[Law] I hate these weird touch scenarios !

ChuckieB

Rugby Club Member
#41
Crossref, you are halfway there. From USA Rugby:

"You hint at, but don't state explicitly, the key point in this scenario.....that is, had the ball crossed the plane of the touch line before it was played by the player who jumped?

If the ball did cross the plane of touch first, then the player who last played it in the field-of-play is responsible.

If the ball had not yet crossed the plane of touch, then the player who jumped and touched it is responsible."

Haven't heard from RFU Laws yet and the SAReferees will take about a month.
So, USA Rugby have effectively set aside your own interpretation, which is essentially as follows, if I read you correctly?

A player leaping from the field of play and failing to get it back into the FOP is deemed to have taken it into touch.
A player leaping from touch and being unsuccessful at keeping it in play is not deemed to have taken it into touch.
The PoT does not come in play in these circumstances.

I see it as being much easier to see where the player has started from, as compared to where the ball is, i.e. which side of the plane, when that player touches it. So much merit in your ineterpretaion.

Wait and see now on other responses!
 
Last edited:

ChrisR

Player or Coach
#42
Doesn't this from WR answer the question?

The process used to decide who has taken the ball into touch changes for 2017. Previously whether
the ball was rolling or stopped was relevant, now the question is: did the ball reach the plane? If the
ball has reached the plane of touch when it is caught, then the catcher is not deemed to have taken
the ball into touch. If the ball has not reached the plane of touch when it is caught or picked up, then
the catcher is deemed to have taken the ball into touch, regardless of whether the ball was in
motion or stationary.
Actually, no. That bit from WR refers to a ball caught or picked up by a player in touch. Therefore the ball is in touch. The scenario under discussion is where the ball is still in play.

I think the first question to be answered is this: Prior to the 2017 law change if a player, standing in the field of play, attempted to catch a ball but failed and the ball fell into touch was he deemed to have put the ball in touch? I can't recall the 'plane of touch' ever being brought into play but I may well be wrong on that.

This is an important point because the 2017 law change only addresses a player with a foot in touch and should not implicitly change other laws.
 

Dickie E

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/australia
#43
Actually, no. That bit from WR refers to a ball caught or picked up by a player in touch. Therefore the ball is in touch. The scenario under discussion is where the ball is still in play.
So ball hasn't crossed plane of touch and player is in FoP. What's the question?
 

crossref

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/england.p
#44
the question was a leaping player, who leaps and while in the air knocks the ball which falls in touch.

- does it matter which side of the line the player leaps from and/or which side he lands?
- or is it the case that the only thing that matters is which side of the plane does the knock happen ?

(I think it's all about the plane)
 

ChrisR

Player or Coach
#45
So ball hasn't crossed plane of touch and player is in FoP. What's the question?
Not quite. The player is in the FoP or jumps from the FoP, attempts to play the ball back into the FoP but the ball falls in touch. Does it matter whether the ball has crossed the plane of touch or not?

To answer that question we have to answer this one first: Prior to the 2017 law change if a player, standing in the field of play, attempted to catch a ball but failed and the ball fell into touch was he deemed to have put the ball in touch? I can't recall the 'plane of touch' ever being brought into play but I may well be wrong on that.


 

ChrisR

Player or Coach
#46
SAReferees (http://www.sareferees.co.za/ref-replies/duty-ref-539--jaco-van-heerden/2829678/) answered.

[FONT=&quot]Question: A player leaps from the field of play in an attempt to play a ball back into the field of play. He makes contact with the ball but the ball falls in touch. Is that player then responsible for putting the ball into touch?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Jaco van Heerden: Hi Chris[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]This happens quite often. The plane of touch is the key here. If the ball has crossed the plane of touch, then the player is not responsible for touch, conversely if the ball has not cross the plane then the player is responsible for touch.
Good question!
Jaco
OK, crossref etc. two out of three going your way. RFU Laws hasn't responded yet.
[/FONT]

[FONT=Open Sans, sans-serif] [/FONT]
 

didds

, Resident Club Coach
#47
and as a ref 30+ metres away at an angle to the PoT, reliant on a squad substitute as TJ who doesn't understand this stuff anyway and is probably not concentrating either, you can make thius call?

Good luck guys. I really, honestly feel fro you

didds
 

ChuckieB

Rugby Club Member
#48
SAReferees (http://www.sareferees.co.za/ref-replies/duty-ref-539--jaco-van-heerden/2829678/) answered.

[FONT=&amp]Question: A player leaps from the field of play in an attempt to play a ball back into the field of play. He makes contact with the ball but the ball falls in touch. Is that player then responsible for putting the ball into touch?[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]Jaco van Heerden: Hi Chris[/FONT]
[FONT=&amp]This happens quite often. The plane of touch is the key here. If the ball has crossed the plane of touch, then the player is not responsible for touch, conversely if the ball has not cross the plane then the player is responsible for touch.
Good question!
Jaco
OK, crossref etc. two out of three going your way. RFU Laws hasn't responded yet.
[/FONT]
You made a compelling case. Not looking good though!

That an elite ref recognises it happens quite often, perhaps WR should include such clarification when they finalise the amendment.
 

ChrisR

Player or Coach
#49
The elite refs have ARs to make that call. As didds points out, good luck making that call.

What surprised me on this thread was the non-response to this question:

Prior to the 2017 law change: If a player, standing in the field of play, attempted to catch a ball but failed and the ball fell into touch was he deemed to have put the ball in touch? I can't recall the 'plane of touch' ever being brought into play but I may well be wrong on that.
That's an 'old laws' question that should have an answer.

That's a laws question that should have an answer and it impacts on this thread.
 

ChrisR

Player or Coach
#50
Got the answer from Laws@rfu.com. Same as USA Rugby and SAReferees. The outcome of a player in the FoP attempting to play the ball, but having it go to touch, depends on the position of the ball relative to the LoT. If the referee judges that the ball had not crossed the Po T then the receiving player put it to touch.

I'm disappointed that these august bodies don't share my insight into the Laws and how they can be effectively applied.

So here is the next question: A player in the FoP, or leaping from the FoP, attempts to catch/play the ball but knocks it forward into touch. You judge that when he played the ball that the ball had crossed the plane of touch. Do you order a lineout to that player's team or a scrum to the opponents for the knock-on?
 

Phil E

, Referees/Trains Referees in England
#51
Got the answer from Laws@rfu.com. Same as USA Rugby and SAReferees. The outcome of a player in the FoP attempting to play the ball, but having it go to touch, depends on the position of the ball relative to the LoT. If the referee judges that the ball had not crossed the Po T then the receiving player put it to touch.

I'm disappointed that these august bodies don't share my insight into the Laws and how they can be effectively applied.
I suspect they may be disappointed that a referee does not share their stated application of the laws?
 

ChrisR

Player or Coach
#53
Just had another thought on this (do I hear a collective groan?).

What if the Red player in the FoP (or leaping from the FoP) bats the ball, kicked by Blue, and it goes forward and lands in touch?

If you deem the ball to have crossed the plane of touch when Red plays it is it then a Line-out to Red (ball played to touch by Blue) or a scrum to Blue (knock-on by Red)?
 

ChuckieB

Rugby Club Member
#54
Just had another thought on this (do I hear a collective groan?).

What if the Red player in the FoP (or leaping from the FoP) bats the ball, kicked by Blue, and it goes forward and lands in touch?

If you deem the ball to have crossed the plane of touch when Red plays it is it then a Line-out to Red (ball played to touch by Blue) or a scrum to Blue (knock-on by Red)?
If it's in touch, it's in touch as the ball has crossed the plane and the ball is dead. Of course you don't know for sure until the leaping player (1) then himself lands in touch (2) thereby confirming it is in touch (3) by which point he might have also knocked it forward (4). 4 comes before 3, yet gets ignored!

....Good Grief!
 

ChrisR

Player or Coach
#55
If it's in touch, it's in touch as the ball has crossed the plane and the ball is dead. Of course you don't know for sure until the leaping player (1) then himself lands in touch (2) thereby confirming it is in touch (3) by which point he might have also knocked it forward (4). 4 comes before 3, yet gets ignored!

....Good Grief!
No, the ball is not dead. Crossing the plane doesn't make it dead. It has to land in touch or contact a player/object in touch. (Consider a ball kicked into the wind that crosses the plane and gets blown back).

The player who plays the ball is not in touch until he lands there so it is still a live ball when he knocks on.

If a player, in the playing area knocks a ball (that has not crossed the plane) forward and it lands in touch it is still a knock-on. Or, does it have to land in the field of play and then go into touch. In either case the opponents get a choice of scrum or lineout.

So, what is it?
 

ChuckieB

Rugby Club Member
#56
No, the ball is not dead. Crossing the plane doesn't make it dead. It has to land in touch or contact a player/object in touch. (Consider a ball kicked into the wind that crosses the plane and gets blown back).

The player who plays the ball is not in touch until he lands there so it is still a live ball when he knocks on.

If a player, in the playing area knocks a ball (that has not crossed the plane) forward and it lands in touch it is still a knock-on. Or, does it have to land in the field of play and then go into touch. In either case the opponents get a choice of scrum or lineout.

So, what is it?
I did say you won't know for sure until he lands!
 

crossref

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/england.p
#59
The Law makes no logical sense, so I don't think we can make reliable inferences to cover any scenario that is not expressly covered.

Let's at the answer that SARefs, USARefs and RFU, all gave, consistently to ChrisR, and look at the the specific case --

- blue kick the ball
- red player leaps from FoP
- ball crosses the plane
- red player bats it backwards and the ball lands..

1 - if ball lands in touch then all three unions agreed BLUE put it there, by kicking it over the plane
2 - but if the ball lands in the FoP then, somehow, despite blue kicking it over the plane, it was never in touch at all .... play on (Law Amendment Trial - see L19 defintions)

So after red bats the ball, the ball is in a twilight zone, it might be in touch, it might not be in touch, it depends where it lands..
and if it lands in touch then ... despite red being the last person to play it it's going to be a red line out.


So from this I would suggest that the Law makes no sense and for any particular scenario not explicitly covered in the Law or in a WR judgement, we can't really know the answer for sure.
 
Last edited: