Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Law discussion: The contentious Jordie Barrett play on decision explained

(Photo by Michael Bradley/Getty Images)

Law guru Paul Dobson takes a look at a contentious incident involving Jordie Barrett during the Hurricanes win over the Chiefs on Friday.

ADVERTISEMENT

Just after the Hurricanes scored to draw level with the Chiefs, Wes Goosen of the Hurricanes is penalised for an aerial tackle on Damian McKenzie of the Chiefs.

The penalty is just inside the Chiefs’ half and about five metres from touch. Aaron Cruden of the Chiefs takes the kick and aims to get the ball out into touch close to the Hurricane’s goal-line. It is a long, soaring kick to his left. But waiting for the ball is Barrett, the Hurricanes fullback. He is waiting for the ball about five metres in touch. As the ball drops towards him, Barrett runs forward, leaps and catches the ball. His leap lands him in the field of play.

The referee allows play to go on. He is heard to say that this was a new law.

Later, during an injury break, the incident is replayed and it showed clearly that the ball had flown beyond the line of touch when Barrett caught it.

The commentators spoke of the plane of touch.

LAW DEFINITION

Plane of touch: The vertical space rising immediately above the touchline or touch-in-goal line.

The replay shows that the ball had travelled beyond the plane of touch. One commentator claimed to have been told by a referee that Barrett would have been right if he had caught the ball before it reached the plane of touch, which was clearly not the case here.

So what does the law say?

Law 18.2 The ball is not in touch or touch-in-goal if:
b. A player jumps, from within or outside the playing area, and catches the ball, and then lands in the playing area, regardless of whether the ball reached the plane of touch.

ADVERTISEMENT

Barrett jumped from outside the playing area, caught the ball and landed in the playing area.

Therefore, according to law, the ball was not in touch.

Therefore, the referee was right to play on.

Therefore, those who were concerned about the plane of touch, need not have been concerned.

This clause was brought into the laws in 2018 as an amendment.

It was clever play by Barrett, who clearly knew the law. What he did was important in the context of the match.

Rugby 365

WATCH: Israel Dagg, Ali Williams, Mils Muliaina and Angus Ta’avao join Kirstie Stanway on the couch for another entertaining episode of the Kick Off.

ADVERTISEMENT
Video Spacer
ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

F
Flankly 2 hours ago
'Absolute madness': Clive Woodward rips into Borthwick in wake of NZ loss

Borthwick is supposed to be the archetypical conservative coach, the guy that might not deliver a sparkling, high-risk attacking style, but whose teams execute the basics flawlessly. And that's OK, because it can be really hard to beat teams that are rock solid and consistent in the rugby equivalent of "blocking and tackling".


But this is why the performance against NZ is hard to defend. You can forgive a conservative, back-to-basics team for failing to score tons of tries, because teams like that make up for it with reliability in the simple things. They can defend well, apply territorial pressure, win the set piece battles, and take their scoring chances with metronomic goal kicking, maul tries and pick-and-go goal line attacks.


The reason why the English rugby administrators should be on high alert is not that the English team looked unable to score tries, but that they were repeatedly unable to close out a game by executing basic, coachable skills. Regardless of how they got to the point of being in control of their destiny, they did get to that point. All that was needed was to be world class at things that require more training than talent. But that training was apparently missing, and the finger has to point at the coach.


Borthwick has been in the job for nearly two years, a period that includes two 6N programs and an RWC campaign. So where are the solid foundations that he has been building?

4 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Are the All Blacks doomed to a 70% flatline? Are the All Blacks doomed to a 70% flatline?
Search