PDA

View Full Version : Advantage over when you kick it..



crossref
13-09-16, 08:09
In my game on saturday, something we have discussed before actually happened ..

- about 25m from the red line, Blue knock on, into the hands of red #9 (I shout knock on, adv red)
- red #9 passes it back into his 22m, to his #10 (I shout 'taken back')
- red #10 takes a unhurried, long kick up field which hangs in the air ..... and goes straight into touch.

What I actually did was: wait to see where the ball landed, and then came back for the knock on, scrum to red, but I know there is a big argument that (for a scrum adv) you normally shout advantage-over at the moment a kick is freely taken...

thoughts?

TheBFG
13-09-16, 09:09
not the moment it's kicked, for the exact reason you had, but once it's landed i'd be looking to call it over

OB..
13-09-16, 11:09
If the kick is freely taken, not under pressure, then it counts as advantage taken. Miskicks happen all the time, so no special dispensation.

I see no point in waiting to see what happens. How is it going to affect your decision?

Nigib
13-09-16, 13:09
If the kick is freely taken, not under pressure, then it counts as advantage taken. Miskicks happen all the time, so no special dispensation.

I see no point in waiting to see what happens. How is it going to affect your decision?

Isn't the difference in the type of advantage being taken - TACTICAL - freedom to play the ball as you wish, and you choose to kick it, and TERRITORIAL - gain in ground. If you call advantage over as soon as it's kicked, you've given tactical advantage, but the kicker may not have had the freedom to play as they wished. Allowing the outcome of the kick enables the territorial advantage.

crossref
13-09-16, 13:09
TBH it was an instinctive call rather than thought through -- I normally do call 'adv over' when it's kicked --- but I must have instinctively suspected it was going out, as I didn't call it.

Dickie E
13-09-16, 13:09
If the kick was clearly not going into touch I'd call advantage over while in the air. If the kick was clearly going into touch I'd blow for the scrum while ball was in the air. Otherwise, I'd wait until it alights.

Paule23
13-09-16, 14:09
If the kick was clearly not going into touch I'd call advantage over while in the air. If the kick was clearly going into touch I'd blow for the scrum while ball was in the air. Otherwise, I'd wait until it alights.

This.

Phil E
13-09-16, 15:09
The advantage was that they passed back and cleared their lines.
Not my problem if he can't kick it into a 100m x 70m box.

OB..
13-09-16, 18:09
Isn't the difference in the type of advantage being taken - TACTICAL - freedom to play the ball as you wish, and you choose to kick it, and TERRITORIAL - gain in ground. If you call advantage over as soon as it's kicked, you've given tactical advantage, but the kicker may not have had the freedom to play as they wished. Allowing the outcome of the kick enables the territorial advantage.He is entitled to tactical OR territorial advantage, not both. By kicking when not under pressure he has chosen tactical.

If the ball goes straight into touch he cannot gain territory - the throw will be opposite where he kicked from and the opponents will throw in.

If he makes a mess of the kick and gains little or no ground, that is his error. He has thrown away the advantage, and it is not the referee's job to give it back to him.

Under what circumstances would you think it right to go back for the scrum?

beckett50
13-09-16, 19:09
He is entitled to tactical OR territorial advantage, not both. By kicking when not under pressure he has chosen tactical.

If the ball goes straight into touch he cannot gain territory - the throw will be opposite where he kicked from and the opponents will throw in.

If he makes a mess of the kick and gains little or no ground, that is his error. He has thrown away the advantage, and it is not the referee's job to give it back to him.

Under what circumstances would you think it right to go back for the scrum?

Your point is valid OB. However, in this instance it was a knock-on advantage and in that instance I would argue that the pass and non-pressurised kick away was sufficient advantage in this instance.

Penalty advantage, of course, would be a different kettle of fish :smile:

Nigib
13-09-16, 19:09
He is entitled to tactical OR territorial advantage, not both. By kicking when not under pressure he has chosen tactical.

If the ball goes straight into touch he cannot gain territory - the throw will be opposite where he kicked from and the opponents will throw in.

If he makes a mess of the kick and gains little or no ground, that is his error. He has thrown away the advantage, and it is not the referee's job to give it back to him.

Under what circumstances would you think it right to go back for the scrum?

Good points all. Agree advantage must be or, not and. If you say advantage over just after the kick, you are deciding it is tactical, as you can't know the outcome. If you wait, you are assessing territorial. If it drops close to the kicker, or goes straight into touch, no advantage. If it ends up downfield (20-30m+, I wouldn't put an absolute number on it) and in play, then territorial advantage gained play on.

OB..
13-09-16, 20:09
Good points all. Agree advantage must be or, not and. If you say advantage over just after the kick, you are deciding it is tactical, as you can't know the outcome. If you wait, you are assessing territorial. If it drops close to the kicker, or goes straight into touch, no advantage. If it ends up downfield (20-30m+, I wouldn't put an absolute number on it) and in play, then territorial advantage gained play on.My point is that once the player has chosen to kick (under no pressure) he has used his advantage. I don't see that if he makes a mess of it he should be able to reclaim advantage on the basis he did not make a territorial gain. The die had already been cast.

IMHO territorial gain applies to other actions eg if he kicks under pressure.

Nigib
13-09-16, 21:09
My point is that once the player has chosen to kick (under no pressure) he has used his advantage. I don't see that if he makes a mess of it he should be able to reclaim advantage on the basis he did not make a territorial gain. The die had already been cast.

IMHO territorial gain applies to other actions eg if he kicks under pressure.

I think we're agreeing. If you judge that the player kicks under no pressure, you've adjudged tactical advantage gained, so you call advantage over. And it's more that your judgement has been made than a die being cast.

And I agree again on your statement regarding territorial gain. If the kick is under pressure, advantage can only be territorial, and you judge if it has been gained. If not, back to the offence.

Dickie E
13-09-16, 21:09
If he makes a mess of the kick and gains little or no ground, that is his error. He has thrown away the advantage, and it is not the referee's job to give it back to him.



Change "kick" to "pass" and then what? If he makes a mess of the "pass" (eg forward) has he gained tactical advantage?

Dickie E
14-09-16, 01:09
Not my problem if he can't kick it into a 100m x 70m box.

Yes, it is your problem because:

The advantage must be clear and real. A mere opportunity to gain advantage is not enough.

Ian_Cook
14-09-16, 03:09
In the OP's circumstances, is passing the ball back into the 22m "playing the ball as they wish"?

Does kicking the ball in these circumstances satisfy "The advantage must be clear and real. A mere opportunity to gain advantage is not enough."

How can you judge if it is real if you haven't yet seen where the ball is going?

How about reversing the situation, the defending team knocks on 5m from touch and 20m out from their own goal-line. An attacking player immediately attempts a dropped goal which misses. Is that advantage over?

(NOTE: Not in my book it isn't)



IMO, the key part of this Law is...

8.1 ADVANTAGE IN PRACTICE
(a) The referee is sole judge of whether or not a team has gained an advantage. The referee has wide discretion when making decisions

...so crossref, I agree with what you did in your OP because the Law makes you the judge and gives you the discretion to decide what is and what is not advantage.

Dickie E
14-09-16, 04:09
Ian, we're on same side with this but I did wonder about this one:

same scenario as OP but instead of going into touch it bounces in FoP and rolls, and rolls and rolls & finally goes dead in goal 90 metres from where the kick was made. Restart?

For me, first bounce = advantage over. So I'd go 22 / scrum option with non-kicking team to feed the scrum.

Ian_Cook
14-09-16, 04:09
Ian, we're on same side with this but I did wonder about this one:

same scenario as OP but instead of going into touch it bounces in FoP and rolls, and rolls and rolls & finally goes dead in goal 90 metres from where the kick was made. Restart?

For me, first bounce = advantage over. So I'd go 22 / scrum option with non-kicking team to feed the scrum.

Agree

Wedgie
14-09-16, 09:09
Yes, it is your problem because:

The advantage must be clear and real. A mere opportunity to gain advantage is not enough.


This is where I have queries in interpretation (again due to law wording). Tactical advantage (ie "the freedom .... to play the ball as they wish") could be viewed as a "mere opportunity". Some of the examples here show that (non-offending team elect to kick/pass and it doesn't work out for them).

Dickie E/Ian - you seem to be on the same page here - could you give us some examples of what you see as tactical advantage that are not mere opportunities?

Thanks, Wedgie.

Ian_Cook
14-09-16, 09:09
This is where I have queries in interpretation (again due to law wording). Tactical advantage (ie "the freedom .... to play the ball as they wish") could be viewed as a "mere opportunity". Some of the examples here show that (non-offending team elect to kick/pass and it doesn't work out for them).

Dickie E/Ian - you seem to be on the same page here - could you give us some examples of what you see as tactical advantage that are not mere opportunities?

Thanks, Wedgie.

1. Red knock on at a ruck. Blue SH clears the ball to the blind side where Blue have a 2-1 overlap but still behind the gain line - tactical advantage gained so advantage over

2. Red knock on at a tackle. Blue SH clears the ball to the open side where the Blue 10 is under some pressure from the Red rush defense but he chips the ball over the top into the space behind the Red defensive line. Two Blue players are going to be first to the ball. Whether or not the ball has reached the gain line, Blue has gained a tactical advantage so advantage over

3. Red player throws a forward pass which falcons a team-mate and bounces 10m toward Blue's goal line. Blue player picks up the ball and runs through a gap and has a clear path upfield. Even if he has not yet made the gain line, that is a clear tactical advantage so advantage in over.

DickieE is an active referee so I'm sure he will he able to relate his own real world scenarios.

Dickie E
14-09-16, 09:09
Dickie E/Ian - you seem to be on the same page here - could you give us some examples of what you see as tactical advantage that are not mere opportunities?



whether it be territorial or tactical advantage, I put myself in the player's position and think "would I rather have had the outcome of that particular passage of play after the opposition knock on or would I rather have had the scrum". If its the former, then that is advantage over for me. If the latter, then back for the scrum.

So even if the player has freedom to play the ball under no pressure, if he cocks it up (knock on, forward pass, kicks out on full, etc) I'll come back for the scrum. That is the difference between advantage and potential for advantage.

OB..
14-09-16, 12:09
IMHO the question to be answered is: what would the team reasonably expect to get from a scrum?

The answer is (typically) clean possession and the opportunity to play the ball as they wish. They do not necessarily expect a gain in ground. If the pass is dropped, or the subsequent kick is mangled - them's the breaks. Why would it be different for advantage?

If the knock-on is further knocked on in trying to gather it, I would probably regard that as pressure caused by difficult circumstances, but otherwise once the pass or the kick is made, that is sufficient.

8.1 (d) Tactical advantage means freedom for the non-offending team to play the ball as they wish.
8.2 The advantage must be clear and real. A mere opportunity to gain advantage is not enough. If the non-offending team does not gain an advantage, the referee blows the whistle and brings play back to the place of infringement.


"Mere opportunity"? Given the definition of Tactical advantage, the team has gained an advantage if they choose to kick (when not under pressure). Whether the kick is good or bad is not relevant.

Ian_Cook
14-09-16, 21:09
IMHO the question to be answered is: what would the team reasonably expect to get from a scrum?

How about, in the OP's example

a. To put pressure on the opposing scrum with a view to causing them to infringe, resulting in a penalty and a clearance to touch that will gain ground and the throw-in?

b. To win the ball with all the opposing backs at least 5m back from their own No. 8's HMF, and all other opposing forwards together in one place on the field?

Also, if this all happens 5m out from the defending team's goal line, with the attacking team having the advantage, the attacking team might want to try to get a pushover try, pr possibly a PT

OB..
15-09-16, 01:09
How about, in the OP's example

a. To put pressure on the opposing scrum with a view to causing them to infringe, resulting in a penalty and a clearance to touch that will gain ground and the throw-in?

b. To win the ball with all the opposing backs at least 5m back from their own No. 8's HMF, and all other opposing forwards together in one place on the field?

Also, if this all happens 5m out from the defending team's goal line, with the attacking team having the advantage, the attacking team might want to try to get a pushover try, pr possibly a PT

(a) and (implied c) are not options when playing advantage since you don't have a scrum, so not relevant. (b) is simply a version of "not under pressure".

If the players would prefer a scrum to advantage then they can decline the latter.

Ian_Cook
15-09-16, 03:09
(a) and (implied c) are not options when playing advantage since you don't have a scrum, so not relevant. (b) is simply a version of "not under pressure".

I was simply answering your question "what would the team reasonably expect to get from a scrum?"


If the players would prefer a scrum to advantage then they can decline the latter.

Then how to they indicate that to you, a wayward kick into touch perhaps?

OB..
15-09-16, 15:09
I was simply answering your question "what would the team reasonably expect to get from a scrum?" The question had a context: playing advantage.




Then how to they indicate that to you, a wayward kick into touch perhaps?We have had threads on this. Some people like the "accidental" knock-on. I prefer a verbal reaction: "We'll take the scrum please, Sir."

crossref
18-09-16, 16:09
Newcastle v Leicester, 52min on game clock
JPDoyle called advantage over when they kicked it.. And when the kick went directly into touch he said No actually, no advantage gained, and went back for the scrum
He explained that he had thought the kick would land infield

OB..
18-09-16, 18:09
Newcastle v Leicester, 52min on game clock
JPDoyle called advantage over when they kicked it.. And when the kick went directly into touch he said No actually, no advantage gained, and went back for the scrum
He explained that he had thought the kick would land infieldHow interesting. That is not what we are taught. And I have certainly seen top level referees stick with the original call of Advantage over.

crossref
18-09-16, 18:09
How interesting. That is not what we are taught. And I have certainly seen top level referees stick with the original call of Advantage over.

indeed.

JP's call was more contentious than mine, as he actually SAID 'advantage over' before deciding it wasn't

Ian_Cook
18-09-16, 22:09
Newcastle v Leicester, 52min on game clock
JPDoyle called advantage over when they kicked it.. And when the kick went directly into touch he said No actually, no advantage gained, and went back for the scrum
He explained that he had thought the kick would land infield

I agree with what he did, and it tells me quite clearly that his thinking is much the same as our referees here. Kicking the ball is merely an opportunity to gain an advantage; the referee won't know if it is an actual advantage until he sees where the ball lands.

crossref, can you remember if the kick was "under pressure" from the opposition?

DocY
18-09-16, 22:09
JP's situation sounds a bit of a cock-up. I'm of the mind that once you say advantage is over, there's no going back. Think quickly, act slowly and all that.

In the OP's situation, it sounds like a good call.

Not a terribly well defined way of thinking about it, but if it were a game-deciding moment and he made the call he did, would it be seen by everyone else there as a contentious decision that they'd be talking about in the bar afterwards? I expect not. But had he called advantage over it probably would be contentious. I realise spectators and players aren't always the best at referee's judgements, despite what they think, but they can act as a good barometer of decisions.

Taff
18-09-16, 23:09
... What I actually did was: wait to see where the ball landed, and then came back for the knock on, scrum to red, but I know there is a big argument that (for a scrum adv) you normally shout advantage-over at the moment a kick is freely taken...
thoughts?
I've asked this at one of our monthly meetings, and was told to wait to see how the kick went. Ie if the kicker ballsed it up, then they haven't had an advantage. It would be different obviously if it was a spectacular kick downfield which bounced into touch as they have gained a good territorial advantage.

Ian_Cook
19-09-16, 04:09
JP's situation sounds a bit of a cock-up. I'm of the mind that once you say advantage is over, there's no going back. Think quickly, act slowly and all that.

In the OP's situation, it sounds like a good call.

Not a terribly well defined way of thinking about it, but if it were a game-deciding moment and he made the call he did, would it be seen by everyone else there as a contentious decision that they'd be talking about in the bar afterwards? I expect not. But had he called advantage over it probably would be contentious. I realise spectators and players aren't always the best at referee's judgements, despite what they think, but they can act as a good barometer of decisions.


That is one way of looking at it... another way is that the referee made a mistake, and has acknowledged that mistake; that will earn you some respect from the players. What will not earn your respect is just bluffing your way through it.

Scenario: Red on attack 20m from Blue goal-line in a tackle/ruck situation where the Blue tackled player knocked forward in the tackle and advantage is being played to Red. Red SH clears the ball back to the 10, who has a drop kick at goal and misses.

Advantage over?

DocY
19-09-16, 08:09
That is one way of looking at it... another way is that the referee made a mistake, and has acknowledged that mistake; that will earn you some respect from the players. What will not earn your respect is just bluffing your way through it.


Sorry, poor wording - there shouldn't be any going back. My point was that his mistake was to call it too early, rather than calling it back. Once he'd called AO, it was always going to go badly for him, though what he did was probably less bad than than saying "I'd already called AO - lineout".


Scenario: Red on attack 20m from Blue goal-line in a tackle/ruck situation where the Blue tackled player knocked forward in the tackle and advantage is being played to Red. Red SH clears the ball back to the 10, who has a drop kick at goal and misses.

Advantage over?

I'm honestly not sure. I think I'd be looking for a reason to go back for the scrum, though - hurried drop goal, wobbly pass, or something. I think I'd struggle to go back for the scrum if he could take an unobstructed kick though - particularly as red will probably get the ball back from the DO.

MrQeu
19-09-16, 09:09
There is a trend in French rugby top refs that drop kicking after a penalty advantage equals advantage over. At least last year, I've yet to witness this scenario this season.

crossref
19-09-16, 09:09
I agree with what he did, and it tells me quite clearly that his thinking is much the same as our referees here. Kicking the ball is merely an opportunity to gain an advantage; the referee won't know if it is an actual advantage until he sees where the ball lands.

crossref, can you remember if the kick was "under pressure" from the opposition?

not especially under pressure.

as one of the posters above says, having called AO JP was in a tricky position -- both options now (insisting advantage was over, or declaring that no it wasn't) are a little bit tricky to sell to the players.

IMO he took that right decision. As Ian says it can be better to admit a mistake than to bluff through it.

OB..
19-09-16, 16:09
The US GMG does not deal with the issue.

The Australian and Canadian GMGs have identical wording:
For a ‘scrum advantage’ to accrue, the non-offending team needs to have gained clear and real
possession roughly equivalent to that which they would get from a scrum.
A ‘penalty kick advantage’ calls for a greater level of reward than for a knock-on or Free Kick. The
non-offending team must gain either tactical or territorial advantage roughly equivalent to that of
receiving the Penalty Kick in the first instanceDid one copy the other, or did this come from eg WR?

It fits with how I understand things.

chbg
19-09-16, 22:09
gained clear and real possession roughly equivalent to that which they would get from a scrum.

And it is absolutely feasible that they can mis-kick from clearly won ball off the back of a scrum. Thus, dependent on how it looks at the time, I am considering Advantage Over when they exercise a freely taken option, not when I see the outcome of that option, e.g. when they are presented with an overlap, not when the final pass has gone safely to hand.