The annoying thing about this is that its understandable for people on here not to understand the Laws but when you get the likes of Paul Cullen on Boots N All last night, highlighting it as a Hull error, then theres not much hope.

That rule only applies on the full. Meli's kick bounced.

And as for Ganson obstructing O'Meley....seems the prop was rather quick out of the scrum, considering props are pretty binded in there.

As I was saying -its understandable people here not knowing the Laws, but full time professional coaches/managers?

Whether he caught it on the full or not makes no difference.

So a player kicks the ball towards touch; it bounces before leaving the field of play, whereon a player, stood in touch over near the boards, catches it. What's the call?

I've just spent too long looking for the rules regarding the Whiting decision. The call by the touch judge and Ganson WAS CORRECT. I wasn't sure myself at first which is why I looked.

If the player catches the ball in touch after the ball has already bounced in the field of play then the head and feed goes to the kicking team.

However, If the ball does not bounce in the field of play and is caught in touch then the head and feed will go to the receiving team.

Then its just kicked out and the other team get it via a scrum where it exited the field of play. Said player has no bearing.

Watch a 40/20 attempt, one the FB/winger is near to. They attempt to bat the ball back in play, or grab it, before it crosses the line, being careful to avoid stepping on the line while touching the ball. Whats being suggested on here is that he can step out, then just grab the ball, that nullifies any 40/20 and his team get the ball.

So what's the difference between being stood in touch (my example) and stood on the touch line (Whiting)?


I don't see how that is being suggested. It wouldn't nullify the 40-20.

No difference, the rule I posted above applies.

R&C, is there any particular reason you keep quoting my post with no reply.