PDA

View Full Version : 22 o scrum option



Diego
07-10-14, 19:10
Was the decision right?

The ball was kicked by a red player through the in goal but did not cross the dead ball line and was grounded by a defending player who was outside the field of play.

The referee ask for the option (scrum or 22 drop out) and –obviously- the defending team chose the scrum option. I was wondering if the referee was right because the law says:

22.8 BALL KICKED DEAD THROUGH IN-GOAL

If a team kicks the ball through their opponents’ in-goal into touch-in-goal or on or over the dead ball line, except by an unsuccessful kick at goal or attempted dropped goal, the defending team has two choices:

• To have a drop-out, or
• To have a scrum at the place where the ball was kicked and they throw in.


This is the link to the video (it is in French but you get the idea.)

http://youtu.be/CqCbQQf6PRk


Saludos!

Diego

Pegleg
07-10-14, 20:10
THe defender was behind the DBL and fell on the ball. The question is does:

"Law 22.4 (g) Player in touch or touch-in goal.
If an attacking player is in touch or in touch-in-goal, the player can score a try by grounding the ball in the opponents’ in-goal provided the player is not carrying the ball. "

Logically also apply to a defender? If so then It was a touch down and a 22m drop out would be correct.

Or

If that law does not apply to a defender. We are left with the moving ball making contact with the defender hence the ball become dead by virtue of being on or over the DBL and in this instance the referee / AR was correct.

For my two-penneth worth it is logical to assume that 22.4(g) applies to both attackers and defenders and a 22 drop out should have been the call.

OB..
07-10-14, 21:10
You want 22.9.

If the player with a foot beyond the dead-ball line had picked up a moving ball, then the kicker would have been deemed to have kicked the ball dead. However touching down the ball, moving or not, does not count. He got half the requirements right and fooled the officials.

Pegleg
07-10-14, 21:10
So OB, would you agree that 22.4 (g) applies to a defender?

chbg
07-10-14, 21:10
So OB, would you agree that 22.4 (g) applies to a defender?

No. See 22.5(b).

But ... in this situation the player was behind the DBL not in TiG. Do/should 22.4(g) and 22.5(b) apply to the DBL?

(Lights blue touchpaper and retires)

Diego
07-10-14, 21:10
No. See 22.5(b).

But ... in this situation the player was behind the DBL not in TiG. Do/should 22.4(g) and 22.5(b) apply to the DBL?

(Lights blue touchpaper and retires)

This is in the same game -first half- It appears makes no distinction...and....same mistake?


http://youtu.be/Lr7aPBNonXk.

Saludos!

Diego

Pegleg
07-10-14, 21:10
Of course sorry I knew it was there somewhere kept missing it. For me the TIG and DBL have to be considered the same. It is for an attacker scoring (see George North Llanelli Scarlets 2013/4 season) so it surely must here too.

Treadmore
07-10-14, 21:10
I'd say you have to go with 22.5(b) applying for defender beyond the DBL too

22.9 does refer to DBL but talks about picking up not grounding the ball

Phil E
07-10-14, 22:10
Dead ball line and touch in goal are to be treated the same.
There was an IRB clarification about it.

Pegleg
07-10-14, 22:10
Thanks Phil.

Diego
07-10-14, 23:10
So, the referee was wrong -twice- and should be 22 m drop out defender team and no options?

Saludos!

Diego

The Fat
08-10-14, 13:10
Dead ball line and touch in goal are to be treated the same.
There was an IRB clarification about it.

DEAD-BALL LINE TO BE TREATED AS TOUCH-IN-GOAL LINE
From SA Refs website

30 Jul 2014
The IRB has spoken and for purposes of deciding about in in-goal or not, the dead-ball line is to be treated as the touch-in-goal line.
This follows debate following a try by George North in the Pro 12 League and a try by van Wyk at ]Craven week and a near try for the Hurricanes in Super Rugby.
The matter was discussed on this website - http://www.sareferees.com/News/law-discussion-two-tries-at-craven-week/2830201/ - and on Rugby365 - http://www.rugby365.com/article/61214-law-discussion-tries-at-craven-week. (In the Rugby365 case there are clips to go with the article.)
Currently there is a problem in the wording of the law: Law 22.4 (g) Player in touch or touch-in-goal. If an attacking player is in touch or in touch-in-goal, the player can score a try by grounding the ball in the opponents’ in-goal provided the player is not carrying the ball.
The problem is that no mention is made of the dead-ball line.
André Watson, the manager of SA Referees, referred the matter to the International Rugby Board who are rugby's lawmakers.
He received the following reply: "To this date referees have treated the dead ball line the same as the touch in-goal line.
"A try scored by George North for Llanelli Scarlets against Cardiff Blues with Derek Bevan as the TMO got it spot on in accordance with that interpretation."
With a bit of luck the law will be made clearer.

chbg
08-10-14, 20:10
Thank you.

ChrisR
09-10-14, 13:10
The OP is re. a defender grounding the ball when not in the FOP. I think he meant "playing area" as in-goal is not in the FOP.

I think that if the player is beyond the playing area he can only ground the ball when it is in contact with the ground. Obviously a stationary ball meets this criteria but what about a ball in motion?

A rolling ball in contact with the ground would be OK but a ball hopping end over end would be another matter. Would you rule that the ball was grounded if the player, using a single downward motion, made contact with the ball a visible height from the deck and, without catching or bobbling, thrust the ball to the ground?