Page 9 of 17 FirstFirst ... 5678910111213 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 165

Thread: Inadvertent touch down

      
  1. #81

    Referees in England


    Soc/Assoc
    LSRFUR
    Grade
    10
    Join Date
    14 Sep 09
    Posts
    15,572
    Thanks (Received)
    109
    Likes (Received)
    1482

    Default Re: Inadvertent touch down

    Quote Originally Posted by OB.. View Post
    So why are we talking about an "inadvertent touchdown" and raising the matter of intent?
    Did he simply pick it up? If so there is no problem.
    Did he fall on it in in-goal or slide on it into in-goal and then pick it up? If so,too late. He had grounded it first.
    He fell on it and picked it up.
    In the course of that he indadvertently slid over the goal line

    On the day it didn't seem to occur to anyone that this might constitute a rouchdown

    (Of course they might have all been wrong)

  2. #82

    Advises in England
    OB..'s Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Glos & District
    Grade
    Adviser (grass roots)
    Join Date
    07 Oct 04
    Posts
    22,177
    Thanks (Received)
    95
    Likes (Received)
    1351

    Default Re: Inadvertent touch down

    Quote Originally Posted by crossref View Post
    He fell on it and picked it up.
    In the course of that he indadvertently slid over the goal line

    On the day it didn't seem to occur to anyone that this might constitute a rouchdown

    (Of course they might have all been wrong)
    Who knows what they thought or saw? Perhaps they thought he had not crossed the line when he picked the ball up? Would it have been different if they had seen some video evidence? What is the point of hypothesising?

    Surely we are trying to decide what the referee should do under a particular set of conditions. I dislike the approach that says the referee can decide to ignore a grounding if he thought it was inadvertent for two reasons:
    (1) I see no justification for it in the laws;
    (2) the proposed justification is woolly and makes for greater individual variation than the factual approach.

    Nobody has explained why they think it is valid to infer the need for intention.
    Nobody has explained why using judgement is better than using facts.
    He trudg’d along unknowing what he sought,
    And whistled as he went, for want of thought.
    The Referee by John Dryden

  3. #83

    Referees in England


    Soc/Assoc
    LSRFUR
    Grade
    10
    Join Date
    14 Sep 09
    Posts
    15,572
    Thanks (Received)
    109
    Likes (Received)
    1482

    Default Re: Inadvertent touch down

    I think the key point is that they didn't TMO it
    Had there been the slightest suspicion that the ball hit the touchline , they would have reviewed it.
    I conclude they didn't think it mattered if it had touched the in goal, because the defender wasn't grounding it, he was picking it up

  4. #84
    Rugby Club Member Flish's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Durham
    Grade
    Level 9
    Join Date
    02 Sep 13
    Posts
    448
    Thanks (Received)
    8
    Likes (Received)
    84

    Default Re: Inadvertent touch down

    Quote Originally Posted by OB.. View Post
    Nobody has explained why they think it is valid to infer the need for intention.
    Nobody has explained why using judgement is better than using facts.
    Empathy, considering what the player is trying to do and the conditions he’s trying to do it in.

    Not sure if it’s changed, but when I did my Refs courses the only thing that trumped empathy in terms of the principles we should apply to our refereeing was safety. We use judgement and empathy all the time to make our decisions. ‘Facts’ are rarely as black and white as the person stating them as being fact would have us believe.

    Would love to know how these incidents pan out in the elite refs review meetings!

  5. #85

    Advises in England
    OB..'s Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Glos & District
    Grade
    Adviser (grass roots)
    Join Date
    07 Oct 04
    Posts
    22,177
    Thanks (Received)
    95
    Likes (Received)
    1351

    Default Re: Inadvertent touch down

    Quote Originally Posted by crossref View Post
    I think the key point is that they didn't TMO it
    Perhaps they decided the player did not actually ground the ball, thus rendering all our theorising otiose.
    Had there been the slightest suspicion that the ball hit the touchline , they would have reviewed it.
    I would hope so.
    I conclude they didn't think it mattered if it had touched the in goal, because the defender wasn't grounding it, he was picking it up
    He was not picking it up. We are told he was pressing it down as described in the laws when he crossed the try line.

    We are going round in circles. Time to stop before we all get too dizzy.
    He trudg’d along unknowing what he sought,
    And whistled as he went, for want of thought.
    The Referee by John Dryden

  6. #86

    Referees in England


    Soc/Assoc
    LSRFUR
    Grade
    10
    Join Date
    14 Sep 09
    Posts
    15,572
    Thanks (Received)
    109
    Likes (Received)
    1482

    Default Re: Inadvertent touch down

    Quote Originally Posted by OB.. View Post
    .
    He was not picking it up. We are told he was pressing it down as described in the laws when he crossed the try line.

    .
    It was both .. which is why there are two possible opinions

  7. #87

    Referees in Australia
    The Fat's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    FNCRRA
    Grade
    L1 Ref & L2 AR
    Join Date
    15 Jul 10
    Posts
    4,116
    Thanks (Received)
    39
    Likes (Received)
    405

    Default Re: Inadvertent touch down

    Quote Originally Posted by OB.. View Post
    21.6 A defending player grounding the ball in in-goal results in a touch down.
    No mention of the need for intent.
    Was on my iPhone and attempted to LIKE this post.
    Damn you fat fingers
    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.

  8. #88

    Advises in England
    OB..'s Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Glos & District
    Grade
    Adviser (grass roots)
    Join Date
    07 Oct 04
    Posts
    22,177
    Thanks (Received)
    95
    Likes (Received)
    1351

    Default Re: Inadvertent touch down

    Quote Originally Posted by crossref View Post
    It was both .. which is why there are two possible opinions
    He can't do both simultaneously.
    He trudg’d along unknowing what he sought,
    And whistled as he went, for want of thought.
    The Referee by John Dryden

  9. #89

    Advises in England
    OB..'s Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Glos & District
    Grade
    Adviser (grass roots)
    Join Date
    07 Oct 04
    Posts
    22,177
    Thanks (Received)
    95
    Likes (Received)
    1351

    Default Re: Inadvertent touch down

    Quote Originally Posted by Flish View Post
    Not sure if it’s changed, but when I did my Refs courses the only thing that trumped empathy in terms of the principles we should apply to our refereeing was safety.
    In the original mantra, the E stood for Equity. Then someone decided (erroneously) that equity meant treating everyone identically, so changed it to Enjoyment which, like the Empathy you were taught, is a bit odd. One team's Enjoyment/Empathy is to the other team's disadvantage, whereas Equity strives to find a fair balance.
    He trudg’d along unknowing what he sought,
    And whistled as he went, for want of thought.
    The Referee by John Dryden

  10. #90

    Referees in England
    Phil E's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Staffordshire and Royal Navy
    Grade
    8
    Join Date
    22 Jan 08
    Posts
    14,561
    Thanks (Received)
    117
    Likes (Received)
    1028
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Inadvertent touch down

    Quote Originally Posted by crossref View Post
    He fell on it and picked it up.
    In the course of that he indadvertently slid over the goal line
    That's not quite how it happened.
    He dived on the loose ball short of the goal line and slid into in-goal.
    As he slid over the line he was half on his side and the ball was off the ground.
    He then turned onto his front to get to his feet, and in doing so he clearly placed the ball onto the ground (still in his possession).
    At that point the ball was dead.

    The conversation from the referee went along the lines of "I don't know who took the ball back (into in-goal), but he then pops it up and........."

    So the possibility of a defender grounding the ball was never on his radar.
    When the TMO replayed the footage they started it from after the pop pass, concentrating on whether Wasps grounded it for a try.

    So you can see why they missed it, but they really should have spotted that the ball was dead.

    Austin Healy spotted it and (I never thought I would hear myself say this) called it correctly. "They need to go further back (in the replay), he grounded the ball in-goal so its dead.

    Follow my Award Winning blog The Rugby Ref


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
  •