[quote="The Phantom Horseman"]Respectfully, I don't think you know the rules, do you? Craven is the marker. He doesn't have to be behind the line. If the play the ball is 12 inches from the line, as it was, and his foot is six inches from the line, he's onside. In any case, his left foot was behind the line (and his right foot in front of it) and my understanding is that would be classed as being behind the line even if he weren't the marker.
Well that’s interesting and incorrect.
I only know and understand the rules from what I experienced playing, watching and reading which includes the following.
Quotes: “If the attacking team are less than 10m from the try line, then the referee will tell the defending team to get behind the try line.”
"Behind when applied to a player means, unless otherwise stated, that both feet are behind the position in question. Similarly 'in front of' means nearer to one's opponent's goal line."
(Which considering the field position and proximity to the try line must include the marker otherwise he would be stood in the play the ball.)
And.
“A defending player is offside if they are less than 10 metres away from the play-the-ball (or, if the play-the-ball is inside his 10-metre line, closer to it than the try-line is.”
(Which he was closer to the ptb with his foot being beyond the try line.)
What are you basing your understanding on to say (“Craven is the marker. He doesn't have to be behind the line. If the play the ball is 12 inches from the line, as it was, and his foot is six inches from the line, he's onside. In any case, his left foot was behind the line (and his right foot in front of it) and my understanding is that would be classed as being behind the line even if he weren't the marker”) because it seems to contradict the above quoted rules.
Is it a something you know for sure or just your general interpretation?
I only ask because, respectfully, I don’t think you know the rules do you?
