il calcio d'inizio in Irlanda-Italia

[aperturaestremo]

Un altro argomento interessante su cui si e' dibattuto a lungo e' stato il calcio d'inizio in Irlanda-Italia, nonche' la mischia ordinata a favore dell'Italia dopo che Botes aveva preso la traversa sulla punizione. Ecco come le spiega lo stesso Craig Joubert, sempre dal sito http://www.sareferees.co.za che io prendo come sito di riferimento (gli arbitri sudafricani sono tra i migliori, da quando il sudafrica e' stato riammesso nel consesso dei paesi civili hanno arbitrato tutte le finali della coppa del mondo salvo le due ovviamente in cui erano impegnati gli springboks). In entrambi i casi, ammette di avere sbagliato.

1. Name: Liam Byrne

Question: The first was when Italy kicked off. The ball went into the Irish in-goal area without being touched by any player. There Rob Kearney stood behind the ball and waited for it to bounce towards him. As he reached out for the ball, it bounced away from him and he caught it and touched it down in one movement. The referee awarded a 22 kick-out which Ireland took.

I was of the opinion that Law 13.9 should have applied:

Law 13.9 BALL GOES INTO THE IN-GOAL
(a) If the ball is kicked into the in-goal without having touched or been touched by a player, the opposing team has three choices:

To ground the ball, or
To make it dead, or
To play on.

(b) If the opposing team grounds the ball, or if they make it dead, or if the ball becomes dead by going into touch-in-goal or on or over the dead ball line, they have two choices:

To have a scrum formed at the centre, and they throw in the ball, or
To have the other team kick off again.

(c) If they opt to ground the ball or make it dead, they must do so without delay. Any other action with the ball by a defending player means the player has elected to play on.

The ball was kicked into the in-goal where it was grounded without delay which should have resulted in paragraph (b) coming into play.

2. Name: Liam Byrne

Question: The second instant was mid way during the first half, when Italy attempted a penalty kick at goal. The ball bounced on the crossbar and came back into the field of play. It was caught by Rob Kearney who was held up immediately by an Italian player. A maul formed which subsequently moved away from the Irish goal line before collapsing. The referee blew up for an unsuccessful end to a maul and awarded the put in to Italy. Several Irish players were unhappy with this decision but the only thing that I could hear over the referee’s radio was “it’s a collapsed maul”.

Should Law 17.6 (h) have applied?

Law 17.6 (h) Scrum after a maul when catcher is held. If a player catches the ball direct from an opponent’s kick, except from a kick-off or a drop-out, and the player is immediately held by an opponent, a maul may form. Then if the maul remains stationary, stops moving forward for longer than 5 seconds, or if the ball becomes unplayable, and a scrum is ordered, the team of the ball-catcher throws in the ball.

‘Direct from an opponent’s kick’ means the ball did not touch another player or the ground before the player caught it.

Was the ball caught from an opponent’s kick, except from a kick-off or a drop-out? Yes.

Was the ball caught direct in that it did not touch another player or the ground before the player caught it? Yes, it did touch the crossbar but didn't touch the ground or another player.

Was the player immediately held by an opponent? Yes.

Was a maul formed? Yes.

Did the ball become unplayable? Yes.

Was a scrum ordered? Yes.

Did the team of the ball catched throw the ball in? No!

The only thing that I could think of was that the crossbar is part of the “ground” but Law 1 defines the ground as an area and to my mind it does not include the posts or crossbar, although Law 22 allows the scoring of a try by grounding the ball against a goal post or its padding. I don't see how a crossbar could be construed as being part of the “ground”.

Thanks again for the site. It is a fabulous resource.

Ed ecco la risposta di Joubert

Craig Joubert: Hi Liam,

Both your questions are relevant. I can tell you that in the change room straight after the game myself and my assistant referees were discussing these exact two incidents, I got a text from the IRB referees boss, Paddy O'Brien to say 'Well done, two points of law to discuss' and both Paul O’Connell and Declan Kidney came up to me at the black tie function that night to discuss these very two incidents as well.

You have quoted the correct law and I couldn't have written it better - your comments are correct, I was wrong on both counts. Long off season, huh?

Cheers, Craig

[pastaefasioi]

grazie, molto interessante.