Crusaders v Waratahs

Chris B.

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="taniwharugby" data-cid="582368" data-time="1464136249">
<div>
but in that one you aren't contesting the ball with someone else, you just cant control it, or maybe I am not getting what you are saying?
 
As I said earlier, I can see the validity in the original question and am highly amused at some of the comments about 'how is this a thing' 'this is the biggest load of BS ever on TSF' etc.
 
Fark this is a forum where people ask all sorts of questions, yes some may seem silly to others (and yes you will get called on it) but even with all the arguments about this topic, I can still see the validity in the question...but given how grey the rule is on the deliberate knock down anyway it would just add another layer to a rule book that seems to be constantly expanding for very minimal impact overall.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
Yep - seems like a sensible point to me. So far I think Nepia's answer is the best - proving that people from Hawkes Bay aren't quite as stupid as we think. :)

Hooroo

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="MajorRage" data-cid="582367" data-time="1464136227">
<div>
It comes down to intention (which I'm the first to admit is going to be bloody hard to ref). If you chip and chase and you dive for it to score or regather, undoubtedly every part of you is trying to control the ball. When you just shove your mitt out to block a pass, you are making no effort at all, just trying to disrupt.
</div>
</blockquote>
...although.... that's what intercepts always look like in close quarters. Most is in hope and luck.
 
I do hear you though and sometimes it looks obvious and should be penalised heavily

Crazy Horse

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Chris B." data-cid="582369" data-time="1464136357">
You could win a world up with that sort of planned move. First five fires the ball at the second five's head - who nods it forward and the centre scores as the defense is thrown into disarray. :)</blockquote>
 
Wasn't there something around Spencer using his knee to do a chip in behind a few years ago? I remember he did it once at Eden Park and set up a try and then, this is the bit I can't quite remember, tried it again in SA and the ref called him up on it? Something about not being in the spirit of the game?

Hooroo

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Crazy Horse" data-cid="582372" data-time="1464137050">
<div>
Wasn't there something around Spencer using his knee to do a chip in behind a few years ago? I remember he did it once at Eden Park and set up a try and then, this is the bit I can't quite remember, tried it again in SA and the ref called him up on it? Something about not being in the spirit of the game?
</div>
</blockquote>
What a cracking memory! 
 
Now that you tell it, I vaguely remember that too

nzzp

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Crazy Horse" data-cid="582372" data-time="1464137050">
<div>
Wasn't there something around Spencer using his knee to do a chip in behind a few years ago? I remember he did it once at Eden Park and set up a try and then, this is the bit I can't quite remember, tried it again in SA and the ref called him up on it? Something about not being in the spirit of the game?
</div>
</blockquote>

<a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=21&language=EN'>http://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=21&language=EN</a>
 
21.3 (b) says they banned it soon after. Too creative... what a player he was. To think how much I used to despise him as a younger lad ...

Hooroo

That talks about how Pen and Free kicks are to be taken, rather than in play

nzzp

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Hooroo" data-cid="582375" data-time="1464137881">
<div>
That talks about how Pen and Free kicks are to be taken, rather than in play
</div>
</blockquote>
 
True, dat. I read too fast.

antipodean

That's because you're not allowed to kick with the knee:
 
Kick: 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; a kick must move the ball a visible distance out of the hand, or along the ground.

Nepia

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Chris B." data-cid="582370" data-time="1464136568">
<div>
Yep - seems like a sensible point to me. So far I think Nepia's answer is the best - proving that people from Hawkes Bay aren't quite as stupid as we think. :)
</div>
</blockquote>
Yes we are, well Zac Guildford is at least, he's actively chosen the NSW/ Ta$man double as teams to play for.

barbarian

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Crazy Horse" data-cid="582372" data-time="1464137050">
<div>
Wasn't there something around Spencer using his knee to do a chip in behind a few years ago? I remember he did it once at Eden Park and set up a try and then, this is the bit I can't quite remember, tried it again in SA and the ref called him up on it? Something about not being in the spirit of the game?
</div>
</blockquote>
 
Stirling Mortlock scored a try for the Wobs once where a pass cannoned off his shoulder over the defensive line, and he chased through after it and scored.

taniwharugby

I remember an NPC game where Tonu'u went for the intercept (was only about 10m out) and the ref ruled he deliberately knocked it forward before re-gathering it and scoring so disallowed the try.

Nepia

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="taniwharugby" data-cid="582395" data-time="1464139744">
<div>
I remember an NPC game where Tonu'u went for the intercept (was only about 10m out) and the ref ruled he deliberately knocked it forward before re-gathering it and scoring so disallowed the try.
</div>
</blockquote>
Man that's shit, because until it touches the ground or another player it isn't a knock on so isn't illegal?

Siam

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="taniwharugby" data-cid="582368" data-time="1464136249">
<div>
but in that one you aren't contesting the ball with someone else, you just cant control it, or maybe I am not getting what you are saying?
 
As I said earlier, I can see the validity in the original question and am highly amused at some of the comments about 'how is this a thing' 'this is the biggest load of BS ever on TSF' etc.
 
Fark this is a forum where people ask all sorts of questions, yes some may seem silly to others (and yes you will get called on it) but even with all the arguments about this topic, I can still see the validity in the question...but given how grey the rule is on the deliberate knock down anyway it would just add another layer to a rule book that seems to be constantly expanding for very minimal impact overall.
</div>
</blockquote>
 
The fundamental flaw in penalising a knock back is that it puts more onus on a referee to decide intent. (AFL have the most ridiculous rule in pro sports where it's deemed illegal to hand ball into touch if it's deemed intentional. For 30 years I've seen players handball in the direction of the touchline hoping like hell it goes out and yet continuing a charade that he didn't do it on purpose - nuts as the ref is ostensiblely asked to be a mind reader)
 
Leave it simple.
 
Put the onus on the attacking player to deliver a pass that can not get tapped back. Make it a skill execution for an attacking team to score a try
 
Don't penalise defenders for one instance of knocking a ball back when all other knock backs are perfectly allowed - that's not the way to go to improve the game all because a passing attacker failed to find his target
 
It's a spurious question, to create an illogical solution and is borne from one instance of a Warratah getting beaten on the outside and then cleverly positioning himself to legally block a try scoring pass - well done that defender. If an All Black does that against Wales it will be a fine piece of desperate defence, not a piece of foul play.
 
The intercept knock down should be called a knock forward

Chris B.

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Nepia" data-cid="582399" data-time="1464140020">
<div>
Man that's shit, because until it touches the ground or another player it isn't a knock on so isn't illegal?
</div>
</blockquote>
 
Actually, I think it is.
 
Intentional knock or throw forward. A player must not intentionally knock the ball forward with hand or arm, nor throw forward.
 
<a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=12'>http://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=12</a>
 
I think you have to read this text carefully and note that "Knock on" is the official term and is used differently to "knock forward". I don't think you're allowed to intentionally bat the ball forward and recover it. O-fucking-tago scored a try in an ITM Cup semi doing exactly this and eliminated Ta$man (not that I'm bitter).

Siam

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Chris B." data-cid="582412" data-time="1464141031">
<div>
Actually, I think it is.
 
Intentional knock or throw forward. A player must not intentionally knock the ball forward with hand or arm, nor throw forward.
 
<a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=12'>http://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=12</a>
 
I think you have to read this text carefully and note that "Knock on" is the official term and is used differently to "knock forward". I don't think you're allowed to intentionally bat the ball forward and recover it. O-fucking-tago scored a try in an ITM Cup semi doing exactly this and eliminated Ta$man (not that I'm bitter).
</div>
</blockquote>
 
Yeah that's the bit which stops you repeatedly tapping the ball over defenders and eventually catching it when clear. A bit like we tap balloons over kids to tease them
 
Pretty easy to spot and certainly not something commonly used

The Silver Fern

Crusaders v Waratahs