you are dead, you don't know that you are dead. It is difficult only for the others.
    It's the same when you are stupid.

  4. #104

    Referees in England


    Soc/Assoc
    --
    Grade
    Grassroots
    Join Date
    14 Sep 09
    Posts
    16,823
    Thanks (Received)
    127
    Likes (Received)
    1615

    Default Re: Inadvertent touch down

    Quote Originally Posted by The Fat View Post
    A player may not intend to knock the ball on but it is still a knock on.
    Reading PHIL E’s description of the incident in question, it is clearly a scrum and the officials clearly bottled it. You seem to be basing your argument on the premise that the referee never makes a mistake and therefore you are assuming that intent is king. That is simply not the case
    Well that is another area where intent is enshrined in law as a knock on is a scrum, and an intentional knock on is a PK (and often a YC)


    My premise is that the defender was picking the ball up (and therefore it wasn't a mistake)
    I don't think it's that outrageous a premise , given that he did, indeed, pick the ball up.
    Last edited by crossref; 12-01-19 at 11:01.

  5. #105

    Advises in England
    OB..'s Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Glos & District
    Grade
    Adviser (grass roots)
    Join Date
    07 Oct 04
    Posts
    22,436
    Thanks (Received)
    106
    Likes (Received)
    1502

    Default Re: Inadvertent touch down

    Quote Originally Posted by crossref View Post
    In fact the very opposite isn't it ?

    This area is one where intent is enshrined in the law ... For this is what 21.2 is saying : it's not a grounding when it happens with the intent to pick the ball up.
    No it is not saying that.
    21.1 The ball can be grounded in in-goal:

      • By holding it and touching the ground with it; or
      • By pressing down on it with a hand or hands, arm or arms, or the front of the player’s body from waist to neck.

    • 21.2 Picking up a ball is not grounding it. A player may pick up the ball in in-goal and ground it elsewhere in in-goal.


    21.2 is distinguishing the action of picking up from the two ways of grounding the ball in 21.1

    It makes no reference to intent, and does not need to. There are enough problems with deciding intent elsewhere without trying to introduce them here.
    He trudg’d along unknowing what he sought,
    And whistled as he went, for want of thought.
    The Referee by John Dryden

  6. #106

    Advises in England
    OB..'s Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Glos & District
    Grade
    Adviser (grass roots)
    Join Date
    07 Oct 04
    Posts
    22,436
    Thanks (Received)
    106
    Likes (Received)
    1502

    Default Re: Inadvertent touch down

    Quote Originally Posted by crossref View Post
    Well that is another area where intent is enshrined in law as a knock on is a scrum, and an intentional knock on is a PK (and often a YC)


    My premise is that the defender was picking the ball up (and therefore it wasn't a mistake)
    I don't think it's that outrageous a premise , given that he did, indeed, pick the ball up.
    There are many laws referring to the concept of intention but Law 21 is not one of them. Inferring intention in this case is unnecessary and confusing.
    He trudg’d along unknowing what he sought,
    And whistled as he went, for want of thought.
    The Referee by John Dryden

  7. #107

    Referees in England


    Soc/Assoc
    --
    Grade
    Grassroots
    Join Date
    14 Sep 09
    Posts
    16,823
    Thanks (Received)
    127
    Likes (Received)
    1615

    Default Re: Inadvertent touch down

    Quote Originally Posted by OB.. View Post
    No it is not saying that.
    21.1 The ball can be grounded in in-goal:

      • By holding it and touching the ground with it; or
      • By pressing down on it with a hand or hands, arm or arms, or the front of the player’s body from waist to neck.

    • 21.2 Picking up a ball is not grounding it. A player may pick up the ball in in-goal and ground it elsewhere in in-goal.


    21.2 is distinguishing the action of picking up from the two ways of grounding the ball in 21.1

    It makes no reference to intent, and does not need to. There are enough problems with deciding intent elsewhere without trying to introduce them here.
    it is distinguishing two actions -

    21.1 - a player placing/pressing the ball down (a grounding)
    21.2 - a player picking the ball up (NOT a grounding)

    Question - watch the video again : which of those two actions was the player doing ?
    Answer - He was picking it up.

  8. #108

    Advises in England
    OB..'s Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Glos & District
    Grade
    Adviser (grass roots)
    Join Date
    07 Oct 04
    Posts
    22,436
    Thanks (Received)
    106
    Likes (Received)
    1502

    Default Re: Inadvertent touch down

    Quote Originally Posted by crossref View Post
    it is distinguishing two actions -

    21.1 - a player placing/pressing the ball down (a grounding)
    21.2 - a player picking the ball up (NOT a grounding)

    Question - watch the video again : which of those two actions was the player doing ?
    Answer - He was picking it up.
    He was picking the ball up AFTER having grounded it.
    He trudg’d along unknowing what he sought,
    And whistled as he went, for want of thought.
    The Referee by John Dryden

  9. #109

    Promises to Referee in France
    L'irlandais's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    CT Alsace-Lorraine
    Grade
    EdR + LCA
    Join Date
    11 May 10
    Posts
    4,113
    Thanks (Received)
    36
    Likes (Received)
    199

    Lightbulb Re: Inadvertent touch down

    Much as it pains me to agree with the likes of Austin Sean Healey, the correct outcome should have been : ask the TMO to review the «*try*» with the question «*is there any reason I cannot award the try?*». Correct TMO answer being, the defender covering back has already grounded the ball. And yes he might have grounded it once more (to make it abundantly clear) instead of having a brain fart and popping the pass to attempt to run the ball out of their own ingoal.

    Consider a different scenario, Gold kick long and the ball comes to rest in the ingoal. If an attacker picks up the ball we would allow him touch down under the posts. In the same way as we would allow a defender to pick that ball up to kick for touch and clear his lines. Only that is very different from what happened. If it had been a Gold player in possession of the ball sliding into the ingoal, a try would have been awarded. Just imagine of Gold after sliding into the ingoal, got up popped the pass to a teammate and the action ended up with them being bundled into touch. Would you seriously NOT award the try?

    Equity, as OB.. points out is the name of the game. A grounding for one side, is a grounding for if the possession is reversed. In open play a player is allowed to go to ground to gather the ball. (13.1 b) In the ingoal, this action cannot to be interpreted as picking up the ball. See 21.1b for an image of the actual type of grounding being discussed here.

    A player on their feet might pick up the ball, with one or both hands. Very different scenario, to that being discussed.
    Last edited by L'irlandais; 12-01-19 at 13:01.
    "We demand strict proof for opinions we dislike, but are satisfied with mere hints for what we’re inclined to accept."
    John Henry Newman

  10. #110

    Referees in England


    Soc/Assoc
    --
    Grade
    Grassroots
    Join Date
    14 Sep 09
    Posts
    16,823
    Thanks (Received)
    127
    Likes (Received)
    1615

    Default Re: Inadvertent touch down

    Quote Originally Posted by OB.. View Post
    He was picking the ball up AFTER having grounded it.
    thats's a very forensic way of looking at it -- are you suggesting that whenever a player picks up the ball we should entertain the possibility that he didn't pick it up completely cleanly and in the course of picking it up he accidentally grounded it?

    I don't think that's the intention of the law -- I think the law has a simple and clear purpose : picking it up is not grounding it.

    I think you are putting too much weight on the question of intent, and micro analysis.

    It's actualyl more simple
    - did he put it down? It's a grounding
    - did he pick it up? It's not a grounding

    Here the ball was on the ground and on one action he dived to the floor, gathered the ball and got up.
    He was picking it up
    Last edited by crossref; 12-01-19 at 13:01.

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
  •