The infringement definition of "knock on" in the Rugby Union laws is very clear about in judging. However, some people seem to misunderstand or not know it and are establishing another standard for the definition.
When I went to a referee course (to be class C referee, for refereeing prefecture-local games), a class B referee lectured and mentioned that there are cases not stated by the law. He took 'knock on' as its example and told that they judge it by looking at whether a ball touches the ground in front of the player's foot or not, as the 'operational' standard. I claimed it was wrong after the class but he insisted it had been practically judged so and his referee colleagues had such the concerns among them. No way!
The Rugby Union Laws of the Game (as of 2017) defines it in Law 12 as:
followed by the clarification of the term 'forward' as:
So there is nothing relevant to the player's feet.
Introduction of foot-based judgement is too much beyond the interpretation of the law. Even if it were the case, the law sentences would have to be amended to clearly state such the standard.
When I went to a referee course (to be class C referee, for refereeing prefecture-local games), a class B referee lectured and mentioned that there are cases not stated by the law. He took 'knock on' as its example and told that they judge it by looking at whether a ball touches the ground in front of the player's foot or not, as the 'operational' standard. I claimed it was wrong after the class but he insisted it had been practically judged so and his referee colleagues had such the concerns among them. No way!
The Rugby Union Laws of the Game (as of 2017) defines it in Law 12 as:
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.
followed by the clarification of the term 'forward' as:
‘Forward’ means towards the opposing team’s dead ball line.
So there is nothing relevant to the player's feet.
Introduction of foot-based judgement is too much beyond the interpretation of the law. Even if it were the case, the law sentences would have to be amended to clearly state such the standard.
Comments
Post a Comment