Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 61

Thread: Why isn't this offisde under 10m law ?

      
  1. #31

    Referees in England


    Soc/Assoc
    Cumbria -The North
    Grade
    Advisor/Assessor
    Join Date
    14 Mar 05
    Posts
    1,836

    Default Re: Why isn't this offisde under 10m law ?

    A charge down is an attempt by a player to block or deflect an opponent's kick by intentional touching the ball. Once touched by an opponent all the kicker's team ahead of the kicker are not offside. If the ball is not caught but merely deflected behind the opponent no player is offside- Play on.
    Last edited by tim White; 24-08-20 at 18:08.
    Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.
    (Groucho Marx)

  2. #32

    Referees in England


    Soc/Assoc
    --
    Grade
    Grassroots
    Join Date
    14 Sep 09
    Posts
    19,235

    Default Re: Why isn't this offisde under 10m law ?

    Quote Originally Posted by tim White View Post
    A charge down is an attempt by a player to block or deflect an opponent's kick by intentional touching the ball. Once touched by an opponent all the kicker's team ahead of the kicker are not offside. If the ball is not caught but merely deflected behind the opponent no player is offside- Play on.
    So looking at 10.4.ç. Give an example of the ball being played (but not charged down) what would that look like ?

  3. #33

    Resident Club Coach
    didds's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    N/A
    Grade
    Club Coach
    Join Date
    27 Jan 04
    Posts
    10,474

    Default Re: Why isn't this offisde under 10m law ?

    Quote Originally Posted by tim White View Post
    A charge down is an attempt by a player to block or deflect an opponent's kick by intentional touching the ball. Once touched by an opponent all the kicker's team ahead of the kicker are not offside. If the ball is not caught but merely deflected behind the opponent no player is offside- Play on.
    but a charge down isnt caught.. so what's the distinction?



    didds

  4. #34

    Referees in America
    Not Kurt Weaver's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Ohio
    Grade
    C3
    Join Date
    11 Sep 08
    Posts
    2,265
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: Why isn't this offisde under 10m law ?

    Quote Originally Posted by CrouchTPEngage View Post

    Nope. That's not quite what I was after,either. I need help here, people !
    Anyone good at writing laws ?
    Quote Originally Posted by tim White View Post
    A charge down is an attempt by a player to block or deflect an opponent's kick by intentional touching the ball. Once touched by an opponent all the kicker's team ahead of the kicker are not offside. If the ball is not caught but merely deflected behind the opponent no player is offside- Play on.
    TW was your post a response to CTPE request for help?

  5. #35

    Referees in Scotland
    Jolly Roger's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Edinburgh - ERRS
    Grade
    Level 6
    Join Date
    19 Feb 10
    Posts
    209

    Default Re: Why isn't this offisde under 10m law ?

    “Clarification of the designated members of the Rugby Committee
    1. The act of a charge down is one where an opposition player not in possession of the ball approaches a kicker at close quarters and makes an attempt to block the kick. In such circumstances players in front of the kicker who are within 10 metres of the kick are not liable to penalty wherever the ball lands.
    2. If the ball is not charged down but is played or touches an opposition player and a player from the kicker’s side is within the 10 metre area in front of the kick that player is liable to penalty in accordance with Law 11.4(f).”

    I think that when the Rugby Committee says “within 10m of the kick” and “within the 10m area in front of the kick” they are referring to where the ball lands, i.e. where it was kicked to not where it was kicked from. As there is nothing in law that refers to the area 10m in front of the kicker other than at a penalty.

    So what they are saying is that an attempted charge down where contact is made with the ball constitutes a charge down. Yes, this should be within the Definition section. Therefore, all players are put onside and the try in OP stands.

    The rewrite of the laws is going to drive me away from refereeing. It was supposed to simplify but has created so much confusion amongst players and referees alike.
    Keep smiling!

  6. #36

    Advises in England
    OB..'s Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Glos & District
    Grade
    Adviser (grass roots)
    Join Date
    07 Oct 04
    Posts
    22,866

    Default Re: Why isn't this offisde under 10m law ?

    I've looked back at the laws to see what was said before they were "simplified". They used the phrase "waiting to play the ball", which was clearly not the case here. There used to be 7 paragraphs on the 10 Metre Law - now there is just one.

    For me the essence of a charge down is that the ball stops going upfield. It also needs to be fairly close; the defender tries to block the ball but has no realistic chance to avoid a potential knock-on.

    That analysis would allow the try.
    Last edited by OB..; 25-08-20 at 20:08.
    He trudg’d along unknowing what he sought,
    And whistled as he went, for want of thought.
    The Referee by John Dryden

  7. #37

    Referees in England


    Soc/Assoc
    --
    Grade
    Grassroots
    Join Date
    14 Sep 09
    Posts
    19,235

    Default Re: Why isn't this offisde under 10m law ?

    I don't think you can blame this on the rewrite .. it was unclear before, it's still unclearly written

  8. #38

    ELRA/Club Referee


    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Select Grade
    Join Date
    08 Nov 18
    Posts
    261

    Default Re: Why isn't this offisde under 10m law ?

    So it boils down to whether or not the referee thinks that touching the ball in flight constitutes a charge down. If yes then the try is legal, if not then he's offside. What would happen if after touching the ball in flight in a similar manner it had rebounded off the post and he'd picked it up and scored

  9. #39

    Referees in England
    chbg's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    D&WRURS, HRURS & ARURS
    Grade
    Level 8
    Join Date
    15 May 09
    Posts
    1,153

    Default Re: Why isn't this offisde under 10m law ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jz558 View Post
    So it boils down to whether or not the referee thinks that touching the ball in flight constitutes a charge down. If yes then the try is legal, if not then he's offside. What would happen if after touching the ball in flight in a similar manner it had rebounded off the post and he'd picked it up and scored
    No difference, as I feel that you know. Although may it depend on which set of goalposts?
    Be reasonable - do it my way.

  10. #40

    Referees in Australia
    Dickie E's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    VRRA
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    19 Jan 07
    Posts
    13,157

    Default Re: Why isn't this offisde under 10m law ?

    Quote Originally Posted by OB.. View Post

    For me the essence of a charge down is that the ball stops going upfield.

    That analysis would allow the try.
    aren't those 2 statements contradictory?
    I, for one, like Roman numerals

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
  •