Reading thru this thread you're spot on.

I'm a Saints fan but it was a wrong call from the TJ/Referee and proved costly for Hull. Saints scored from the scrum.

Imagine Whiting caught the ball 5 metres over the touchline. There wouldn't even be a debate about it as everyone would know he was in touch when he caught the ball.

Standing on the white line is exactly the same as the line is deemed touch. Should have been head and feed to Hull.

Correct.

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.

Sorry mate, wrong button.

You are wrong with you're interpretation of the rule by the way.

So at what point is the ball considered 'out'? when it bounces outside the field of play?

If the ball is kicked out and bounces in the field of play, then is caught by the opposition 4/5 feet outside the field of play is that still classed as the kicking teams head and feed?

The ball is considered out when it comes into contact with a player, ground any object etc outside of the field of play. The white line is considered outside

Then so is the RFL if you are right. I took it from their official rulebook.

Yes.

To put it into perspective, when a team kicks a 40/20 the opposing winger / fullback will try to bat the ball back into the field of play if it has crossed the line and not yet bounced. If the opposing player makes contact with the touchline or the area past it whilst handling the ball then the kicking team will receive possession.

That is because they are trying to avoid the ball going out of play. If it does go out of play the kicking team get the ball not because it was touched by the defending player whilst in touch but because it is a 40/20

The situation we are discussing is a player kicking the ball from say the half way line, the ball bouncing on the 30metre mark, but then being caught outside of the field of play, without bouncing outside of the field of play by the defending winger and the head and feed being given to the kicking side as the defending winger would be judged to have taken the ball outside of the field of play.

Right, I see your point now.

According to what I read earlier from the rulebook and the RFL's site the the situation you describe would mean that the kicking team received the ball, as happened on Monday.

If the ball bounces in the field of play it is considered 'live' until it bounces outside the field of play (excluding the dead ball area). So if a defending player touches the ball before it bounces again outside of the field of play then he is considered to have taken it over.

But this is not what happened on Monday.

It wasn't a 40/20 kick.
Whiting caught the ball as he was stood on the white line hence the moment he touches the ball it becomes touch. He didn't make it touch. Head and feed should have gone to Hull.

Had he caught the ball a split second before touching the white line then its head and feed to Saints.

That's not what it says in the rulebook though. It states that the scenario you just mentioned is only applicable when the bull sails out on the full, without bouncing.

That's the official rule from the official rulebook, I do have to say before reading it I would of agreed with you, however the opinion I had and that you currently have is unfortunately wrong.

I dont know which rule you're looking at but can assure you the decision on Monday was wrong.

Surely if its caught on the full without bouncing then thats ballback anyway.

I would of agreed with you originally mate, but have a look at the rules regarding a player making contact with the ball in touch.

Yeah, it is ball back on the full, but that's the only time a player can handle it in touch without it going to the opposition. The ball must bounce in touch first.

If the defender catches the ball in touch after jumping from inside the field then he is deemed to have made it touch.

If the defender catches the ball in touch after jumping or standing outside of the field (on the whit line if you like) then it is deemed to be already in touch. This is what happened on Monday.