[Law] I hate these weird touch scenarios !

Phil E

, Referees/Trains Referees in England
#61
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.
Which bit of law says that?

The new bit of law about who gets the lineout (depending on which side of the plane the ball is caught) only applies if the ball is caught or held.

The law doesn't mention some bits of your scenario so we are still in the dark, but your assumptions are not all correct.
 

crossref

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/england.p
#62
Which bit of law says that?
this is the question that ChrisR asked to SARefs, USARugby and the RFU (see posts 39, 46, 50 above, do keep up, Phil!) all gave the same answer -- here's SARefs as it is on-line

SAReferees (http://www.sareferees.co.za/ref-repl...erden/2829678/) answered.

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?
Jaco van Heerden: Hi Chris
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
NB - see above RFU gave the same answer, and I know you won't claim they got it wrong.
 
Last edited:

Phil E

, Referees/Trains Referees in England
#63
this is the question that ChrisR asked to SARefs, USARugby and the RFU (see posts 39, 46, 50 above, do keep up, Phil!) all gave the same answer -- here's SARefs as it is on-line

NB - see above RFU gave the same answer, and I know you won't claim they got it wrong.
Yes I understand that (despite your sarcasm), but I don't understand the point you are trying to make.

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..
The ball is always in this twilight zone because it's not in touch until it touches something or someone in touch.
If the ball is 100 feet up in the air we can't decide if it's in touch or not until it comes down. It's the same if its 1 foot in the air.
 

crossref

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/england.p
#64
the point I am making is that the Law, as explained by RFU et al doesn't make sense

- blue kick the ball
- red player leaps from FoP
- ball crosses the plane
[ball is now in twilight zone, might end up in touch, might not]
- red player bats it backwards ....
[it's still in the twilight zone, might end up in touch, might not]
- it lands in touch

Despite red being the last person to play it it's going to be (per RFU, SARefs, USARugby) a red line out.

I don't think that makes sense - do you ?
 
Last edited:

Phil E

, Referees/Trains Referees in England
#65
the point I am making is that the Law, as explained by RFU et al doesn't make sense

- blue kick the ball
- red player leaps from FoP
- ball crosses the plane
[ball is now in twilight zone, might end up in touch, might not]
- red player bats it backwards ....
[it's still in the twilight zone, might end up in touch, might not]
- it lands in touch

Despite red being the last person to play it it's going to be (per RFU, SARefs, USARugby) a red line out.

I don't think that makes sense - do you ?

There are lots of pieces of law that don't make sense to me.
I try not to worry about them, just apply them.

I am a referee not a lawmaker.
 

ChrisR

Player or Coach
#66
Which bit of law says that?

The new bit of law about who gets the lineout (depending on which side of the plane the ball is caught) only applies if the ball is caught or held.

The law doesn't mention some bits of your scenario so we are still in the dark, but your assumptions are not all correct.
This is a critical point. As crossref noted all three bodies that I sent the question to referenced the plane of touch when determining who put the ball in touch when the ball is played, but not caught, and it falls in touch.

Personally, I think they are digging a hole for themselves, and for their referees, by incorporating the plane of touch into the decision making. I'm sending this follow-up question to all three:

Blue kicks toward touch. Red, leaping from the playing area attempts to play the ball that has crossed the plane of touch. The ball bounces off his hands towards the opponent’s goal. If the ball lands in the playing area it will be a knock-on. What if the ball lands in touch?

Is it a line-out to Red as the ball, having crossed the plane of touch before it was played, was put into touch by Blue. Or is it a scrum to Blue for the Red knock-on as the ball was still in play when last touched by Red?
 

ChrisR

Player or Coach
#68
If a player in the playing area knocks on and the ball flies directly to touch (not landing in the FoP rolling) do you offer a choice of LO or scrum?
 

crossref

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/england.p
#69
If a player in the playing area knocks on and the ball flies directly to touch (not landing in the FoP rolling) do you offer a choice of LO or scrum?
I do.

And I see your point precisely - consistency with that would lead to an answer to the qu of the same - scrum/line to blue.
but consistency with their answer to your other qu is lineout red.

they have boxed themselves into a bit of a corner...
 

ChrisR

Player or Coach
#70
Xactly, Zachary

. . . and all because someone didn't like a player reaching a foot over to the touch line as he caught the ball . . .
 

Pinky

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/scotland.
#72
the point I am making is that the Law, as explained by RFU et al doesn't make sense

- blue kick the ball
- red player leaps from FoP
- ball crosses the plane
[ball is now in twilight zone, might end up in touch, might not]
- red player bats it backwards ....
[it's still in the twilight zone, might end up in touch, might not]
- it lands in touch

Despite red being the last person to play it it's going to be (per RFU, SARefs, USARugby) a red line out.

I don't think that makes sense - do you ?
i'm happy with this because red only was the last person to play the ball after it had crossed the plane of touch and that is in touch unless it is played by a player in the fop or in the air having jumped from the fop and the ball is actually returned to the fop, when it is play on and decision about whether it is KO or not is appropriate. If the ball does not make it back into the fop then it is touch and a red lineout. For me red playing only matters if the ball is returned to the fop by the red player before he lands in touch.
 

ChrisR

Player or Coach
#73
A quick response from USA Rugby:

"That would be lineout to red as the ball had crossed the plane of the touchline and was not returned to the playing area, which is the only way that particular trial amendment is in effect."

Now there's a thought.