FORUMS > The Virtual Terrace > 'Wonder try' actually a knock-on? |
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Owner | 12006 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jul 2003 | 21 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Mar 2019 | Oct 2014 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Cronus "You HAVE knocked it forward deliberately - in order to catch it. It's like juggling the ball before you gather it - you're deliberately keeping the ball close so you can eventually gather it.
I've never seen a penalty given for someone not catching cleanly, juggling the ball so it leaves his hand and moves forward before gathering it.'"
If you bobble the ball from a pass off your chest and both your hands and then catch it and score - is it a try? - Yes.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Board Member | 5064 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Aug 2002 | 22 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Sep 2017 | Feb 2016 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Oh, and his second play at the ball was also a knock-onKNOCK-ON means to knock the ball towards the opponents’ dead ball line with hand or arm, while playing at the ball.'"
So he played at the ball two times. Both times he knocked the ball [itowards the opponents' dead ball line[/i. Two knock-ons and he definitely didn't regain or kick the ball after the second knock-on...
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 855 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jun 2006 | 18 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Aug 2016 | Jun 2015 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Cronus "You HAVE knocked it forward deliberately - in order to catch it. It's like juggling the ball before you gather it - you're deliberately keeping the ball close so you can eventually gather it.
I've never seen a penalty given for someone not catching cleanly, juggling the ball so it leaves his hand and moves forward before gathering it.'"
If you knocked it forward in the process of attempting to take the ball, then later took the ball, it would not be a knock on.
If however, you decided to slap the ball forward over an opposition player's head, and then then ran onto it to gain possession, it would be a knock on.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Owner | 7735 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Feb 2004 | 21 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Aug 2023 | May 2022 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Saddened! "No it doesn't. It's a penalty if you deliberately propel the ball forwards even if it touches nothing and you catch it afterwards.
For example if you are given a pass and can't reach it so punch it or push it forwards and then catch it it's still classed as a knock on.'"
You mean like what Kerion O'Laughlin did in the 1984 CC final for Widnes' first try?
Which was given.
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Chairman | 28357 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Feb 2002 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
May 2024 | Oct 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Conroy "Well no, but he didn't did he.'"
Knock it forward on purpose? Well yes, I reckon he did. Unless he had size 40 velcro'd hands he couldn't have caught it. One thing he certainly didn't try to do is 'palm it back', that much is plain from the fact that that's not the action his hand and arm did. It is bleedin' obvious if someone has tried to palm a ball backwards. Isn't it?
But I don't [iknow[/i if he definitely did it on purpose, it is just how it plainly looked to me, and I should have thought anyone.
Quote: Conroy "
I do wish it were possible to have threads where there is a bona fide discussion of rules and decisions without it being called "whingeing". It seems to be discussing decisions about key moments for its own sake on on their won merits, to me. Nobody is saying we lost because of tehse decisions for example. Why can't we discuss laws rules and rulings without being ludicrously and inexplicably accused of "whingeing"?
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 855 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jun 2006 | 18 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Aug 2016 | Jun 2015 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Ferocious Aardvark "Knock it forward on purpose? Well yes, I reckon he did. Unless he had size 40 velcro'd hands he couldn't have caught it. One thing he certainly didn't try to do is 'palm it back', that much is plain from the fact that that's not the action his hand and arm did. It is bleedin' obvious if someone has tried to palm a ball backwards. Isn't it?
But I don't [iknow[/i if he definitely did it on purpose, it is just how it plainly looked to me, and I should have thought anyone.
You need to turn your sarcasm dial down, it's at 11.
I don't think you're far off, though, I reckon he intended to bat it on a short way (as he couldn't obviously catch it first time) and then catch it and drop for a try. But ended up batting it too far, so then decided to palm it back.
You maintain that the first contact was just in fact no more than a fsck-up, then?
I do wish it were possible to have threads where there is a bona fide discussion of rules and decisions without it being called "whingeing". It seems to be discussing decisions about key moments for its own sake on on their won merits, to me. Nobody is saying we lost because of tehse decisions for example. Why can't we discuss laws rules and rulings without being ludicrously and inexplicably accused of "whingeing"?'"
^Everything, and I mean absolutely everything, he said.
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Chairman | 9721 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Dec 2001 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Aug 2020 | Apr 2020 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| 5 pages on and it happened 2 days ago!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It's finished, its done, it will not return and IT WILL NOT CHANGE!!!
GET A LIFE people
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 1419 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Dec 2008 | 16 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2014 | Oct 2014 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Reaches to contest the ball.
Ball ricochets off of Slaters hand in the direction of the dead ball line. Currently under Slater's posession "loose" he is not in full control, similar to a fumble, allowed to be recollected unless in contact with a foreign object (Slater does not count ), whih would be a knock on if Slater did not collect.
Slater regathers the ball whilst technically still within the pitch (last contact with ground was on the floor within the pitch).
He is now in posession of the ball just within the pitch, and has enough control to propell it backwards relative to the position of his foot when he jumped, constituting a pass.
Smith collects and scores.
Very good try, and whomever commented about basketball, running off the side of the pitch without touching the ground outside of the pitch, then passing it before you touch the ground is fully legit, and may I add awesome, and is a great tactic if pulled off. I commend that little !$£@*^& Slater
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Board Member | 5064 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Aug 2002 | 22 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Sep 2017 | Feb 2016 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Bovrick "Reaches to contest the ball.
Ball ricochets off of Slaters hand in the direction of the dead ball line.'"
Which is a knock-on.
Quote: Bovrick "allowed to be recollected unless in contact with a foreign object (Slater does not count
Until it hits a foreign object play can continue [iafter[/i the knock-on if he regains possession. He doesn't regather, he knocks the ball, for a second time, towards the dead ball line (he and the ball are past the dead ball line but still in play at this point).
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Chairman | 28357 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Feb 2002 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
May 2024 | Oct 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: SBR "
Until it hits a foreign object play can continue [iafter[/i the knock-on if he regains possession. He doesn't regather, he knocks the ball, for a second time, towards the dead ball line (he and the ball are past the dead ball line but still in play at this point).'"
Mind you, you're bound to find some argumentative enough to tell you that "regaining possession" doesn't actually mean that, and knocking the ball a second time equals regaining possession!
There was a time when occasionally our refereeing supremos would be brave enough to stick their heads over the parapet and explain these highly contentious rulings, for the benefit and elucidation of us great unwashed, and not least to clarify the rules - I mean to put it at the very least, these decisions have been controversial, and the arguments continue. Are the rules supposed to be a mystery for the paying speccies?
And if they agree fsck-ups were made, then it would be nice of them to say so.
If they say the stuff was legal and why, then we can all know for future reference.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Coach | 2154 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
May 2005 | 20 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Sep 2019 | Mar 2017 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| My post and those of others have already detailed why this was a legitimate try (where speculation doesn't come into it, like those of the opposite opinion), yet we're still going on about it? Dear, oh dear.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Board Member | 5064 | |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Aug 2002 | 22 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Sep 2017 | Feb 2016 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote: Ferocious Aardvark "There was a time when occasionally our refereeing supremos would be brave enough to stick their heads over the parapet and explain these highly contentious rulings, for the benefit and elucidation of us great unwashed, and not least to clarify the rules - I mean to put it at the very least, these decisions have been controversial, and the arguments continue. Are the rules supposed to be a mystery for the paying speccies?
And if they agree fsck-ups were made, then it would be nice of them to say so.
If they say the stuff was legal and why, then we can all know for future reference.'"
It would be nice to know what interpretations the refs are working to instead of trying to guess from their decisions. At one point Thecko was working with a ref who posts on here to try and get permission from the RFL to publish the various edicts sent to refs regarding interpretations.
The RFL said no.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Board Member | 13571 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jan 2003 | 22 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Feb 2023 | Sep 2022 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| it would be interesting as to mr cummings thoughts on the try, why he thought it was good( if he did etc) just to clarify a dubious decision, i thought i was a good try myself but most people can see both sides of the coin
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 15980 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jan 2006 | 19 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
May 2016 | Jun 2015 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| I'll only comment on the Inglis try which was a shocking VR decision but, considering who the VR was, not surprising.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Owner | 229 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Mar 2004 | 21 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
May 2019 | May 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Maybe the rules need amending like they were when someone headed the ball over the line from a play the ball and scored many years ago. I think the rule was changed as it was seen as unfair to the defending team.
Did Slater gain an unfair advantage by knocking the ball forward over the defenders head. If the answer is yes, whether it was deliberate or not should be irrelevant.
|
|
|
|
|
|