Laws Question? Ask here!

castie · 03-02-2012 5:53pm

kensutz wrote: »

Yes there is a law.

16.4 (f) A player must not take any action to make the opposing team think that the ball is out of
the ruck while it is still in the ruck

I remember one of my first games I reffed, someone tried it and I pinged them for it. The scrum half was baffled and I told him he tried to get the opposition in an offside position from dummying a play and free kick was going against him.

It specifically says ruck though.
So cant be applied to a scrum in my opinion

Losty Dublin · 03-02-2012 6:13pm

castie wrote: »

It specifically says ruck though.
So cant be applied to a scrum in my opinion

There is the same offence at a maul (17.3.b) and a scrum (20.9.f).

castie · 04-02-2012 5:32am

Losty Dublin wrote: »

There is the same offence at a maul (17.3.b) and a scrum (20.9.f).

Thanks.

For anyone looking it up later its 20.9.h on the irb site.

(h) Scrum half: Dummying. A scrum half must not take any action to make the opponents think that the ball is out of the scrum while it is still in the scrum.
Sanction: Free Kick

MyKeyG · 10-02-2012 8:24pm

Can someone point out the law that precludes tipping the ball over an opponents head as being classified a knock on? I just saw it in Ulsters first try. I scanned through the thread so if it was mentioned already apologies.

PS: What a good second try!!!

Losty Dublin · 10-02-2012 9:09pm

MyKeyG wrote: »

Can someone point out the law that precludes tipping the ball over an opponents head as being classified a knock on? I just saw it in Ulsters first try. I scanned through the thread so if it was mentioned already apologies.

PS: What a good second try!!!

Law 12 is where it's at

MyKeyG · 10-02-2012 10:05pm

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Law 12 is where it's at

Well that's my point. According to law 12:

DEFINITION: KNOCK-ON
A knock-on occurs 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.
‘Forward’ means towards the opposing team’s dead ball line.

EXCEPTION
Charge down. If a player charges down the ball as an opponent kicks it, or
immediately after the kick, it is not a knock-on even though the ball may travel
forward.

By definition to tip the ball over your opponents head should be a knock on. So I return to my original question seeing as how Law 12 isn't in fact where it's at.

Losty Dublin · 10-02-2012 10:13pm

MyKeyG wrote: »

Well that's my point. According to law 12:

By definition to tip the ball over your opponents head should be a knock on. So I return to my original question seeing as how Law 12 isn't in fact where it's at.

The crucial part is the end of the definition... "and the ball touches the ground or another player before the original player can catch it."

It is not as well worded as it ought to be and it can be easily read wrong.

rje66 · 10-02-2012 11:12pm

refer to law 12.1 (e) a player must not intentionally knock the ball forward with hand or arm , nor throw forward

sanction : pen

daveharnett · 10-02-2012 11:40pm

rje66 wrote: »

refer to law 12.1 (e) a player must not intentionally knock the ball forward with hand or arm , nor throw forward

sanction : pen

Without seeing the event in question, application of this law depends on the player's intent. Deliberately throwing or propelling the ball forward to beat a man falls under 12.1

On the other hand, if a player deliberately 'juggles' the ball forward in a (successful) effort to gain control of it, play on. While the player is juggling, defending players are in their rights to tackle/hold the would-be ball carrier.

For Paws · 11-02-2012 12:00am

daveharnett wrote: »

Without seeing the event in question, application of this law depends on the player's intent. Deliberately throwing or propelling the ball forward to beat a man falls under 12.1

On the other hand, if a player deliberately 'juggles' the ball forward in a (successful) effort to gain control of it, play on. While the player is juggling, defending players are in their rights to tackle/hold the would-be ball carrier.

This would seem to indicate that a player 'juggling' the ball is still considered to be in possession of the ball.
Law 12 does not seem to distinguish between 'juggling' while attempting to retain control and 'juggling' deliberately in order to gain an advantage.
Law 12 is specific on what constitutes a 'KNOCK ON' and it's meaning is clearly predicated by the phrase 'touches the ground or another player, before the original player can catch it'.
It follows that a player can deliberately play the ball over or past an opponent in order to gain an advantage, as long as the ball does not touch the ground or another player before he can catch it.

daveharnett · 11-02-2012 12:11am

For Paws wrote: »

This would seem to indicate that a player 'juggling' the ball is still considered to be in possession of the ball.
Law 12 does not seem to distinguish between 'juggling' while attempting to retain control and 'juggling' deliberately in order to gain an advantage.
Law 12 is specific on what constitutes a 'KNOCK ON' and it's meaning is clearly predicated by the phrase 'touches the ground or another player, before the original player can catch it'.
It follows that a player can deliberately play the ball over or past an opponent in order to gain an advantage, as long as the ball does not touch the ground or another player before he can catch it.

That's a logical line of reasoning, but I don't know many refs who'd interpret it that way. Hand passing the ball over opponent's heads isn't part of rugby.

For Paws · 11-02-2012 12:16am

A throw forward occurs when a player throws or passes the ball forward. ‘Forward’ means towards the opposing team’s dead ball line.

Result of an 'Unintentional throw forward'; a scrum must be awarded at the place of infringement.

Law 12 (1) e. seems to deal with a player not in possession deliberately 'throwing or passing' a ball forward in order to gain an advantage.

For Paws · 11-02-2012 12:24am

Having just had a chance to review Ulster's 1st try tonight.

It seems that an 'Unintentional throw forward' does occur and the referee erred in not awarding a scrum to Dragons.

It would seem that the Laws envisage a situation where a player in possession can
unintentionally throw or pass a ball forward, and the offence differs from a knock on, but has the same result / saction.

MyKeyG · 11-02-2012 10:12am

For Paws wrote: »

Having just had a chance to review Ulster's 1st try tonight.

It seems that an 'Unintentional throw forward' does occur and the referee erred in not awarding a scrum to Dragons.

It would seem that the Laws envisage a situation where a player in possession can
unintentionally throw or pass a ball forward, and the offence differs from a knock on, but has the same result / saction.

Yes and it was so blatant. Now unfortunately I can't come up with a precise example (I have a recent one stuck in my head I just can't think of what match) but it's happening more and more so it seems that it's OK. I'd just love to know why since according to the laws it's illegal.

chippers · 11-02-2012 2:30pm

Quick question - is pulling a player down by the collar of their shirt classified as a high tackle or is it legal?

Shelflife · 11-02-2012 2:44pm

High tackle , its above the shoulders and dangerous .

For Paws · 11-02-2012 3:34pm

It is difficult to understand, given the specific inclusion in Law 12 of the 'Unintentional throw forward', how any player losing and regaining control of the ball 'forward' is not considered to have breached Law 12.
In other words 'no juggling allowed'.

Is it the case then, that only when the ball has moved in any direction except towards the opposing team's dead ball line, that a 'juggle' is allowed.

Since the case already exists, that where a player loses possession of the ball, but does not cause the ball to move 'forward' play may continue (without 'advantage' awarded).
In this case it is not relevant that the ball touches the ground or another player.
It is therefore not considered a 'juggle', but simply a knock back.
If this is not a juggle, and any other juggle is a 'throw forward', then by definition the juggle (where play is allowed to continue) does not exist.

MungBean · 11-02-2012 3:45pm

Rarely penalised though from what I have seen.

For Paws · 11-02-2012 4:22pm

Law 10.1(b)
Running in front of a ball carrier. A player must not intentionally move or stand in front of
a team-mate carrying the ball thereby preventing opponents from tackling the current ball carrier or the opportunity to tackle potential ball carriers when they gain possession.

Is this not what 'dummy runners' consistently do ?
They 'intentionally move'.
They are in 'front of a team-mate carrying the ball'.
Their presence in such a position effectively hinders opposition players from moving to engage / tackle the ball carrier and other 'potential ball carriers'.

Why is this not considered to be a breach of Law 10 ?
Although Law 10 makes no mention of actual contact being made between the would be tackler(s) and the 'dummy runner(s)', contact seems to define when the majority of referees signal 'crossing' or 'blocking'.

Similarly when forwards not engaged in a ruck, and not bound to the ruck, stand to the
side of such ruck, and not behind the rearmost foot.
Why are these players not deemed to 'have stood.... in front of a team-mate carrying the ball' ?

Any views ?

Teddy455 · 11-02-2012 6:24pm

Is one awarded the points if the ball is coming towards them and bounces in front of them and then they volley it in the air and it goes over the bar?

Shelflife · 11-02-2012 7:04pm

Teddy455 wrote: »

Is one awarded the points if the ball is coming towards them and bounces in front of them and then they volley it in the air and it goes over the bar?

No, one is not awarded the points as they never drop kicked the ball. they must have the ball in hand to perform a drop kick/

Shelflife · 11-02-2012 7:08pm

thereby preventing opponents from tackling the current ball carrier or the opportunity to tackle potential ball carriers when they gain possession.

For paws this is the crucial part, there is nothing to stop a player jogging up the pitch and standing on the try line, as long as he doesnt do the above.

as for the ruck area, if they are infront of the ball and interfere with the oppostion in their attempt to get the ball or ball carrier then they are penalised

rje66 · 11-02-2012 9:39pm

daveharnett wrote: »

Without seeing the event in question, application of this law depends on the player's intent. Deliberately throwing or propelling the ball forward to beat a man falls under 12.1

On the other hand, if a player deliberately 'juggles' the ball forward in a (successful) effort to gain control of it, play on. While the player is juggling, defending players are in their rights to tackle/hold the would-be ball carrier.

referees dont take intent into consideration, just facts

rje66 · 11-02-2012 9:53pm

For Paws wrote: »

Law 10.1(b)
Running in front of a ball carrier. A player must not intentionally move or stand in front of
a team-mate carrying the ball thereby preventing opponents from tackling the current ball carrier or the opportunity to tackle potential ball carriers when they gain possession.

Is this not what 'dummy runners' consistently do ?
They 'intentionally move'.
They are in 'front of a team-mate carrying the ball'.
Their presence in such a position effectively hinders opposition players from moving to engage / tackle the ball carrier and other 'potential ball carriers'.

Why is this not considered to be a breach of Law 10 ?
Although Law 10 makes no mention of actual contact being made between the would be tackler(s) and the 'dummy runner(s)', contact seems to define when the majority of referees signal 'crossing' or 'blocking'.

Any views ?

if they have a material effect then they are liable for sanction.

eg red kick long, white 15 catches but bumps into his winger who is just in front of him, but kick chasers are 15m away, no material effect, play on.
or
red kick long, white 15 catches but bumps into his winger who is just in front of him, and kick chasers are 1m away, material effect, penalty.

Losty Dublin · 11-02-2012 10:10pm

rje66 wrote: »

referees dont take intent into consideration, just facts

I don't want to cause a ruction here but I think Dave Hartnett, being a ARLB ref, would know a wee bit more about this than the average man on the street

rje66 · 11-02-2012 10:48pm

he will agree with me:):)

For Paws · 12-02-2012 7:22pm

Running in front of a ball carrier. A player must not intentionally move or stand in front of
a team-mate carrying the ball thereby preventing opponents from tackling the current ball
carrier or the opportunity to tackle potential ball carriers when they gain possession.

if they have a material effect then they are liable for sanction.

If the practice of using dummy runners has no 'material effect' then why do so many coaches incorporate it into their plays then ?

Reloc8 · 12-02-2012 9:04pm

^

For Paws wrote: »

... thereby preventing opponents from tackling the current ball
carrier or the opportunity to tackle potential ball carriers when they gain possession.

It can be fine line between distracting/fixing the defence and (physically) 'preventing opponents from tackling'.

Done properly, dummy lines work great. Done badly, they'll be penalised, where they stop a tackler from tackling.

rje66 · 12-02-2012 9:24pm

agree.

also remember there will be other situations in a game where team mates of ball carrier are in front of him, eg full back returns kick , are you saying his team mates should be treated the same as dummy runners,

That law is there to cover obvious obstruction, if none takes place then play on

daveharnett · 12-02-2012 9:46pm

rje66 wrote: »

referees dont take intent into consideration, just facts

Refs (and their organisations) like to say this, and it's true for dangerous play.

http://www.irblaws.com/EN/guidelines/ wrote: »

Referees and Citing Commissioners should not make their decisions based on what they consider was the intention of the offending player. Their decision should be based on an objective assessment (as per Law 10.4(e)) of the overall circumstances of the tackle.

For other types of offenses, intent matters:

10.2 UNFAIR PLAY wrote:

(a) Intentionally Offending. A player must not intentionally infringe any Law of the Game, or play unfairly. The player who intentionally offends must be either admonished, or cautioned ... or sent off.
Sanction: Penalty kick

1 Paragraph Later wrote:

(b) Time-wasting. A player must not intentionally waste time.
Sanction: Free Kick

(Emphasis mine)

Search the book for 'deliberately' and 'intentionally', and you come to realize that refs are called to read players' minds pretty regularly.

Laws Question? Ask here!

Comments