Wellington 7s Final - Offside

chalksta

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/newzealan
#1
I noticed this occurrence while watching the game and it is a scenario that is not often seen where the ball is knocked backwards and then picked up by a player in front. Just want to get other peoples thoughts on what their decision would be.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwzpSTxDjc8#t=17m07s

In my view SA 4 is in an offside position so play should have stopped with a scrum to SA for the initial knock on infringement.
 

Ian_Cook

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/newzealan
#2
Its a difficult scenario and one that the Laws don't actually address very well.

The question is, when a player plays at the ball and then retires or moves back towards his own dead ball line, does the offside line (for team-mates who wish to play the ball) move back within him, or does it remain a line across the field where the ball was played?

Imagine this scenario: A fullback (with all his 14 team-mates ahead of him) is tackled just out from his own goal-line. He drops the ball backwards and it rolls into in-goal while he is driven back by the tackler, further than then ball has rolled.

Should a team-mate in the field of play be allowed to run back and ground the ball. Technically, he could be offside.

IMO, it makes more sense that the offside line remains where the ball was played, therefore, so long as SA4 played the ball at a point no closer to the opposition DBL than where his teammate played it, then he has retired to the offside line and played the ball legally.
 
Last edited:

Camquin

Rugby Club Member
#4
White have the ball and knock it on.
Green player runs back and fails to pick up the ball but definitely plays it, so he is now the offside line.
No white player touches him.
Green player from an offside position approaches the ball.
Even if the ball is the offside line, he is interfering with play before he gets onside.

So for me Green chose to create an offside line, so penalty but go back for the earlier knock on by white, scrum green.
 

Not Kurt Weaver

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/usa.png">
#5
Imagine this scenario: A fullback (with all his 14 team-mates ahead of him) is tackled just out from his own goal-line. He drops the ball backwards and it rolls into in-goal while he is driven back by the tackler, further than then ball has rolled.

Should a team-mate in the field of play be allowed to run back and ground the ball.
Technically, he could be offside.

.
Should a team-mate in the field of play be allowed to run back and ground the ball. Nope, equity and fairness are not applied And it is specific

for reference of readers:

11.1 Offside in general play
(a)
A player who is in an offside position is liable to sanction only if the player does one of three things:
Interferes with play or,
Moves forward, towards the ball or
Fails to comply with the 10-Metre Law (Law 11.4).
A player who is in an offside position is not automatically penalised.
A player who receives an unintentional throw forward is not offside.
A player can be offside in the in-goal.
 

Not Kurt Weaver

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/usa.png">
#6
Imagine this scenario: A fullback (with all his 14 team-mates ahead of him) is tackled just out from his own goal-line. He drops the ball backwards and it rolls into in-goal while he is driven back by the tackler, further than then ball has rolled.

Should a team-mate in the field of play be allowed to run back and ground the ball. Technically, he could be offside.
.
Oh, um or ah, this one

22.5 Ball grounded by a defending player
(a) Touch down. When defending players are first to ground the ball in their in-goal, it results in a touch down.

Maybe this, but um Which is applied
 

Ian_Cook

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/newzealan
#7
White have the ball and knock it on.
Green player runs back and fails to pick up the ball but definitely plays it, so he is now the offside line.
No white player touches him.
Green player from an offside position approaches the ball.
Even if the ball is the offside line, he is interfering with play before he gets onside.

So for me Green chose to create an offside line, so penalty but go back for the earlier knock on by white, scrum green.
The bold bit is that part I don't agree with.



Green 1 played the ball at the red line, and continued to run back towards his own goal-line after touching the ball. What you are essentially saying is that Green 4 is offside because Green 1 has carried the offside line back with him from the red line to where he stopped (marked by the yellow line). Do you really think that this is what the Law intends?

What if Green 4 was already where he is now when Green 1 touched the ball (i.e, behind the red line)? Does the fact that Green 1 runs behind Green 4 make Green 4 offside?

For mine, the offside line in this play is the red line, NOT the yellow line. The offside line cannot be any further back from where the player last touched it.
 
Last edited:

Not Kurt Weaver

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/usa.png">
#8
For mine, the offside line in this play is the red line, NOT the yellow line. The offside line cannot be any further back from where the player last touched it.
But the red line can move forward (toward opponents DBL) as the player that last touched it also moves forward? Just not backward?
 

Ian_Cook

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/newzealan
#10
But the red line can move forward (toward opponents DBL) as the player that last touched it also moves forward? Just not backward?
Having the offside line move forwards with the last player who touched the ball make perfect sense because we don't want a player in front of that player to benefit from being in an offside position; we want him to wait until he is put onside.

However, having the offside line move back with the last player who touched the hall makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
 
Last edited:

Not Kurt Weaver

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/usa.png">
#11
H
However, having the offside line move back with the last player who touched the hall makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
Cept we have a law to the contrary, as you know. that is kinda clear.

It does make sense that zero benefit should be gained by an offside player of a teammate who missed played the ball, by virtue of his team putting him in a position to play the ball poorly.

11.2 Being put onside by the action of a team-mate
In general play, there are three ways by which an offside player can be put onside by actions of that player or of team mates:
(a) Action by the player. When the offside player runs behind the team-mate who last kicked, touched or carried the ball, the player is put onside.
 

chbg

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/england.p
#12
I am definitely with Ian's Post #7; Green 4 even goes behind the ball to pick it up. That is how the situation is invariably refereed, although the Laws are silent on the scenario. Even though they are silent, has there ever been a question put for clarification? That then is probably your answer, as it would otherwise put defenders in an untenable position.
 

Ian_Cook

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/newzealan
#14
Isn't that the idea of playing the game as a whole, not just the individual event that resulted as result of poor play
Yes, but the Law should not be interpreted in such a way as to make the game unplayable

Penalising a player for offside in this scenario looks very much like a "gotcha"
 

didds

, Resident Club Coach
#15
and to add to Ian's point, if in some paralleled universe and bizarre scenarios the green #1 ended up behind his own DBL then nobody in his team could ever play the ball and its a walk in for the oppo?

didds
 

Dickie E

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/australia
#16
If Green #1 had touched the ball with his boot then the ball went backwards, would Green #4 be offside under 10 metre law?
 

Not Kurt Weaver

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/usa.png">
#17
and to add to Ian's point, if in some paralleled universe and bizarre scenarios the green #1 ended up behind his own DBL then nobody in his team could ever play the ball and its a walk in for the oppo?

didds
green can still touch the ball down in your parallel universe to prevent the walk in, the follow on PK would be 5m
 

Not Kurt Weaver

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/usa.png">
#18
Yes, but the Law should not be interpreted in such a way as to make the game unplayable

Penalising a player for offside in this scenario looks very much like a "gotcha"
The game is only unplayable to offside players, all others can also become available

Gotha or not it is covered in law. Aid is not provided by law for running the wrong direction and inability to perform.
 

Ian_Cook

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/newzealan
#19
Looks like our No, 1 "theoretical referee" is hard at it again

Tell me NKW, do you PK scrum-halves for hands in the ruck when they take the ball out of a ruck?
Do you call a knock on when a player drop-kicks the ball?