Rugby (Union/League) rule clarifications

[miguel de cervantes]

A couple that bother me:

(1) A few people in France, and it came up again today, seem to perform grubber kicks by doing little drop kicks - ie they drop the ball onto the ground then kick it along the ground. For me this is a knock on every day of the week - the ball must hit the foot before the ground. They insist it is legal. Who is right? Or is this just a union thing?

(2) Pass or kick to an offside player in touch. In this case it is the ball touching the player that makes the ball in touch. OK, but what if he/she is in an offside position? Offside penalty? Foward pass? I'm guessing touch has priority over the others.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

I think in answer to 1 it's legal precisely because its classed as a drop kick (just not one aimed at the posts). Otherwise drop goals in general play would be illegal too.

 

[madunit]

Spacey is right on point 1.

As for point two, the first infringement counts. A forward pass to an offside player is a forward pass. If an offside player touches a ball that has been kicked, then an offside peanalty.

 

[langpark]

2nd one is a strange one I have no idea how to answer.

1st question though, remember, it's all about intent. If a player fumbles the ball then kicks it after it's landed, he was not intentionally drop-kicking the ball. But if you see him lining it up and intentionally kicking it like that, then it should be ok, the same way a field goal attempt is not a knock on.

Good thread! Every now and then I have doubts about some of the more obscure rules and have often looked for somewhere to ask.

 

[adamkungl]

I find it very odd that a rule should care about a player's intent, since it is so hard to define or judge. If this is indeed the case, I'd amend the rule to state that a player must have controlled ball-in-hand before and while 'dropping' the ball for the drop-kick. So a fumbled pass or ball popped out can never be a legal drop-kick.The result would be 99.9% the same but it would be clearer and remove any discussions about supposed intent.

 

[GW.]

GW here,

On reading this, it seems as if the French is correct.

You cant have one kick ok in one interpretive instance, and not in another, which is also subjective.

A drop kick is a drop kick. Take away the intent and have a clearly defined drop kick rule. Even if a player drops it, if he puts boot to ball within acertain time frame (im guessig thats how you interpret a drop kick) then play should go on. If nothing else, its an added attacking dimension to the game.

 

[Knownothing]

I would guess that "control" would matter a lot more than "intent".



If a player loses control of the ball, it is a knock on, even if he manages to kick it, surely?

 

[langpark]

Fair point that 'intent' can be a bit of a grey area. How about this then, unless it's a genuine field goal attempt, any drop then kick shall be deemed a knock-on?