rugbyunion
Latest News:

Opinions expressed on this message board are solely those of the individual author. No endorsement of such opinions by the editors, Sportnetwork or Sale Sharks can or should be inferred.


The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
ageinghoody (IP Logged)
08 January, 2018 11:43
Having now had chance to watch the replays a few times, a question comes to mind.

If there is any doubt that Robshaw's posterior penetrated the paint (and I don't think there is!), there can surely be no doubt that he'd have been well over the line if Visser hadn't been in the way.

My question for those conversant with the laws is this. Is it permissible for a player outside the field of play to prevent a team-mate going into touch, either by pushing back or simply leaving his body in the way? I'd have thought that, apart from throwing in, anyone outside the field of play is out of the game.

Various other questions are raised whether the answer is yes or no, but I won't complicate matters yet.

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
Crutch (IP Logged)
08 January, 2018 11:49
Clutch has posted a couple of times that it should be accidental offside if Robshaw is not in touch (he clearly was IMO too).

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
MartWhit (IP Logged)
08 January, 2018 12:02
if/when Robshaw makes contact with the player in touch, is he not then also in touch by default?

You couldn't have a maul where half the folks were off the pitch but the ball was still infield and in play surely?

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
ageinghoody (IP Logged)
08 January, 2018 12:14
Apologies, missed that!

My own thought was there's a case for "in-touch" to include physical contact with a team-mate actually in-touch.

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
PoyntonShark (IP Logged)
08 January, 2018 12:21
Law 18

1. The ball is in touch or touch-in-goal when:

a. The ball or ball-carrier touches the touchline, touch-in-goal line or anything beyond.


That surely covers it. Visser must come under the description 'or anything beyond'.



Unhappiness, where's when I was young
And we didn't give a damn
'Cause we were raised
To see life as a fun and take it if we can



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 08/01/2018 12:23 by PoyntonShark.

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
Flumpty (IP Logged)
08 January, 2018 12:27
I call touch when the ball carrier is in touch - in a maul situation, you do the best that you can !

If you take it to its (slightly silly ) conclusion, you could have a maul 5mts in from touch, then 3 players bind on and the outer most player steps out into touch, which would plainly be ridiculous.

if you google "maul in touch" and then drill into a rugby refs forum, you'll see that there quite a few interpretations and no clear definitive answer.

Another good example is when (say) the FB has come across the pitch, to tackle the winger who is running 1 mt inside the touchline. The FB makes the tackle and the FB's momentum carries him over the touchline and he grounds his knees/legs, but the wingers momentum carries him forward and he touches the ball down, even though the FB is in touch and the wingers feet/legs/torso are over the touchline, but haven't touched the ground as in this piccie (imagine that Cuthbert still had hold of Dalys leg and Dalys leg was in the air, over the touchline)http://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/rugby-union/2017/02/11/JS120352565_Rex-Features_Wales-v-England-RBS-6-Nations-11-Feb-2017_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqR1gN756bgu-Oq1JkfYLunEw76cCMHy4yXG6NK8n9_qo.jpg?imwidth=1400

or better still, this one

http://www.talkingrugbyunion.co.uk/images/e-011543/elliot-daly-5.jpg

Does that all make sense ?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/01/2018 12:39 by Flumpty.

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
Penalty Try (IP Logged)
08 January, 2018 12:35
you can actually score a try whilst in touch according to the letter of the law as long as you were not in contact with the ball when you left the field of play. It is an anomaly in the laws of the game but that is how our game works.

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
PoyntonShark (IP Logged)
08 January, 2018 12:38
Thinking about it for only a short while leads to the conclusion that you can't give touch for every occasion where the ball carrier is not in touch, but a player whom he is in contact with, is in touch. Many tries scored in the corners have a tackler in touch, but the try scorer not, we surely don't want to negate those tries. Where the player in contact is a teammate of the ball carrier, however, then surely that the ball carrier be deemed in touch is a valid interpretation.



Unhappiness, where's when I was young
And we didn't give a damn
'Cause we were raised
To see life as a fun and take it if we can

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
Chris1850 (IP Logged)
08 January, 2018 12:42
There are often occasions when a player is tackled close to the touchline. A teamate may try to keep the ball carrier in touch in the immediate aftermath until the tackle is called. If the team mate has a foot in touch, the ball carrier is not called as in touch to my knowledge.

With regards to Visser being accidentally offside as has been suggested, can you be offside when off the field of play?

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
clutch (IP Logged)
08 January, 2018 12:43
Fortunately the decision was made! I wonder if Carley partly gave the 'I'm going to give touch' decision because of the potential offside factor.

There shouldn't be these kind of abnormalities in the laws. It is ridiculous. It isn't down to refs interpretation. It's either touch or it isn't.

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
ageinghoody (IP Logged)
08 January, 2018 12:59
Quote:
PoyntonShark
Law 18
1. The ball is in touch or touch-in-goal when:

a. The ball or ball-carrier touches the touchline, touch-in-goal line or anything beyond.


That surely covers it. Visser must come under the description 'or anything beyond'.

Presumably that would have been the situation if, say, Robshaw had wound up on top of Visser but not touching the ground.

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
MartWhit (IP Logged)
08 January, 2018 13:20
It seems wrong on every level that a player from the ball carriers team can help his teammate stay in play whilst being out of the field of play himself. Anyone off the field is out of the game. You can't have someone standing in touch pushing his own man infield in order to stay in play.

I'd see it similar for a maul. If 2 people consciously bind to one another they act as one surely?

The only grey area for me would be accidental contact with one person (from the same team) being out of play. Even there, it feels right that the contact creates an in touch situation.

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
PoyntonShark (IP Logged)
08 January, 2018 13:44
Anyone off the field certainly isn't out of play. A Player off the field may jump and keep a ball, that has passed the plane of touch, in play either by catching it and landing in play, or 'knocking' the ball back into play. A winger running down the line my be out of play, but kick a ball that is in play. As Penalty try states a player in touch can exert downward pressure on the ball in the in-goal area and score a try. A player has to be carrying the ball when going into touch' not just touching it.

Other than that, I agree it feels right that teammates in contact, in touch should render the ball carrier in touch, accidental contact or not.

Clutch is right it is a situation that can be clarified easily in the laws.

Though for me if the law were applied rather than interpreted then it would be pretty clear, but as written currently those in the corner tackles would also all be in touch, rather than tries.



Unhappiness, where's when I was young
And we didn't give a damn
'Cause we were raised
To see life as a fun and take it if we can



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/01/2018 13:46 by PoyntonShark.

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
MartWhit (IP Logged)
08 January, 2018 13:48
Good clarification Poynton. Out of play but in the air and not having yet touched the ground in touch is still 'in play'

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
PoyntonShark (IP Logged)
08 January, 2018 13:55
No Mart. The winger, on the ground in touch can still kick a ball that is in play, strictly speaking he could knock it back i.e. with his hand, to a team mate too.

Your situation only applies if carrying the ball,( strictly speaking you can't be carrying the ball as you pass the plane of touch) you can touch the ball at any time whilst in touch.



Unhappiness, where's when I was young
And we didn't give a damn
'Cause we were raised
To see life as a fun and take it if we can

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
MartWhit (IP Logged)
08 January, 2018 13:58
thanks.

I'm sorry but that sounds all wrong to me.

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
Chris1850 (IP Logged)
08 January, 2018 14:05
Returning to the title of the thread, it is a good job that it was Robshaw who was playing the ball at the time, rather than, say, Danny Care who would seem to have a rather smaller a***!!

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
Pappje Shark (IP Logged)
08 January, 2018 14:23
Quote:
Chris1850
Returning to the title of the thread, it is a good job that it was Robshaw who was playing the ball at the time, rather than, say, Danny Care who would seem to have a rather smaller a***!!

On the other hand, I was going to say that Quins were lucky it was Robshaw and not Marler if hed still been on the pitch - because hes a huge a*se. Badum tish.

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
H's Dad... (IP Logged)
08 January, 2018 14:58
Does 'anything' also mean 'anybody'?
I think not. Think of a tackler who is clearly in touch with one hand on a tryscorer as he touches down. The try stands.

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
Olyy (IP Logged)
08 January, 2018 17:34
The whole TMO situation could have been drastically shortened if he watched the clip for a second longer because Care's foot was on the line when he picked the ball up

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
Saintquin (IP Logged)
08 January, 2018 18:32
Seen so many times when a ruck has formed on the touch line some players from both teams have been in touch but, the ball carrier has not. Referee always allows play to carry on.
Don't know if referees are doing right or wrong though!



Harlequins, (was once) probably the best rugby club in the world!
(Sm115)(Sm115)(Sm115)

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
08 January, 2018 18:39
Quote:
Olyy
The whole TMO situation could have been drastically shortened if he watched the clip for a second longer because Care's foot was on the line when he picked the ball up

Looking at earlier comments, that would seem to not be touch, unless Care had contact with the ball as he put his foot on the line.



http://v4admin.sportnetwork.net/upload/101/101_0_1475852289.jpghttp://www.sportnetwork.net/mainadmin/img/1011155763860.jpg
Somewhere in the South Stand

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
08 January, 2018 18:41
And yet...

Ball kicked forwards, about to land infield near the touch line. Player puts foot in touch, catches ball: out on the full.



http://v4admin.sportnetwork.net/upload/101/101_0_1475852289.jpghttp://www.sportnetwork.net/mainadmin/img/1011155763860.jpg
Somewhere in the South Stand

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
C3Q (IP Logged)
08 January, 2018 18:45
Quote:
PoyntonShark
No Mart. The winger, on the ground in touch can still kick a ball that is in play, strictly speaking he could knock it back i.e. with his hand, to a team mate too.

Surely if you are on the ground, you are out of the game, regardless of where you are in relation to touch? Therefore, any contact with the ball would be a penalty I think.

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
PoyntonShark (IP Logged)
08 January, 2018 19:04
On the ground rather than in the air, not prone. i.e. standing up you are still on the ground.



Unhappiness, where's when I was young
And we didn't give a damn
'Cause we were raised
To see life as a fun and take it if we can

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
Yareet (IP Logged)
08 January, 2018 19:15
Quote:
Cap'n Major Bloodnok
And yet...
Ball kicked forwards, about to land infield near the touch line. Player puts foot in touch, catches ball: out on the full.

Not sure it is any more. Sure I read over the past few months that this tactic had been wiped out by a law change.

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
PoyntonShark (IP Logged)
08 January, 2018 19:30
No Major. If Care has his boot on the line when picks up the ball, then he is in touch. The determining factor is he picks the ball up, not just touches it. Not sure it is much more conclusive than whether Robshaw was in touch, but I agree with Olyy Care did look to be in touch also.

Yareet is right on the other point, under Global law trials 2017, there have been amendments to the definition of in touch.

If the ball has passed the plane of touch when it is caught, then the catcher is not deemed to have taken the ball into touch. (i.e. out on the full)

If the ball has not passed 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.



Unhappiness, where's when I was young
And we didn't give a damn
'Cause we were raised
To see life as a fun and take it if we can

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
08 January, 2018 19:44
OK. Sounds like this another area of the laws where various bits are in competition with each other to produce a bit of a mish-mash.



http://v4admin.sportnetwork.net/upload/101/101_0_1475852289.jpghttp://www.sportnetwork.net/mainadmin/img/1011155763860.jpg
Somewhere in the South Stand

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
DaveAitch (IP Logged)
08 January, 2018 21:32
Quote:
Crutch
Clutch has posted a couple of times that it should be accidental offside if Robshaw is not in touch (he clearly was IMO too).

He didn't prevent a tackle being made, which seems to be necessary now for 'accidental offside'.

Quote:
MartWhit
if/when Robshaw makes contact with the player in touch, is he not then also in touch by default?]
Players are frequently in touch and in contact with the player who has the ball, but I don't believe I have ever seen it given as being 'out'.

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
ageinghoody (IP Logged)
09 January, 2018 12:56
Quote:
H's Dad...
Does 'anything' also mean 'anybody'?
I think not. Think of a tackler who is clearly in touch with one hand on a tryscorer as he touches down. The try stands.

Any ruling would surely have to refer to contact with a team-mate, not an opponent. Otherwise a defender wouldn't even have to make an effective tackle on a winger. The "tackler" would just need to put one foot on the line while reaching out and touching the ball carrier.

On the "accidental offside" question, DaveAitch is right that Visser didn't prevent a tackle being made, but I'm pretty sure he prevented the tackle being fully effective.

 
Re: The Case of Robshaw's Bum!
09 January, 2018 13:44
It's the old "having a material effect" thing, isn't it?



http://v4admin.sportnetwork.net/upload/101/101_0_1475852289.jpghttp://www.sportnetwork.net/mainadmin/img/1011155763860.jpg
Somewhere in the South Stand


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net
 
 

Who is online?

Total users online:  

Most users online:  

Users on this site:  

Where are they?