Wednesday, 13th May 2009Noel's Logic
Roy HarveyToying with the laws in an amusing story from Roy Harvey
Noel’s Logic
The following is easily refuted in Law – but can you determine how?
The objective of the exercise is to have match officials think about the Law Book and, at the same time, (hopefully) enjoy the experience.
Why the police had to be called called.
The late tackle on the kicker was so blatant that both teams stopped in their tracks to watch the ball sail through the air towards the posts and, at the same time, contemplate the degree of injury to the centre who had been smacked to the ground as he had stood, transfixed, admiring the probable success of his drop kick at goal. All on the field – other than the comatose centre – acknowledged that play was about to be stopped for either the awarding of the successful drop goal or the penalty for the late tackle – and anything else involving cards (not the Get Well Soon type, either).
We all watched; one team willing the ball over the crossbar, and the other praying for a very close miss. One of our players (a perennial intellectual who never missed a practice, knew everything about the club’s history, could recite the standings of every team in our league, and was boringly knowledgeable of Laws – but didn’t know our captain was dating his sister) contemplated the question ”If a penalty try may be awarded, why not a ‘penalty’ drop kick?” as he analyzed the event that appeared to materialize in slow motion. Another, the late tackler who had been miles offside, considered how many weeks he’d be suspended – and how many times he’d be able to relate the event over a bought pint before it became old news. A third, the kicker, had completely lost interest in the event – in fact, had completely lost interest in everything.
And then there was me (or is that ‘I’?). Initially I suppose I was part of the group willing for a very close miss, but after the ball struck the upright and rebounded directly into my arms, I became a very specific group of one when our intellectual yelled the one word that eventually caused the police to be called:
”Run!” Noel cried (We called him that due to his knowledge – his real name was Owen. But we couldn’t call him Owen because another player had that name because he was always borrowing money from his mates).
“Run?” I thought. “Why bother?” And the same question was evidently on the mind of all concerned as we awaited the referee’s shrill blast.
“Run!” he cried again. So I started to walk, and then jog, up the field, through a host of opposing players who stood transfixed; eyes and ears focused on the referee. I saw no point in my action other than my blind faith in the Noel’s direction. Nevertheless,
I’d soon jogged the length of the field whilst looking over my shoulder and delicately placed the ball on the ground in our opponents’ In goal (thinking better of a Shane Williams-like dive).
Look back down the field I could see our intellectual and the referee calmly talking in philosophical tone as others stood around with bated breath.
“No doubt about it”, the referee claimed, ”I’m awarding a penalty kick according to Law 10.4.(m) – after I have a word with that Kamikaze pilot”.
“I’m afraid you can’t award a penalty kick”, declared our bright lad.
“And why not?” questioned the referee in agitated, but hesitant fashion.
“I’ll tell you why not”, explained our lad with a confidence that greatly exceeded his playing ability, ”That law specifies, on the top of page 42 – just before the diagram – that if the ball hits the goal post or crossbar the optional penalty kick is to be awarded where the ball lands. And it didn’t land did it? Rather, it was caught. Now since this Law is all about options when the kicker is late charged, it cannot be applied because one of the options is unavailable. - and cannot offer options when one of the two is unavailable. I propose to you that this aspect of the law is illogical and does not make sense”.
“I suppose you have a point”, responded the referee through a glassy haze, as members of both teams gathered and listened to the logic being bantered about, transferring weight from one foot to another, some subconsciously opening and closing fists.
“No ‘suppose’ about it”, continued my ever-more-confident teammate. “When the second of two options does not apply, you cannot impose the first one – philosophically speaking – because there is no choice available. Look, it’s like this: If I asked you if you’d like me to give you a cream slice or a chocolate éclair, and then told you I didn’t have a cream slice, where’s the sense in that?”
“I see your point”, declared the referee, “In that case I have no choice but to award the try!”
….. and shortly after that the police had to be called.
Roy Harvey
Director of Officials
NAWIRA
