Must've missed it then. What can I say. Obviously our brown envelope reached him just in time.

Placed onside 3. An off side player is placed onside if:



(a) an opponent moves ten metres or more with the ball.

(b) an opponent touches the ball without retaining it.

(c) one of his own team in possession of the ball runs in front of him.

(d) one of his own team kicks or knocks the ball forward and takes up a position in front of him in the field of play.

(e) he retires behind the point where the ball was last touched by one of his own team





[urlhttp://www.therfl.co.uk/a_guide_to_the_game/official_laws/14_offside[/url

Not 100% sure, but I don't think it counts as an offside. If he's in front of the ball when played, isn't it something else? "Inactive" or some other stupid term?



Purely going on when Brent Webb was penalised for it at Odsal and had a try chalked off. He went behind the man in possession, but was still penalised.



I'm sure it's a different rule to offside and is essentially that you're not allowed to get involved until the ball is played again.



Ritz will be able to clarify this one for us I think.

Not sure about "Inactive" but if he was Offside then by the laws of the game he was definitely onside by the time he touched the ball.

Yeah but as I say, go back to the try that got chalked off at Odsal a year or two ago, when Webb was penalised for the same thing after he got involved. By that rule you've quoted, he would have been deemed onside again and therefore the try would have been given. So there must be something more to it than simply classed as offside.

Maybe the ref got the Webb decision wrong?

Got it.



From Section 11:







So attacking player in front of the PTB is classed as "out of play".



Then from same section you linked to:









They are classed as "out of play" and not "offside" and not played back in by the lines you've quoted. They are "out of play" until the next PTB.

Nope Mr Alibert was correct.

It's not very clear where he would be classed as "out of play" but if the same rules apply to the attacking team then this would bring him back into play





[i(h) having retired the distance prescribed in the preceding paragraph no player of the team not in possession may advance until the ball has cleared the ruck. A player who is out of play may again take part in the game when the advantage gained by not retiring has been lost[/i





It's not very clear either way imo

I disagree. I think it's perfectly clear.



I don't recall the incident with Buderus (and have no intention of going back and watching it). But if it's the same as the Brent Webb one from Odsal, then he was "out of play" and therefore not eligible to be involved until the next PTB (which is when the advantage has gone). It's right there in Black and White.

I was just struggling to see where he was officially classed as "out of play" and where it says he cannot join in until the next ptb.



I admit I have not read the entire rule book but could not find these points.

I agree it doesn't actually say that. It explains when a defender comes back into play, but not the attacking player (the bit you quoted is referring to the defender).



For that, I can only judge on what happened with the Webb incident, where they clearly stated on commentary that he's not eligible to be involved again until the next PTB (I only remember this clearly because when I was at the game without the benefit of commentary, I was completely bemused as to why the try was disallowed).



The rules don't seem to clarify that properly though, you're right.