VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, [3] ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: Tue, March 27 2007, 7:51:41 GMT-10
Author: Mick Stone
Subject: Re: Touch-in-goal and dead ball rulings
In reply to: Gregory Pfeiffer 's message, "Touch-in-goal and dead ball rulings" on Sat, February 17 2007, 19:36:35 GMT-10

>I have recently watched the presentation on the pane
>of glass rulings for in-goal rulings. I can only
>comment that these rulings have made a very simple
>ruling area now exceedingly complicated. And for some
>reason, has changed the way we rule on touch rulings
>on the other side of the corner post. Where did this
>ruling change come from? Where in the Laws Book does
>it say that different Laws apply to determine who made
>the ball in touch in the in-goal area? Indeed, some of
>the interpretations seem to be directly contradictory
>to the Laws of the Game.
>
>Looking at the new rulings, I believe that they have
>been designed for the Video referee to use, but the
>referee / touch-judge in park football wil have very
>little chance, if any, of confidently applying these
>rulings.

Greg, refer to page 21, notes "Dead Ball line restarts. Should a kick be made dead by a defending player straddling the dead ball line or touch in-goal line, play will restart with a goal line drop out." If the same thing happens with the touch line, provided that the ball is still moving and the kick was from outside the kicker's 40 metre line, the kicker is deemed to have put the ball into touch.

So you can see that you are totally wrong when you say that the interpretations are contrary to the Laws of the Game. I also take issue with your statement that the area of the Law concerned is a simple one. When the "straddle" rule was introduced, it created numerous contradictions that needed to be resolved. It was the introduction of the "straddle" rule and not the interpretations that has created the confusion. As for the comment that the changes were made for the video referee, that is also incorrect. The NRL, Premier League and other rep referees need to confidently be able to determine who made the ball dead. Whilst I find the "pane of glass" theory a touch unpalatable, after much consultation and discussion with a good many stakeholders in our game, and applying a large number of "what ifs" to the propositions, the touch judge fraternity arrived at the rulings to which you refer. Applying the Laws as written, I cannot crtiticise their interpretations.

Greg, I frequently enter this forum for the specific purpose of keeping in touch with all and any feelings outside the "ivory tower" of the NRL. It is unhelpful for someone of your knowledge to place a note like this on the forum without due diligent research. There is an open invitation to you if you don't understand something, to ring me directly at the NRL. I urge you to do this.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT+10
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.