he doesnt have to carry it out, a player can be in touch, reach for a ball still within the field of play and as soon as he touches it (and he is in contact with the ground), the ball becomes in touch. This is not some new magical rule, this has been how it is for as long as i can remember

No it wouldn't have been play on as he had entered the field of play from outside the field of play (he was on the touchline).

Correct,
If a player is stood on the touchline he is considered to be part of the touchline i.e out of play. Saints in that case kicked the ball out of play. Head and feed to Hull.

The TJ got it wrong.

Had he have JUMPED I said! How can he out of play if he has jumped?

The only reason the ball was out of play was because he touched it with his feet on the touchline. I don't know if you're just stupid or winding me up!!!

that cannot be right! the player is considered to be out of play, but not part of the touchline, the emphasis is on the player to be in play or this (as chris saint alluded to) would be open to massive abuse

If he jumped from outside the field of play. IE, from having his foot on the line.

If he jumped and patted the ball and the ball was released before he hit the ground it would have been play on. The point i'm making is that the ball was still in play until it touched Whiting.

If he'd have jumped from in field. The point is that Whiting was in contact with the line immedialtly before he touched the ball. Rogues theory is that this essentially means he IS the line, so the ball went out from the kick, rather than being carried out by whiting.
It feels wrong in this situ, as if the fact the ball bouces should change the desicion, but unless a ref (and I've emailed Cummins's address from the sky sports website) tells me otherwise, I'm inclined to think it should have been Hull's head and feed.

It feels wrong but it may be right

Therefore Whiting is in touch in control of the ball. Either way it's a Saints head and feed. If he had received a pass from a Hull player and was stood on the line it would be a Saints scrum. If he had intercepted a pass and already had his foot on the line it would be a scrum to Saints. There is no difference. He caught the ball and was in touch at the same time in exactly the same way as he would if he'd received a pass. The ref was correct.

this is my understanding of it

So if, in a situation of a (half) break a saints player is stood with his foot on the line and the hull player [ipassed[/i it to him, you would deem the saints player to be the one to take it into touch, there for a hull scrum?

That, to me, feels right in the spirit of the game, but i can't help thinking that the written rules say different, implying if you hit a player who's in contact with the line, then you've essentially passed it into touch.

If you make a play for it then yes. How can it be any other way? If a Hull player passes it and your foot is on the line and you knocked it forward trying to recover possession are you saying that it should be my head and feed because I was out of bounds when I made a play for it? How can that be? There's a difference between being completely out of bounds and on the line surely? The game's rules should be interpreted towards the spirit of the game in conjunction with technicality because we already do that with high tackles i.e. a high tackle is considered to be such but then the spirit in which the high tackle was attempted is also included in a decision.

I don't know, I need someone with real authority to clarify it for, as its drving me crazy. I agree with you that in the spirit of the game the decison given on monday was correct and that the above situation would be farcical, but I just can't shake the fact I think the smallprint of the rules says otherwise.

Maybe it's that I don't read so well, but the written rule on the previous page didn't clarify it either way.

If he was stood on the line and a Hull player passed it to him, then it would be head and feed to Saints, as it was the Hull player who passed the ball who would have been deemed to have put the ball into touch as Whiting is out of play and is part of the touchline. It doesn't matter if it's an inch or a yard.

If he touches/catches a ball whilst out of the field of play from an opposing player then it's head and feed to his side (Hull in this case).