Rugby videos of tackles, tries, funny incidents and more: Bizarre Richard Haughton Try vs Glasgow

Sunday, January 20, 2008

Bizarre Richard Haughton Try vs Glasgow

Saracens met Glasgow in a Round 6 Heineken Cup encounter that was played in howling wind and rain on Friday night in Scotland.

Less than 5 minutes into the game Glasgow Warrior Hefin O'Hare nearly profited when Richard Haughton hesitated on defence, hoping a high kick would go out. But, after racing onto the bouncing ball the former rugby league man O'Hare just put a foot in touch and was rightly called back.

The incident seemed to wake the Saracens speedster Haughton up and when Jackson drilled a low kick into the Glasgow touch-in-goal area, it was this time O'Hare's turn to hesitate, as he waited for the ball to run dead.

Haughton used his express pace to hunt down the ball and the Television Match Official ruled he had dived to touch down millimetres inside the line.

Labels: Heineken Cup 2007

Haughton's right arm was in touch when he got downward pressure on the ball. Didn't look like a try to me.

By Anonymous, at January 20, 2008 1:18 pm
Agree. O' Hare should have just dotted the ball down anyway, but should not be a try because the right hand side of his body is over the dead ball line as he grounds the ball.

Cost Glasgow the match unfortunately. Cost Scottish fans another year of miserly luck.

By Anonymous, at January 20, 2008 1:33 pm
Who was the video ref? he made an awful decision

By Anonymous, at January 20, 2008 1:44 pm
reminds me of rob howleys try v Toulouse lol do you have that video on this site?? its on your youtube i know

By Anonymous, at January 20, 2008 2:42 pm
Even though I am a Sarries fan I'm afraid that the video ref made the wrong call. Haughton did ground the ball but his arm was in touch. No try.

By Anonymous, at January 20, 2008 3:51 pm
I am not so sure it was a try... Given that you aren't sure about ground, referee must award 5m scrum, attacking side (Haughton's team).

O'Hare was hoping ball would have gone touch-in-goal, so that he had the scrum option back at the kick.

All O'Hare had to do was put one foot on the touch-in-goal, and then pick UP the ball. Then it would have been considered touc-in-goal, 22m or scrum @ kick.

Remember that a player in touch can touch the ball down in-goal and score a try or touchdown. Therefore O'Hare would have had to pick the ball UP first, to for touch-in-goal. A straight touchdown would be 22m only (no scrum choice).

Terrible mistake. Then again, many wingers are the worst when it comes to knowing the lawbook.

By Anonymous, at January 20, 2008 4:09 pm
I do believe that one can touch the ball down in the dead zone even if part of his body is out (in the area). Can anyone confirm this?

By Anonymous, at January 20, 2008 8:24 pm
Muliaina did it against South Africa in the Tri Nations. He had his foot out and picked it up which resulted in a scrum from the place of the kick IIRC. If he touches it down its a 22 kickoff no?

At the try itself, didn't look like a try, half his body looked out.

By Unknown, at January 20, 2008 9:06 pm
I don't know if this is true or not, BUT in a post-match analysis...the guys had spoken to a TMO expert person apparently and he had said:

It doesn't matter if you're in touch if you're reaching back in bounds to ground the ball.

That's just what I heard.

By Anonymous, at January 20, 2008 10:22 pm
Glorzifen, and Anonymous number 265,452...

You are correct.

A player that is:
in-touch, touch-in-goal, on-over the Dead Ball Line (or in the Field of Play for that matter) may ground a ball, PROVIDED that they simply put downward pressure on the ball.

If the player picks the ball up first and then applies downward pressure, no go. They in effect but the ball in touch FIRST, and then tried to ground it.

The key point of Haughton's play was that the ball's entirety was in the in-goal area. Since Haughton's first play on the ball was downward pressure, it was irrevelant where his body was.

This is very different from diving tries in the corners. Here, the play is carrying the ball into the try zone. Therefore when the player's body skims a touchline or touch-in-goal, the player is holding the ball off the ground IN TOUCH.

By Anonymous, at January 21, 2008 12:14 am
Forgive my long-windedness before..
Here is the actual Law...

[ATTACKING player]
22.4 OTHER WAYS TO SCORE A TRY
(g) Player in touch or touch-in-goal.
If an attacking player is in touch or in touch-in-goal, the player can score a try by grounding the ball in the opponents’ in-goal provided the player is not carrying the ball.

[DEFENDING player]
22.5 BALL GROUNDED BY A DEFENDING PLAYER
(b) Player in touch or touch-in-goal.
If defending players are in
touch-in-goal, they can make a touch down by grounding the ball
in their in-goal provided they are not carrying the ball.

By Anonymous, at January 21, 2008 12:19 am
haughton's right arm was in touch

By Anonymous, at January 21, 2008 1:15 am
Cheyanquí, wow, thanks for teaching me something new.

By Anonymous, at January 21, 2008 10:30 am
Anon: "Haughton's right arm was in touch when he got downward pressure on the ball. Didn't look like a try to me."

Anon: "Who was the video ref? he made an awful decision"

bigscottyj: "Haughton did ground the ball but his arm was in touch. No try."

decepti0n: "At the try itself, didn't look like a try, half his body looked out."

Cheyanquí: law 22.4

Anon: "haughton's right arm was in touch"

Hehe. I'm not surprised lots of people calling this as "no try", although once someone quoted the law I would've hoped people would read it...

I'm not impressed by the fact that one of the commentators called "no try, his arm's in touch" though. Those guys are paid to know better.

By Anonymous, at January 21, 2008 10:59 am
The try was correctly awarded by the referee after his TMO advice. As Haughton was not carrying the ball, he merely needed to get downward pressure on the ball (which was in play). Whether he is in play or in-touch/beyond deadball line is irrelevant to the awarding of the try - Law 22.4

Shame the commentators were so ill-informed but understandable about causal TV viewers. The referee is often proved to right, when all others think he is wrong !

By Anonymous, at January 21, 2008 11:13 am
Yeah, as Rawling said, I too wasn't fully aware of that law, but Cheyanqui has explained it.
So why would people still say it's not a try?

Good try, and well chased by Haughton. Why on earth O'Hare didn't sort it out way earlier is beyond me. If I was that incompetent in my job it would be Gross misconduct.

By Anonymous, at January 21, 2008 12:24 pm
All my law analysis aside, my first instinct would have been to call no try...
I guess I got it right after further thought.

By Anonymous, at January 21, 2008 5:32 pm
BTW -- Rugbydump admin, please consider filing this one under "Laws" along with the others you have there.

By Anonymous, at January 22, 2008 4:10 pm
on 21 Jan 2008, IRB Issued a Ruling based on a series of questions from the English RFU.

Seems like this play may have been the impetus of the ruling...

The six-part ruling basically stresses the difference between the ball being STATIONARY vs IN MOTION.

The text from the ruling is below. It should be posted in the coming days to http://www.irb.com/lawregulations/lawsrulings/index.html

In the O'Hare-Naughton case, the ruling basically says that:

As soon as the ball stopped in the mud, had O'Hare picked it up into touch-in-goal, he would have been deemed to have carried it out. RESULT: 22m dropout

Had O'Hare put one or both feet and gathered the ball whilst ball was IN MOTION, the kicker woul dhave been deemed to have placed the ball into touch-in-goal

RESULT: option of scrum at the kick (50+m upfield) OR 22m dropout.

====================
22-METRE [Existing Law]
If a player with one or both feet inside (presumably on or behind) the 22-metre line, picks up the ball which was stationary outside the 22-metre line, and kicks it directly into touch, then the player has taken the ball back inside the 22-metre line, and therefore the line-out is formed in line with where the ball was kicked.

If a player with one or both feet inside (presumably on or behind) the 22-metre line, picks up the ball which was in motion outside the 22-metre line, and kicks it directly into touch, then the player has not taken the ball back inside the 22-metre line, and therefore the line-out is formed in line with where the ball crossed the touch-line.

[NEW RULINGS]

GOAL LINE:
If a player with one or both feet on or behind the goal line, picks up the ball, which was stationary within the field of play, player is deemed to have picked up the ball in the field of play and thereby that player has taken the ball into in-goal.

If a player with one or both feet on or behind the goal line picks up the ball, which was in motion within the field of play, player is deemed to have picked up the ball within in-goal.

DEAD BALL LINE:
If a player with one or both feet on or behind the deal ball line, picks up the ball, which was stationary within in-goal, player is deemed to have picked up the ball in in-goal and thereby that player has made the ball dead.

If a player with one or both feet on or behind the dead ball line picks up the ball, which was in motion within in-goal, player is deemed to have picked up the ball outside the playing area.

TOUCH / TOUCH-IN-GOAL
If a player with one or both feet on or beyond the touch-line (or touch-in-goal line), picks up the ball, which was stationary within the playing area, player is deemed to have picked up the ball in the playing area and thereby that player has taken the ball into touch (or touch-in-goal).

If a player with one or both feet on or beyond the touch-line (or touch-in-goal line), picks up the ball, which was in motion within the playing are, player is deemed to have picked up the ball in touch (or touch-in-goal).

By Anonymous, at January 24, 2008 5:46 pm
no try that was a bad decision by the video ref

By Anonymous, at February 06, 2008 7:16 am
he's not that fast

By Anonymous, at February 12, 2008 10:37 am
"Less than 5 minutes into the game Glasgow Warrior Hefin O'Hare nearly profited when Richard Haughton hesitated on defence, hoping a high kick would go out. But, after racing onto the bouncing ball the former rugby league man O'Hare just put a foot in touch and was rightly called back."

I dont understand that.......

By Anonymous, at March 31, 2008 2:00 pm
well look it just goes to show that whether or not he was in touch it thanks to some good chasing!

By Anonymous, at April 03, 2008 9:35 pm
That is not a try! What is the point in a TV ref when they get it wrong? Really needs looking into its happening just too often.

By Anonymous, at April 23, 2008 6:10 am
before anyone else comments that this isnt a try, please just take a second to read cheyanqui's comment!

By Anonymous, at April 24, 2008 9:55 pm
THERES NO WAY THATS A TRY
IT DUSNT MATTER WHETHER HES IN THE IN GOAL AREA HE HAD A BODY PART IN TOUCH

By Anonymous, at April 26, 2008 1:44 pm
You dipshits. Cheyanqui quoted the damn lawbook. If you still think they're wrong, why not just go check out the book yourself.

By DJT, at August 13, 2008 1:48 am
he was not carrying the ball just touching down!! therefore according to the rule book it doesnt matter if part of him was in touch or not!!! READ the rule book!! great decision from the vid ref!!!

By Anonymous, at April 01, 2009 12:08 am