PDA

View Full Version : Penalty Kick blocked



The Fat
26-11-15, 13:11
Putting this question here as it is from a course I just completed and there is no other obvious section to post it.

Q. A player takes a PK at goal (let's say 30m out and directly in front). An opponent is lifted by a team mate 1m in front of the crossbar, and knocks the ball sideways and backwards but preventing it from going through the goal.
What is the correct decision?
MUST have a Law reference to back up your answer.

Phil E
26-11-15, 13:11
What is the correct decision?
MUST have a Law reference to back up your answer.

9.A.2 KICK AT GOAL - SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES
(d) Any player who touches the ball in an attempt to prevent a penalty goal being scored is
illegally touching the ball.
Sanction: Penalty kick

ddjamo
26-11-15, 13:11
9.A.2 KICK AT GOAL - SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES
(d) Any player who touches the ball in an attempt to prevent a penalty goal being scored is
illegally touching the ball.
Sanction: Penalty kick

+10m

Sanction: Any infringement by the opposing team results in a second penalty kick, 10 metres in front of the mark for the first kick. etc...

depending on many variables - may consider intentionally offending/foul play.

didds
26-11-15, 14:11
depending on many variables - may consider intentionally offending/foul play.

Its difficult to argue that a lifted blocker was not intentional :)

If you were toi card though... who would you card?

- the lifted blocker?
- the entire lifting pod?
- the captain/whoever made the call to lift and block (if overheard and definitive etc)
- the caller and the entire lifting pod?

didds

didds

Dan_A
26-11-15, 15:11
Its difficult to argue that a lifted blocker was not intentional :)

If you were toi card though... who would you card?

- the lifted blocker?
- the entire lifting pod?
- the captain/whoever made the call to lift and block (if overheard and definitive etc)
- the caller and the entire lifting pod?

didds

didds


My 2p worth - Just the player touching the ball - the lifters etc are allowed to lift, they have done nothing wrong. It's only the ball player that is offending and ONLY if they play the ball "to prevent a goal being scored". For example if the ball is falling way short then the ball player surely isn't offending at all.

TheBFG
26-11-15, 15:11
PK at the point where it was blocked and depending on the level YC for the person that has played it.

Camquin
26-11-15, 15:11
ddjamo +10m is from Law 21.
Blocking is law 9 and I always assumed it was a new offence.

Dixie
26-11-15, 16:11
My 2p worth - Just the player touching the ball - the lifters etc are allowed to lift, they have done nothing wrong. It's only the ball player that is offending and ONLY if they play the ball "to prevent a goal being scored". For example if the ball is falling way short then the ball player surely isn't offending at all.

21.5(c) If the kicker indicates to the referee the intent to kick at goal, the opposing team must stand still with their hands by their sides from the time the kicker starts to approach to kick until the ball is kicked.
(e) If the opposing team infringes while the kick is being taken but the kick at goal is successful, the goal stands. A further penalty is not awarded for the infringement.


Implication (though nor clearly stated) is that an infringement of 21.5(c) results in a further penalty if the goal is not scored.

I'd card the whole pod - but perhaps that the freedom that only comes with retirement!

Womble
26-11-15, 16:11
PK at the point where it was blocked and depending on the level YC for the person that has played it.

Why does the level count in this instance? curious :chin:

crossref
26-11-15, 16:11
I'm not sure it's a YC offence at all, it surely would have been done in ignorance of the Law, thinking it's legal. So PK only

It's not an offence you'd commit cynically as there is no mileage in it, you save three points and give them ..... a PK in front of the posts where they can still get three points, but now have other options as well...

Cynical offences are usually to give away 3 to avoid a likely 5 or 7

Womble
26-11-15, 16:11
"I'm not sure it's a YC offence at all, it surely would have been done in ignorance of the Law, thinking it's legal." wow wow wow, did you just say that?

crossref
26-11-15, 16:11
"I'm not sure it's a YC offence at all, it surely would have been done in ignorance of the Law, thinking it's legal." wow wow wow, did you just say that?

but what would be the point of doing it? there's no gain.

it's not as if no one would notice, it's not like slowing the ball down in a ruck, where you have a good chance of getting away with it.

didds
26-11-15, 17:11
but what would be the point of doing it? there's no gain..

Assuming of course that the ref knows law 9.A.2. Or the players are prepared to gamble it.

hands up - which of you honestly did know it ? and for thoise that didn't ... what level do you ref?

This is NO WAY a dig. I knew that - but I'll wager if i go and ask our youth age group coaches many of them probably won't. No surprise you may say of course!

didds

crossref
26-11-15, 17:11
I knew that - but I'll wager if i go and ask our youth age group coaches many of them probably won't. No surprise you may say of course!

didds

I agree. that's why I say that if it really happened, most likely the coach/player is in the camp who don't know.


If you do know the Law it's a quite a brave gamble to hope that the ref doesn't.

didds
26-11-15, 17:11
I agree. that's why I say that if it really happened, most likely the coach/player is in the camp who don't know.


If you do know the Law it's a quite a brave gamble to hope that the ref doesn't.

yes agreed. But if its a last ditch hope when the ball will go over and secure the game then _maybe_ its a gamble that some would risk ie its a hiding to nothing.

Its limited in that regard I would totally agree and that's entering yeah-but-no-but territory.

didds

Nigib
26-11-15, 23:11
Surely if they were preparing to lift a player in line with the posts, even with your guide dog, stick and binoculars in the car you would spot something happening while the kicker was prepping - wouldn't you do something preventative?

Dixie
27-11-15, 09:11
Surely if they were preparing to lift a player in line with the posts, even with your guide dog, stick and binoculars in the car you would spot something happening while the kicker was prepping - wouldn't you do something preventative? Such as say: Don't lift him until after the ball is off the tee - and don't try to stop it going over the bar!

I don't know about you, but I tend to be much nearer the kicker than the potential offenders in such cases. It's not like shuffling two steps and muttering in an ear - it would have to be a full-on shout near the kicker's ear during the kicker's preparations - poor form in my view.

crossref
27-11-15, 09:11
Such as say: Don't lift him until after the ball is off the tee - and don't try to stop it going over the bar!

I don't know about you, but I tend to be much nearer the kicker than the potential offenders in such cases. It's not like shuffling two steps and muttering in an ear - it would have to be a full-on shout near the kicker's ear during the kicker's preparations - poor form in my view.

if you pointed at them and shook your head it would likely work :)

TheBFG
27-11-15, 10:11
Why does the level count in this instance? curious :chin:

If an U16's side did this I'd just award another PK (at the spot) and educate them, but if your boys do it on Saturday the blocker is likely to go to the bin :wink:

crossref
27-11-15, 10:11
If an U16's side did this I'd just award another PK (at the spot) and educate them, but if your boys do it on Saturday the blocker is likely to go to the bin :wink:

but this is my point in reality the U16s are just the level that you'd ever be likely to see this : big and strong enough to lift each other high enough to do it, smart alec enough to try out clever ideas, but still clueless about the Laws. I'd handle it same as you.


you won't ever see womble's team doing it -- they know the Laws and realise it's completely pointless.

The Fat
27-11-15, 12:11
So to summarise so far,
Phil E >>>> Awards a PK but doesn't say where
ddjamo >>>> Awards a PK 10m forward of the original mark
didds >>>> Wants to card the lot but no indication of PK or mark
Dan_A >>>> Is more laid back than didds and cards the toucher but no indication of PK or mark
TheBFG >>>> PK at point where touched and maybe a YC for the toucher
Camquin >>>> Comments but no concrete decision
Dixie >>>> Is getting tougher as he gets older. YCs all round (+ the water boy and old blazers in the club house probably) PK but where?
Womble >>>> No decision but is curious and then later amazed
crossref >>>> Hints at PK in front of sticks
Nigib >>>> Has locked all vision aids in his car but manages to yell at the offenders
crossref >>>> Is now pointing fingers and shaking heads but still to clarify final decision
TheBFG >>>> TheBFG's nurturing side has emerged but the YCs are still cocked and ready to fly for any players with a hint of experience


I was hoping more people would say where they would award the ensuing PK and give a law reference.

Phil E
27-11-15, 13:11
I was hoping more people would say where they would award the ensuing PK and give a law reference.

Sorry, I thought it was obvious. My bad.

9.A.2 KICK AT GOAL - SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES
(d) Any player who touches the ball in an attempt to prevent a penalty goal being scored is illegally touching the ball.
Sanction: Penalty kick

Penalty kick: Unless a Law says otherwise (it doesn't), a penalty kick is awarded at the place of infringement.

Dave Sherwin
27-11-15, 13:11
Agreed. PK at place of infringement. I would YC the toucher (since he is the only one actually in breach of a law) at any reasonable level. BUT... I would expect to manage out the offence long before it ever occurred; a lifting pod in front of the posts getting ready to lift would be pretty obvious and would get a very loud and repeated shout!

crossref
27-11-15, 13:11
I am intrigued by everyone wanting to give a YC -- in this real life game where a player actually attempts to block a kick, most posters didn't even want to PK him.
http://www.rugbyrefs.com/showthread.php?19310-What-s-the-decision

ddjamo
27-11-15, 14:11
the word "any" with regards to an infringement by the non kicking team tells me 10m up. two things:

- if they were shaping to lift - it would more than likely be managed by the referee.

- wouldn't this be a great time for a "penalty goal"? under the posts - award a penalty goal, yc the toucher and get on with the match.

the two issues. if the blocking takes away the goal and then the kicking side gets another shot and misses - the blocking team gained an advantage. conversely - if going with a pk at the place of infringement - that could be a HUGE game changer. now they are poised for a try.

"penalty goal" if not for an act of foul play a goal would have been scored....to me that's the fairest outcome but sadly not in law.

crossref
27-11-15, 15:11
"penalty goal" if not for an act of foul play a goal would have been scored....to me that's the fairest outcome but sadly not in law.

but current Law is sufficient to stop it ever happening ... .so there's not really a problem to be fixed.

beckett50
27-11-15, 16:11
My two penneth.

Award the PK at the point the ball was touched, as this is the place of the offence.
YC to the poor chap who touched it - rather than the whole pod - since he/she is the offender.

Yes, I was aware of the requirements of the defending team at the PK to goal :hap:

The problem with warning the defenders not to lift is that it is likely the move will start to take place either as the kicker is making his approach - and as Dixie said it would be poor form to put the kicker off his preparations and kick - or once the ball has already been kicked and then your warning becomes immaterial as ones mind is already seeking the likely sanction.

I agree that the level is irrelevant as far as penalising, but I would be less likely to card a (say) L8 and below than a L7. As for L6 and L5 it is bolt card all day long.

didds
27-11-15, 17:11
I am intrigued by everyone wanting to give a YC -- in this real life game where a player actually attempts to block a kick, most posters didn't even want to PK him.
http://www.rugbyrefs.com/showthread.php?19310-What-s-the-decision

I had somehow missed (I think) the talk about blocking under 9.2.A.

That seems pretty much bang to rights indeed CR.

didds

ddjamo
27-11-15, 19:11
I am intrigued by everyone wanting to give a YC -- in this real life game where a player actually attempts to block a kick, most posters didn't even want to PK him.
http://www.rugbyrefs.com/showthread.php?19310-What-s-the-decision

I am not making application to the resident debate club but I will point out that there are approx a dozen different responses to the OP. law is not clear. even with unclear application of law - I did not say it was a problem nor is it a problem in the game. the OP is clearly an anomaly.

if foul play takes away a goal - maybe it would be easy to have a PG just like we have a PT. that is clear...beam up the jumper in the OP and it's a goal.

Nigib
27-11-15, 19:11
Just to clarify my previous post - I don't subscribe to shouting for the obvious - it will likely put off the kicker. But being near to the kicker does have an advantage, in that most of the opposing team are looking that way, and hence I'm in their line of sight. So when they do stray (I've never seen pod-lifting, but I do see them with arms up, moving and so on from time to time) I will use a combination of ref glare, pointing and non-intrusive (to the kicker) hand waving to bring them to order. Never had to have a rekick.

The Fat
27-11-15, 23:11
Well the correct answer to the OP is that a PK is awarded where the infringement occurs (illegally touching the ball 1m from the posts). We all know that the new mark will have to come back out to the 5m line.

I was interested to see where others would award the PK as I initially answered the exam question as per ddjamo's first response i.e. 10m forward of the original mark.

I'm not convinced it is worth a YC but that argument would gain strength if the kicker missed the 2nd kick from close range and in front of the posts when his original kick was going over. That is why I think ddjamo's liking of a PG has some merit.

It was a seemingly straight forward law question that again managed to divide opinion from some reasonably experienced refs on this forum so it was a good exercise I feel. Thanks for having a crack at it. Maybe I'll post another one. Got 3 wrong in the exam so I might post them one at a time to allow for some discussion of each before moving to the next one.
Cheers

The Fat
27-11-15, 23:11
QUESTION 2 MAUL

Team A takes the ball into a maul. Team B "rips" the ball away from Team A within the maul. The maul then goes to ground legally, and the ball is available to be played at the back of the maul, but does not look likely to be played immediately by Team B. Which of the following statements is wrong?

A) The referee should call for Team B to "Use it!"

B) Team B has 5 seconds to use the ball after being told to use it by the referee.

C) If Team B does not use the ball within 5 seconds after being told to use it, the referee awards a scrum to Team B, because Team B did not take the ball into the maul initially.

D) If Team B does not use the ball within 5 seconds after being told to use it, the referee awards a scrum to Team A, because the ball was not used in time by Team B.


Single letter answer only please. After we get a few answers, we can go back and ask for a law reference to support your initial answer.
Cheers

menace
28-11-15, 01:11
C is wrong.

crossref
28-11-15, 07:11
New question would work better as a new thread

ddjamo
28-11-15, 08:11
Well the correct answer to the OP is that a PK is awarded where the infringement occurs (illegally touching the ball 1m from the posts). We all know that the new mark will have to come back out to the 5m line.

I was interested to see where others would award the PK as I initially answered the exam question as per ddjamo's first response i.e. 10m forward of the original mark.

I'm not convinced it is worth a YC but that argument would gain strength if the kicker missed the 2nd kick from close range and in front of the posts when his original kick was going over. That is why I think ddjamo's liking of a PG has some merit.

It was a seemingly straight forward law question that again managed to divide opinion from some reasonably experienced refs on this forum so it was a good exercise I feel. Thanks for having a crack at it. Maybe I'll post another one. Got 3 wrong in the exam so I might post them one at a time to allow for some discussion of each before moving to the next one.
Cheers

Correct per what law or convention or was it the instructor's opinion?

Nigib
28-11-15, 11:11
C is wrong.

What he said

The Fat
28-11-15, 11:11
Correct per what law or convention or was it the instructor's opinion?

The OP is specifically covered by Law 9.A.2 where the sanction is a PK and as Law 21.1 tells us, unless a law states otherwise, the mark for the PK is at the place of the infringement.

The sanction listed at the end of 21.7 is where we see an infringement by the opposing team result in a new PK 10m in front of the original mark however, Law 21.7 does not mention touching the ball to prevent a penalty goal being scored whereas 9.A.2 does.

9.A.2
(d) Any player who touches the ball in an attempt to prevent a penalty goal being scored is illegally touching the ball.
Sanction: Penalty kick


21.1
Unless a Law states otherwise, the mark for a penalty or free kick is at the place of infringement.

21.7 What the opposing team must do at a penalty kick

(a) Must run from the mark.
(b) Must keep running.
(c) Kick taken quickly.
(d) Interference. The opposing team must not do anything to delay the penalty kick or obstruct the kicker. They must not intentionally take, throw or kick the ball out of reach of the kicker or the kicker’s team mates.

Sanction: Any infringement by the opposing team results in a second penalty kick, 10 metres in front of the mark for the first kick. This mark must not be within 5 metres of the goal line. Any player may take the kick. The kicker may change the type of kick and may choose to kick at goal. If the referee awards a second penalty kick, the second penalty kick is not taken before the referee has made the mark indicating the place of the penalty.

Camquin
28-11-15, 11:11
If I were redrafting the laws I would move 9.A.2 into law 21 and 9.B into 22 In goal and leave law 9 as just the points values.
Law 7 and 9 also need forward references to the details in later laws.
In fact I might move the rump of law 9 into law 7.

ddjamo
28-11-15, 15:11
The OP is specifically covered by Law 9.A.2 where the sanction is a PK and as Law 21.1 tells us, unless a law states otherwise, the mark for the PK is at the place of the infringement.

The sanction listed at the end of 21.7 is where we see an infringement by the opposing team result in a new PK 10m in front of the original mark however, Law 21.7 does not mention touching the ball to prevent a penalty goal being scored whereas 9.A.2 does.

9.A.2
(d) Any player who touches the ball in an attempt to prevent a penalty goal being scored is illegally touching the ball.
Sanction: Penalty kick


21.1
Unless a Law states otherwise, the mark for a penalty or free kick is at the place of infringement.

21.7 What the opposing team must do at a penalty kick

(a) Must run from the mark.
(b) Must keep running.
(c) Kick taken quickly.
(d) Interference. The opposing team must not do anything to delay the penalty kick or obstruct the kicker. They must not intentionally take, throw or kick the ball out of reach of the kicker or the kicker’s team mates.

Sanction: Any infringement by the opposing team results in a second penalty kick, 10 metres in front of the mark for the first kick. This mark must not be within 5 metres of the goal line. Any player may take the kick. The kicker may change the type of kick and may choose to kick at goal. If the referee awards a second penalty kick, the second penalty kick is not taken before the referee has made the mark indicating the place of the penalty.

thanks for the info, opinion and thought provoking OP.