Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 234567 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 61

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

      
  1. #51

    Referees in England
    chbg's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    D&WRURS, HRURS & ARURS
    Grade
    Level 8
    Join Date
    15 May 09
    Posts
    1,184

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Not Kurt Weaver View Post
    It is a reference. What is your reference? , "Everybody knows"

    It called a charge"down", hence what happens to the ball as down.

    No good, but what r u hanging ur hat upon?
    Because that only occurs under Law 11-Knock on (which is actually later in the Law Book than Law 10 Offside) and it is not included in Definitions.

    To take your position to the extreme, if the 'charge down' actually goes upwards from the hands/arms (and that happens pretty often) and not downwards as in the picture in Law 11, then it cannot fall under the exclusions from a knock-on. Actually the Law "knocks the ball forward", so we cannot rely just on the picture (or the word 'down').

    Why is that the only description of a charge down? Because an attempted 'charge down' that doesn't go forward is not going to worry the judiciary in a Knock-on Law.

    We just suggest for clarity that a charge down should be defined in the manner that it is refereed in custom.
    Be reasonable - do it my way.

  2. #52

    Referees in England


    Soc/Assoc
    --
    Grade
    Grassroots
    Join Date
    14 Sep 09
    Posts
    19,365

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Not Kurt Weaver View Post
    .

    No good, but what r u hanging ur hat upon?
    I don't think there is any definition on which to hang it.

  3. #53

    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 crossref View Post
    I don't think there is any definition on which to hang it.
    But I have some evidence, when looking for evidence it is not always good evidence.

    For instance, circumstantial evidence is not great in court of law, but it is a "kind of evidence"
    Last edited by Not Kurt Weaver; 30-08-20 at 23:08.

  4. #54

    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 chbg View Post

    To take your position to the extreme, if the 'charge down' actually goes upwards from the hands/arms (and that happens pretty often) and not downwards as in the picture in Law 11, then it cannot fall under the exclusions from a knock-on. Actually the Law "knocks the ball forward", so we cannot rely just on the picture (or the word 'down').
    .
    Eventually that charge down describe in red, will come down and also forward.

  5. #55

    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 chbg View Post


    Why is that the only description of a charge down? Because an attempted 'charge down' that doesn't go forward is not going to worry the judiciary in a Knock-on Law.

    .
    If it doesn't go forward it is not a charge down, it is played and does not negate 10m law.
    A "proper" charge down does negate the 10m because there is not 10m of existance.
    Last edited by Not Kurt Weaver; 30-08-20 at 23:08.

  6. #56

    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 chbg View Post

    We just suggest for clarity that a charge down should be defined in the manner that it is refereed in custom.
    I understand the custom, which may be incorrect, but that custom does not protect the receiving/catching player from a previously offside player smashing them to dust. If fact, the custom further increases the likelihood of mid air collisions.
    Last edited by Not Kurt Weaver; 30-08-20 at 23:08.

  7. #57
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    Cardiff Society of Welsh Rugby Union Referees
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    05 Jan 18
    Posts
    2,210

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Not Kurt Weaver View Post
    If it doesn't go forward it is not a charge down, it is played and does not negate 10m law.
    A "proper" charge down does negate the 10m because there is not 10m of existance.
    That would be a successful charge down. not a "proper one". Cf a attempt at a conversion one that misses is unsuccessful the other is succerssful,. both are "proper" what ever that means.

    The law, as other have tried to does not define a chargedown.You disagree by quotinga partly rerlated section of the knock on law. I see little reward in following that line of thinking.

  8. #58

    Advises in England
    OB..'s Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Glos & District
    Grade
    Adviser (grass roots)
    Join Date
    07 Oct 04
    Posts
    22,907

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Wakeham View Post
    That would be a successful charge down. not a "proper one". Cf a attempt at a conversion one that misses is unsuccessful the other is succerssful,. both are "proper" what ever that means.

    The law, as other have tried to does not define a chargedown.You disagree by quotinga partly rerlated section of the knock on law. I see little reward in following that line of thinking.
    The relevance of that line of thinking is that the aim is to prevent a charge down from being penalised as a knock-on. I take that to be because the charger is deemed to be unable to adjust to the kick because he is too close. It also helps the referee who does not have to decide which part of the player the ball actually hit.

    An effective charge down will normally send the ball back in the other direction. However the action might merely deflect the ball on its way upfield - hence the problem. At present it seems that this is a risk that the player must accept, with the illustrated potential consequences.
    He trudg’d along unknowing what he sought,
    And whistled as he went, for want of thought.
    The Referee by John Dryden

  9. #59
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    Cardiff Society of Welsh Rugby Union Referees
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    05 Jan 18
    Posts
    2,210

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

    However, yours are not the posters words.

  10. #60

    Referees in New Zealand
    Ian_Cook's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Retired player and referee
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    12 Jul 05
    Posts
    13,633

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

    Personally, I have never seen any referee, at any level of the game, penalise a downfield player for offside (under the 10M law or otherwise) when the ball has been clearly touched in flight. On the contrary, most referees will yell "touched" so all players know that everyone downfield is onside. Pulling out the whistle and PKing a player for 10M offside after yelling "touched" would count as a real "gotcha" moment.

    Its important to keep in mind that 10M law is all about where the ball lands or is caught after being kicked.

    Law 10.4. An offside player may be penalised, if that player:

    c:
    Was in front of a team-mate who kicked the ball and fails to retire immediately behind an onside team-mate or an imaginary line across the field 10 metres on that player’s side from where the ball is caught or lands, even if it hits a goal post or crossbar first. If this involves more than one player, then the player closest to where the ball lands or is caught is the one penalised. This is known as the 10-metre law and still applies if the ball touches or is played by an opponent but not when the kick is charged down.


    The ball touched in flight has not been caught, nor has it landed, so that makes all players onside irrespective of the 10M Law. That the ball will land later is irrelevant, because the last player who played the ball was an opponent, so all those players have been previously made onside under law 10.1. Law 10.4c cannot override that.

    IMO This Law was written with the intention of not making any downfield team-mates of the kicker onside when an opponent near where the ball lands, touches or plays the ball in an unsuccessful attempt to field it, for example, an opponent attempts to catch the ball but drops it behind him. An action like that will put those players onside in scenarios where the 10M Law does not apply

    Law 10.7: Other than under Law 10.4c, an offside player can be put onside when:
    b:
    An opponent of that player.
    i:
    Carries the ball five metres, or
    i
    i.Passes the ball, or
    iii:
    Kicks the ball, or
    iv
    Intentionally touches the ball without gaining possession of it.


    As often happens in here, the Law has been over-analysed to the nth degree, in discussions involving numbers of angels on pin heads. This is unhelpful to newish referees looking for answers. The words printed in the Laws do not matter as much as how they are officially interpreted - what really matters is what advice we should give to referees should they encounter this scenario in their games. My advice would be that, when a player attempts to block a kick, and the ball is touched in flight by the blocker, then all players of both sides that are downfield of the blocker, are onside.
    Last edited by Ian_Cook; 01-09-20 at 06:09.
    "You can Google for information, but you can't Google for understanding"
    - Jay Windley

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
  •