• Please bear with us. We have moved to a new provider, and some images and icons are not working correctly. We are working hard to fix this

Knock-on

Balones said:
It is legal to tackle a player while they are ‘juggling’ with their hands.
Click to expand...
This was precisely what i had in mind when i wrote the post above.

While you are regaining control, odds are you slow down and your focus is on the ball (i.e. eyes on the ball, not the guy coming at you). This gives the defender a huge advantage. That's why i don't see this sort of play being attempted intentionally. You are a sitting duck. It works on the video because the ball carrier already had a huge advantage to begin with.

If you've lost the ball, there might be an upside: avoiding a scrum and/or keeping possession. etc. But doing it on purpose? The risk/reward equation doesnt look particularly promising.
 
Cross said:
I don't understand. Could you describe a scenario where this could be exploited? I don't see it.

I put myself in the shoes of the player and i cant see a situation where I'd pretend to lose control only to regain it later by using the foot. If it is accidental, i get it, you regain control after losing it. The upside is avoiding a scrum an maintaining possession. But doing this on purpose? You have to slow down, lose momentum, you give the defense time to adjust, get closer, and given the skill such a maneuver requires, you put a huge bulls eye on the ball carrier. His eyes are on the ball and regathering and not on the defender.
But the fact that i cant see one doesn't mean there isn't one, so I'm all ears. Very curious actually.


To be honest, i don't see the "balance" either. The word balance appears to imply some sort of compromise, which i don't really see. Maybe it's me. They are just applying the letter of the law. If the play doesn't meet the criteria set out by the definition, you don't blow the whistle.
Click to expand...
A scenario would be more likely with the hand than the boot so not this specific example - say a ball chipped over to a running attacker who is confident they can gather but concerned about loosing possession/ribs to oncoming defender so theatrically taps the ball only to regather once past the attacker and with ribs intact.

The “balance” comment was more how we often have find a sweet spot between a rigid reading of a law that isn’t legally prescriptive and all-encompassing (especially now “simplified”) and the reality of what we see on the pitch and try to enforce in a coherent and consistent manner. The length of some of the threads on this forum can attest to that.
 
Volun-selected said:
A scenario would be more likely with the hand than the boot so not this specific example - say a ball chipped over to a running attacker who is confident they can gather but concerned about loosing possession/ribs to oncoming defender so theatrically taps the ball only to regather once past the attacker and with ribs intact.

.
Click to expand...
But A player must not intentionally knock the ball forward with hand or arm. Sanction: Penalty.
 
Is @Volun-selected discussing ball from hand or ball kicked I am not sure.

But if from hand is that a Knock On?

Knock-on - 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.​

Unless it meets the both clauses separated by the AND criteria then no, so if they player in possession, fumbles and regathers, no.

Also if from hand then maybe:

11.7 - A player must not intentionally throw or pass the ball forward. - Sanction Penalty​

It is not a pass if the player in possession recollects as:

Pass - A player throws or hands the ball to another player.​

But:

Throw forward - When a player throws or passes the ball forward i.e. if the arms of the player passing the ball move forward.​
​
I would accept that you cannot Throw Forward to yourself.

Although you cannot pass to yourself as a Pass is to another player!

So how can the arms of the player passing move forward if it is not a Pass because it hasn't gone to another player?
 
Volun-selected said:
A scenario would be more likely with the hand than the boot so not this specific example - say a ball chipped over to a running attacker who is confident they can gather but concerned about loosing possession/ribs to oncoming defender so theatrically taps the ball only to regather once past the attacker and with ribs intact.
Click to expand...
You will have to excuxse me, but I dont understand. For two reasons.

First, isn't the defender in your hypothetical allowed to tackle the attacker once this one taps the ball (but before he regathers)? To be clear, once a player has made contact with the ball and is in the process of controlling it, aren't defenders allowed to tackle him?

Second, i sincerely don't understand the relevance of the example (tapping) given the subject of this thread (using the foot to prevent a knock-on).
 
Cross said:
I don't understand. Could you describe a scenario where this could be exploited? I don't see it.

I put myself in the shoes of the player and i cant see a situation where I'd pretend to lose control only to regain it later by using the foot. If it is accidental, i get it, you regain control after losing it. The upside is avoiding a scrum an maintaining possession. But doing this on purpose? You have to slow down, lose momentum, you give the defense time to adjust, get closer, and given the skill such a maneuver requires, you put a huge bulls eye on the ball carrier. His eyes are on the ball and regathering and not on the defender.
But the fact that i cant see one doesn't mean there isn't one, so I'm all ears. Very curious actually.


To be honest, i don't see the "balance" either. The word balance appears to imply some sort of compromise, which i don't really see. Maybe it's me. They are just applying the letter of the law. If the play doesn't meet the criteria set out by the definition, you don't blow the whistle.
Click to expand...
It, sort of, happened in Ireland a few years ago.

A player "juggled the ball" and it travelled forward over the head of a potential atackler. The "ball carrier" ran round him and regathered. It was not allowed as he was deemed to have thrown the ball passed the player rather than it being an attempt to regather. So Yes I can see, and have seen a player try it. But It will be a rare event and it is a bit like a knock on. The referee my make a judgement as to what is happening and rule accordingly.
 
At the risk of becoming Chopperesque … chip to winger just inside touch, ball juggling tap begins, steps around incoming defender and goes into touch, loops round and back into the field of play to recover. Yes, unlikely (thankfully) but this thread is helping me clarify a stack different laws in my head.
 
Here's Rees-zammit losing control, the ball falling forward, bouncing backwards off his leg and striking the leg of the opposition player and yet TMO and ref decided no knock-on
 
Apologies for the late reply.

Marc Wakeham said:
A player "juggled the ball" and it travelled forward over the head of a potential atackler. The "ball carrier" ran round him and regathered.
Click to expand...
Why didn't the defender tackle the attacker during the regathering? Was it because

a) the defender wasn't allowed by the rules?
b) the defender was slow to react/surprised/etc?

To be honest, i am not really concerned about b) and i don't see any evidence to support a). Let's call it an auto pass (that's what we called it in touch rugby back in the 80s), at it's extreme. You try that and you might get away with it the first time vs a much, much less skilled opponent. With a LOT of luck. The skill required is huge.
The other 99 times you will be dropped as you are a) liable to being tackled and b) you have your eyes on the ball (up) and not on your defender.

The regathering works if there is no defender close by. If there is, chances are it's better to drop the ball and give away a knock on than try to regather, give your opponent a free shot at your ribcage and still end up giving up the opposition a scrum.


Volun-selected said:
chip to winger just inside touch, ball juggling tap begins, steps around incoming defender and goes into touch, loops round and back into the field of play to recover.
Click to expand...
The obvious question then becomes: why is the defender in your scenario waiting for the attacker to regather in order to tackle him when he is allowed to do so during the regathering?
Let me use your example, but including the defender's reaction

Attacker 1: chip to winger just inside touch
Attacker 2: ball juggling begins, steps around incoming defender
Defender 1: tackles Attacker 2 while the attacker's eyes are on the ball and his arms up trying to regather the ball, leaving his entire ribcage exposed.


rephrase: if something like this gets pulled off, i don't think it is because there is an exploit in the rules that gives the attacker an advantage. It is because the defender is not using his own advantage (focus, speed, exposure to being tackled, etc) to stop it.
 
Cross said:
Apologies for the late reply.


Why didn't the defender tackle the attacker during the regathering? Was it because

a) the defender wasn't allowed by the rules?
b) the defender was slow to react/surprised/etc?


The regathering works if there is no defender close by. If there is, chances are it's better to drop the ball and give away a knock on than try to regather, give your opponent a free shot at your ribcage and still end up giving up the opposition a scrum.
Click to expand...
That question would be better directed at the defender. I dont know.
 
Volun-selected said:
At the risk of becoming Chopperesque … chip to winger just inside touch, ball juggling tap begins, steps around incoming defender and goes into touch, loops round and back into the field of play to recover. Yes, unlikely (thankfully) but this thread is helping me clarify a stack different laws in my head.
Click to expand...
Either:

The player is deemed to be in control / possession. In which case the ball is in touch.

or

He's not in possession so he lost the ball forward.


Either way not the outcome he might have hoped for.
 
simple try/no try query that fits into this thread and has come up here before.

Leinster v Scarlets

no control, Blue 13 touches the ball in the air first with hands and eventually sort of grounds it with stomach. Try stands, not even questioned.

how is it different to this disallowed try from 2023 RWC warmups?
www.rugbyworld.com

When a try is not a try - rugby’s laws on grounding the ball explained - Rugby World

Grounding the ball in the in-goal area to score a try sounds simple. So how come it is open to so many interpretations, and why is it so often controversial
www.rugbyworld.com www.rugbyworld.com
 
Nope not a Knock Forward for me, "no control" can include just bouncing from the kick.

There is no requirement to control the ball.

It never touches hand or arm and was Grounded by the attacker's stomach therefore a good try, although had to check offside in slo-mo.

21.1The ball can be grounded in in-goal:​
​
a. By holding it and touching the ground with it; or​
​
b. By pressing down on it with a hand or hands, arm or arms, or the front of the player’s body from waist to neck.​

Seems the red defender did them a favour as he pulled the blue players left hand. If he had not touched it, there might have been hand/arm contact but I do not see any in that video.

Whereas LRZ touched the ball and it went forward, Sir Nigel explains that quite well. From the definitions:

Knock forward- 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. [previously knock-on]​
 
didds said:
if one accepts that catching a kick from a fumble is permissible, presumably the furthest one can do this is the distance between the two dead ball lines, less sufficient distance to not be dead in goal at either end.
Click to expand...
Would the player be in possession throughout this attempt to gain control of the ball and therefore liable to be tackled? 😝
 
crossref said:
did he first touch it with his hands? if so then it's a knock on of course, but I can't make out any touch
Click to expand...
Pretty sure he touches it with left hand first. Granted it is hard to confirm, but if you rock and roll it on YT the trajectory of the ball changes. As @BikingBud points out, there is a red hand in there too which complicates it further.

Therefore just missed by TMO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top