Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 59

Thread: MARK - Is this a valid mark ?

      
  1. #21

    Resident Club Coach
    didds's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    N/A
    Grade
    Club Coach
    Join Date
    27 Jan 04
    Posts
    10,117

    Default Re: MARK - Is this a valid mark ?

    Quote Originally Posted by crossref View Post

    There aren't many changes from 2018 to 2019 .. tjere is a thread in the Laws forum that lists them (do keep up , didds!)

    cheers for that CR - as for keeping up why do you think I am a member here? ;-)

    Being semi serious I get mkore sense (!!!) from this one site than a myriad of NGB, WR and meejah sites - all power to you guys elbows.

    didds

  2. #22
    Coach/Referee

    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Select Grade
    Join Date
    03 May 13
    Posts
    1,009

    Default Re: MARK - Is this a valid mark ?

    In the OP the player was effectively in possession of the ball and presumably tackleable for the second that the ball was not in his hands. (Between losing it forward and regathering it)
    If he is in possession then I would say he has made a clean catch and therefore award the FK.

  3. #23
    Slowing down these days

    Soc/Assoc
    London Society
    Grade
    Level 8
    Join Date
    21 Jan 09
    Posts
    451

    Default Re: MARK - Is this a valid mark ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dickie E View Post
    well, its not a knock on cos ball hasn't hit ground or another player. So it's just a fumble (aka an unclean catch).
    Hmm... We could be back to the interpretation of the Boolean logic in this definition
    Knock-on: When a player loses possession of the ball and it goes forward, or when a player hits the ball forward with the hand or arm, or when the ball hits the hand or arm and goes forward, and the ball touches the ground or another player before the original player can catch it.


    One could parse that many ways.
    1) When a player loses possession of the ball and it goes forward,
    OR when a player hits the ball forward with the hand or arm,
    OR [ when the ball hits the hand or arm and goes forward, AND the ball touches the ground or another player before the original player can catch it. ]

    or...

    2) [ When a player loses possession of the ball and it goes forward,
    OR when a player hits the ball forward with the hand or arm,
    OR when the ball hits the hand or arm and goes forward, ]
    AND
    [ the ball touches the ground or another player before the original player can catch it. ]

    I have seen both interpretations but (2) is the one I use.

  4. #24
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    Cardiff Society of Welsh Rugby Union Referees
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    05 Jan 18
    Posts
    1,919

    Default Re: MARK - Is this a valid mark ?

    Quote Originally Posted by OB.. View Post
    2017
    18 Definition The player must make a clean catch direct from an opponent's kick

    2018
    17.1 (b) Catch a ball that has reached the plane of the 22-metre line directly from an opponent’s kick before it touches the ground or another player

    The law appears to have changed so that the referee no longer needs to decide if it was a "clean" catch.

    The bit about touching a post first was in the 2017 law as well, where it clearly meant that touching a post did not make the catch indirect.

    That bit is interesting. In 2018 there was no reference to the ball reaching the plane. of the 22.

    With regard to the ball going from the "catcher" onto a post and back, I would say that that nulifies the catch and it becomes a Knock on. Would he have regatherd had it not hit the post? I have not thought about this before and will chat in Society mut that is my initial thought.

  5. #25

    Referees in England


    Soc/Assoc
    --
    Grade
    Grassroots
    Join Date
    14 Sep 09
    Posts
    18,701

    Default Re: MARK - Is this a valid mark ?

    Here's Law 17 from the Law Book (the current Law Book, FFS, the 2019 Law Book! )


    17 Mark
    PRINCIPLE
    A means of stopping play within a player’s own 22 by directly catching an opponent’s kick.

    CLAIMING A MARK

    To claim a mark, a player must:

    Have at least one foot on or behind their own 22-metre line when catching the ball or when landing having caught it in the air; and
    Catch a ball that has reached the plane of the 22-metre line directly from an opponent’s kick before it touches the ground or another player; and

    Simultaneously call “mark”.

    A player may claim a mark even if the ball hits a goal post or crossbar before being caught.

    When a mark is called correctly, the referee immediately stops the game and awards a free-kick to the team in possession.
    A mark may not be claimed from a kick-off or a restart kick after a score.


    1 - The plane is still mentioned and important
    2 - No need for the catch to be 'clean' (whatever that used to mean, back in the day)
    3 - Anyone spot the error in the Law? Clue1 : it's in the very first sentence of Law 17, and contradiscted in the last sentence

    Place of the mark Location of free-kick
    Within the 22 At the place of the mark but at least five metres from the goal line, in line with the place of the mark.
    Within the in-goal On the five-metre line in line with the place of the mark.

  6. #26

    Referees in England
    Phil E's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Staffordshire and Royal Navy
    Grade
    8
    Join Date
    22 Jan 08
    Posts
    15,027
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: MARK - Is this a valid mark ?

    I am not convinced that a bobbled catch can now claim a Mark, but have asked the question of laws@RFU.com
    Let's see what they say in reply?

    Follow my Award Winning blog The Rugby Ref


  7. #27

    Referees in Wales
    Taff's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Llanelli District
    Grade
    WRU Level 2
    Join Date
    23 Aug 09
    Posts
    6,936

    Default Re: MARK - Is this a valid mark ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Wakeham View Post
    ... With regard to the ball going from the "catcher" onto a post and back, I would say that that nulifies the catch and it becomes a Knock on. Would he have regatherd had it not hit the post?
    I think the reference to the posts means if the ball rebounds off the post and the catcher claims a mark, he can still have it.

  8. #28

    Referees in Australia
    Dickie E's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    VRRA
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    19 Jan 07
    Posts
    12,870

    Default Re: MARK - Is this a valid mark ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Phil E View Post
    I am not convinced that a bobbled catch can now claim a Mark, but have asked the question of laws@RFU.com
    Let's see what they say in reply?
    if they come back and say the bobbled catch is not a mark, then the wording of the whole of the 2019 lawbook will be in doubt.
    I, for one, like Roman numerals

  9. #29

    Resident Club Coach
    didds's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    N/A
    Grade
    Club Coach
    Join Date
    27 Jan 04
    Posts
    10,117

    Default Re: MARK - Is this a valid mark ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dickie E View Post
    if they come back and say the bobbled catch is not a mark, then the wording of the whole of the 2019 lawbook will be in doubt.
    Go to jail.
    Do not collect £200

  10. #30

    Referees in England
    Phil E's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Staffordshire and Royal Navy
    Grade
    8
    Join Date
    22 Jan 08
    Posts
    15,027
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: MARK - Is this a valid mark ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dickie E View Post
    if they come back and say the bobbled catch is not a mark, then the wording of the whole of the 2019 lawbook will be in doubt.
    It could be the end of civilisation as we know it!

    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)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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