Imagine the following scenario:

Player (A) attempts a drop goal but misses horribly and the ball sits in the in-goal area. He chases his own kick and grounds the ball.

Decision?

Draw an imaginary square with your hands and let someone else make the decision for you.

Imagine your not on sky!

knock on

he failed in his attempted drop kick and so dropped the ball.

I know losing to Bradford is embarassing but you lot have shot right off the bitter scale. We beat you by ten points so this is nothing more than the ramblings of a sore loser.

Get a grip son. PBG is a referee and last night's incident has probably provoked this post, but Deacon didn't even attempt a drop goal.

And this would have changed the result how exactly?

That's my point, you clot!

PBG is asking a referee quiz type question because he's a referee and he knows the answer!!! There's no agenda!

No sour grapes or anything. Just a question.

I like Browns quotes regarding our performance yesterday.

"The things that helped the Giants to Wembley and to sit in third place, we just clearly didn't have in the first half.

"We tried our best to guard against that attitude side of the game but effort in the first half clearly wasn't acceptable.

"We asked for a response in the second half and we got a good one, but you cannot give away big starts like that.

"Bradford played some good footy, they came up with some nice plays and scored some nice tries.

"You need to give them credit but I think we saw, when we muscled up and decided to put in the required effort, things fell in our favour."

They fell in your favour so much that you won. right ?

Hey, you have your day in the sun. We'll have the Cup Final and the play offs. Laugh away...

Ok fair enough, It was clearly a knock on and the score shouldn't have stood.

Ignore the Deacon incident.

Player (A) attempts a drop goal but misses horribly and the ball sits in the in-goal area. He chases his own kick and grounds the ball.

It's just play on, isn't it, so long as he has not fluffed it on purpose. If he grounds the ball, it's a try. If any other player on his team grounds it, so long as he was behind the player when he fluffed the kick, it's a try.

I think!

Not a chance, he tries for a drop kick, takes and air swing

Drop kick - the kick = drop.

If his foot completely misses the ball then I agree. I was more on about he makes some dud contact, so th eball is nowhere near going over the crossbar but does end up in the in goal area.

then thats playon, yes.

Is the fact that the ball has to strike the floor for a drop kick to count relevant, or am I being a bit thick?

By definition a drop kick is a kick whereby the ball is dropped from the hands (or hand) and is kicked immediately as it rebounds from the ground.

Does that therefore mean that the ball is, in effect, knocked on prior to the kick and the decision would be a tap twenty for the defending team, irrelevant of whether the ball goes dead or not.Or am I again being thick.

If your assuming that all drop kicks are knock on's then no. It would be where the drop kick was taken.

You have to keep in mind that a drop kick is not a knock on.

According to the international laws of the game if Player (A) misses a drop goal and the ball ends up in the in-goal area before being grounded by Player (A) then a try should be awarded. There is nothing in the laws to suggest that it is a knock on.

The point I am trying to make is where do you draw the line between a knock-on and a failed drop goal attempt?

I know it is a little far fetched to suggest Paul Deacon was attempting a drop goal in that situation seen last night, but under the logic applied by the video ref all drop kicks in general play would also be knock-ons.

I thought the drop kick thing was the foot stricking the ball immediately as it struck the ground, not after

TRY

It would be a try.
A drop kick is a legitimate kick whether it be for a drop goal or not.
(I think

)