A dubious ruling

And an interesting ruling

The International Rugby Board is the law-making body in rugby. It draws up the Laws of the Game. It is also the point of reference for clarification of Laws of the Game. These clarifications are called rulings. We discuss two here.

Rulings should not be necessary. The Laws of the Game state that: The Laws of the Game, including the Standard Set of Variations for Under 19 Rugby, are complete and contain all that is necessary to enable the game to be played correctly and fairly.

From time to time, countries produced rulings. This was a bad idea as it produced inconsistencies. Now the IRB issues rulings in response to queries. It is better but also not a good idea. Many of those rulings remain unknown to the playing population of the world.

The rulings are made by a committee of three called Designated Members. Rulings are not law. They can come and go far more easily than law-changes.

It would be much better to have the Laws of the Game written so well that there is no need for rulings.

We had one recently about stepping into the line-out that produced silly penalties that affected matches and which has now been rescinded. Certainly one of the two we have under discussion needs to be rescinded.

1. Knee knock

The ruling comes in response to a Welsh query and was made on 24 December 2004.

Welsh query: A player in possession of the ball drops it onto his thigh and propels it forward. What is the correct decision?

Ruling of the IRB's Designated Members: If this occurred in general play the following would apply. By definition 'A kick is made by hitting the ball with any part of the leg or foot, except the heel, from the toe to the knee but not including the knee&'. In the case described the ball has not been kicked but has been dropped onto the thigh and this is ruled as a knock-on or throw forward. If the action as described was taken by a player after his team had been awarded a penalty kick or free kick, then a penalty kick or free kick has not been correctly taken. Under Law 21.3(b) bouncing the ball on the thigh can in this case be taken to include the knee as this is also in the definition above. Thus, the player has infringed this Law and a scrum to the opposing team should be ordered.

The logic of this is hard to follow. That it is not a kick is irrelevant. There is no relation between a kick and a knock-on and between the taking of a kick at a penalty or a free kick and a knock-on. That the ball has not been kicked has nothing to do with the knock-on or throw forward, any more than heading the ball has.

It is about the knock-on and throw forward.

Let's look at the definition of a knock-on:

A knock-on occurs when a player loses possession of the ball and it goes forward, or when a player hits the ball forward with the hand or arm, or when the ball hits the hand or arm and goes forward, and the ball touches the ground or another player before the original player can catch it.
Forward means towards the opposing teams dead ball line.

The first point to make is that in the case of a player who knees the ball is that he does not lose possession. In fact the only players who can do this are highly skilled, highly co-ordinated players who practise doing it.

Carlos Spencer of New Zealand was a past master at it. When he did it he was not losing possession. He was in fact using possession cleverly.

We had a query from a reader who saw it done in a match at Swansea. The referee blew it up. What a shame, to remove a rare skill from the game.

A reader wrote recently (1 February 2005): "Last week on TV a panel discussed a situation during a recent game at Swansea (South Wales). The game was played in the Welsh semi-pro premiership and one can assume that the referees are experienced.

"From a line-out the Swansea No .10 took the ball up to the defensive line and played the ball off his knee in order to chip the ball over the defence. This isn't a new tactic and it has been used in the past by players such as Mark Ring and Jonathon Davies. In this case the referee stopped the play and called it a knock-on. This was disputed by the players who were very confused but the referee explained that this year such a skill is to be considered as a knock-on. Can you verify this as I saw no reference to it in your list of Law updates?"

It is not surprising the players were confused. The player had not lost possession. It had not gone forward as a result of losing possession.

One wonders why on earth it should be necessary to make such a ruling and to rule out a bit of skill and enterprise.

One wonders if Carlos Spencer knows about the ruling - and the referees who are going to be refereeing the Super 12.

The bit about bouncing the ball off the knee at a penalty or freeze kick is clear enough and in the Law.

2. 22 - in or out

Welsh query: A player of the attacking team kicks the ball indirectly into touch just outside the defenders 22 metre area. A defender gathers the ball, runs a few metres (still in touch) to a place behind his 22 metre line where he throws the ball straight infield. He gathers it and kicks direct to touch. What is the correct decision?

Ruling of the IRB's Designated Members: The defender is allowed to take the quick line-out in the manner specified. A line-out at the place where the ball went into touch from the defenders kick is the correct decision.