Can anyone tell me what the rule is when catching a ball "in-goal" to get a tap 20 is.

Do both feet have to be in the "in-goal" area or can 1 be in the field of play and 1 behind the goal line?

I was re-watching the Huddersfield game and at one point in the first half McIntosh goes to catch a kick from Brough and puts a foot over the goal line before catching it and Huddersfield are given a tap 20.

Thanks

Yes that's right,and it's a 7 tackle set as well. A stupid rule that needs scrapping.

As long as the foot is behind the line when the receiver takes possession, the kick is diffused and a 20 tap followed by a zero tackle is correct. The interpretation of the rule has been changed recently, but can't recall to what extent without checking.

If the receiver places his foot behind the line after taking possession (for instance, jumps from the field of play, takes possession and lands in the in-goal), then the ball is deemed to have been fielded in-play and play continues.

One or both feet need to be in-goal when the ball is caught. If the player catches it in mid air, he is deemed to be where his feet where when he jumped, regardless of where he lands. The player can then run and take a quick tap as long as his team are all behind the 20 and the officials are in position. If he passes to a teammate, then its a controlled restart with the ref letting the defence get set.

No rule change other then the 7 tackle set being introduced. You may be thinking of the straddling rule. Straddling the dead ball line and touching the ball now results in a drop out rather than a 20m restart

Why is it stupid? I think it works well. It's a reward for good defence and in some ways a punishment for a poor kick.

So if you kick and it's landing say 1 to 3 feet short of the line, you are punished if the defender catches it with one foot in the in-goal area. It would be easier to just run ball on the last tackle and give a set of six if you fail to score,and that would probably be inside the 10m area,so it's pointless kicking in the first place when you also risk giving a penalty for tackling or touching in the air. Yes a try can be scored also,but you should also consider the risk as well.

Pointless kicking? Loads of tries are scored from kicks. If teams are encouraged to run it more often, good.

That's the one.

Yes,and loads of 7 tackle sets and penalties are given also.

In a nutshell,I just don't like the rule,and the 7 tackle set. That is my opinion.

A kick that falls short of the try line is a well placed kick and as a result the attacking side will have the advantage. Where the ball lands determines who gets the greater benefit and is a reward/punishment for good/poor skill.
The penalties have nothing to do with this ruling. You could get rid of the seven tackle rule and idiot defenders would still shepherd players off the ball.

So if you kick the ball up and it lands short enough from the try line,and the defender can't put one foot in the in-goal area, what have you achieved apart from only giving a 6 tackle set instead of 7? If you caught the ball in the in-goal area with both feet,fair enough,but just let it be a 6 tackle set. Like i said earlier, a 7 tackle set is stupid.

I also think it should be a 6-tackle set. Attacking kicks should be encouraged.

Also, the ball carrier should be able to start from the 20 regardless of whether or not the officials are 'in position', let the game flow.