PDA

View Full Version : Question of Advantage



BikerRef
04-10-17, 15:10
Okay so here is a scenario that happened to me this past weekend.

Red ball carrier is running from behind his own 22 and is outside of his left hand 15. Blue defender is running full speed toward him. Red BC sees some open space in the opposite corner and quickly puts up a beautiful high and long cross-pitch punt. Blue defender tries (too quickly) to turn to follow the kick, but slips, falls, and inadvertently slides in front of the kicker, who then also goes down face first (no harm done and absolutely belly-laugh-hysterical to watch).

I signaled penalty advantage for tripping and watched to see how the result of the kick unfolded. Another Blue player caught the ball and I brought the whole thing back to the spot of the trip for a PK.

At the time of the kick most of the Red players were a scant 5 to 10 meters offsides, but because the kicker was inadvertently tripped he had no real opportunity to put his team onside. I thought there might be a slight opportunity for Red to score.

My question is: Was I right to play the advantage, or should I have just blown it up immediately?

Rich_NL
04-10-17, 16:10
Play the advantage if you can. An onside red *might* have caught it and scored while the others retired...

I'd have given the red captain the option of where to take the PK, though, as obstructing the kicker is a PK either at the infringement or where the ball lands/is next played.

BikerRef
04-10-17, 16:10
I guess I didn't think it was "possible enough" for Red to have caught the kick to offer the option of kicking form the point of receipt of the ball, and I had already given them some of the benefit of the doubt because most of them had been offsides at the time of the kick.

Phil E
04-10-17, 16:10
So Blue defender falls over; and then the kicker trips over his prone body...all after the kick is away?

crossref
04-10-17, 16:10
I think from your description it's a choice of
1 .. play on, it's just one of those things
2 .. its a late hit on the kicker , so red get choice of PK (where ball was kicked or where it landed )

If it was (2) then by all means play a little time of adv just to see what happens when ball lands, but in reality for a really long kick it's going to be hard for red to achieve anything better than a PK where it lands

aside : normally a late hit can be a real flashpoint, so blow early. But in this case not so much !

Pegleg
04-10-17, 17:10
Okay so here is a scenario that happened to me this past weekend.

... Blue defender tries (too quickly) to turn to follow the kick, but slips, falls, and inadvertently slides in front of the kicker, who then also goes down face first .
.

My question is: Was I right to play the advantage, or should I have just blown it up immediately?

So why are you blowing at all? You tell us it was an accident.

BikerRef
04-10-17, 18:10
So Blue defender falls over; and then the kicker trips over his prone body...all after the kick is away?

Yep, and like I said it was a sight right out of a Keystone Cops short.

BikerRef
04-10-17, 19:10
So why are you blowing at all? You tell us it was an accident.

I blew it up after I saw no advantage could be had.

It was clearly an accident, but it also caused the other 14 guys from the kicker's team to be offside and with the kicker down, no way for them to be put on side unless they ran back to him, which gives a huge advantage to Blue to return the kick.

Taff
04-10-17, 19:10
So why are you blowing at all? You tell us it was an accident.

I blew it up after I saw no advantage could be had.

I think the point was there was no offence.

Dickie E
04-10-17, 20:10
I blew it up after I saw no advantage could be had.

It was clearly an accident, but it also caused the other 14 guys from the kicker's team to be offside and with the kicker down, no way for them to be put on side unless they ran back to him, which gives a huge advantage to Blue to return the kick.

a couple of points:

1. if it was truly an accident I would have called play on, and
2. even if there was an offence,if the 14 team mates are in front of the kicker, there's not much point in playing advantage.

I wouldn't have too much sympathy for a kicker who puts in a cross field kick and not find touch with all his team mates in front of him.

Phil E
05-10-17, 09:10
Originally Posted by Phil E View Post
So Blue defender falls over; and then the kicker trips over his prone body...all after the kick is away?


Yep, and like I said it was a sight right out of a Keystone Cops short.

Play on for me. No offence. It's no different to a tackle that takes the kicker out as he kicks it, someone else has to put everyone on side.

Thunderhorse1986
05-10-17, 09:10
I blew it up after I saw no advantage could be had.

It was clearly an accident, but it also caused the other 14 guys from the kicker's team to be offside and with the kicker down, no way for them to be put on side unless they ran back to him, which gives a huge advantage to Blue to return the kick.

The Red players can be put on side by Blue opponent in certain ways (running 5m, passing, kicking), assuming they were not offside under 10m rule.

thepercy
05-10-17, 16:10
The Red players can be put on side by Blue opponent in certain ways (running 5m, passing, kicking), assuming they were not offside under 10m rule.

But they can't be moving forward until they are put onside.

Camquin
05-10-17, 16:10
While there are opportunities for blue to put red onside - red are highly disadvantaged. Which is why it carries the double penalty.

Phil E
05-10-17, 16:10
While there are opportunities for blue to put red onside - red are highly disadvantaged. Which is why it carries the double penalty.

But this isn't a kick or kick situation.
The kicker wasn't hit late, he just fell over a player on the floor.
There is no offence.

Paule23
05-10-17, 20:10
I agree with a few people on here, as described there is no offence here. Red player slips and falls over/slides, blue player trips over the red player after accidental contact. Unfortunate for blue, but play on.

Interesting thought about blue being put onside if all were in front of the kicker. Clearly with the kicker down this is going to be difficult so I would give some latitude and allow them to progress after the point they would likely have been put onside by the blue player, otherwise there is nothing they can do to be onside until red clay the ball and run 5m or pass it.

crossref
05-10-17, 21:10
Well the kicker presumably got back to his feet and ran, putting g his team mates onside in the normal way

Thunderhorse1986
06-10-17, 07:10
I agree with a few people on here, as described there is no offence here.
...
I would give some latitude and allow them to progress after the point they would likely have been put onside by the blue player, otherwise there is nothing they can do to be onside until red clay the ball and run 5m or pass it.

I don't understand this point - you think there is no offence by the non-kicking side, so no penalty. And you agree blue players infront of kicker are offside. But you would allow those players in front of the kicker to advance "after the point they would have likely been put onside". Wayt oo much subjectivity to make this call in my view. Do you have the same view if the Blue player kicks, pulls a hammy in the kick and can't run forward? You would give leeway because if he hadn't pulled the hammy,he probably would have put them onside? It sounds close to making up law which is risky business.

The Blue players can and will be put onside by red playing the ball, or if other onside teammates run ahead of them or if they retreat far enough (to the original kicker). That's just the law, regardless of any unfortunate situation, isn't it?

BikerRef
06-10-17, 14:10
Well the kicker presumably got back to his feet and ran, putting g his team mates onside in the normal way

Yes but for the inadvertent interference they would have been put onside quite a bit earlier and could have had a chance to compete for the kick and potentially score.

Phil E
06-10-17, 15:10
Yes but for the inadvertent interference they would have been put onside quite a bit earlier and could have had a chance to compete for the kick and potentially score.

This sounds like you are searching desperately for a reason to give a PK?

BikerRef
06-10-17, 18:10
This sounds like you are searching desperately for a reason to give a PK?

Maybe just to justify to myself: a) playing the advantage in the first place and b) ultimately awarding the penalty.

Paule23
06-10-17, 19:10
I don't understand this point - you think there is no offence by the non-kicking side, so no penalty. And you agree blue players infront of kicker are offside. But you would allow those players in front of the kicker to advance "after the point they would have likely been put onside". Wayt oo much subjectivity to make this call in my view. Do you have the same view if the Blue player kicks, pulls a hammy in the kick and can't run forward? You would give leeway because if he hadn't pulled the hammy,he probably would have put them onside? It sounds close to making up law which is risky business.

The Blue players can and will be put onside by red playing the ball, or if other onside teammates run ahead of them or if they retreat far enough (to the original kicker). That's just the law, regardless of any unfortunate situation, isn't it?

I get what you are saying, I'm just trying to be fair to the Blue team. Due to an unfortunate set of circumstances the kicker has hit the deck and there is no other Blue player who can put them onside. I'm not sure it's fair or equitable to expect the entire team to retreat/stand still while all red players can move to the ball and begin an attack with no Blue player within 40m of them.

I understand things start to get highly judgemental, and I might be wrong in law, I'm just looking at a way to be fair to both teams in an unusual situation.

BikerRef
06-10-17, 20:10
It is actually the Red team that kicked, was tripped and was therefore disadvantaged.

Dickie E
06-10-17, 21:10
I get what you are saying, I'm just trying to be fair to the Blue team. Due to an unfortunate set of circumstances the kicker has hit the deck and there is no other Blue player who can put them onside. I'm not sure it's fair or equitable to expect the entire team to retreat/stand still while all red players can move to the ball and begin an attack with no Blue player within 40m of them.

I understand things start to get highly judgemental, and I might be wrong in law, I'm just looking at a way to be fair to both teams in an unusual situation.

I see a cross-field kick with all of your team mates in front of you as a high risk strategy. He paid the price. Shit happens.

Pegleg
06-10-17, 22:10
It is actually the Red team that kicked, was tripped and was therefore disadvantaged.

But you posted:


...inadvertently slides in front of the kicker, who then also goes down face first...

It was an accident. There is no offence = PLAY ON!

SimonSmith
07-10-17, 18:10
You can’t play advantage unless an offence has occurred.

Before you play advantage, take a breath. Be sure that an offence has occurred; be sure that there is a viable advantage. Only then should you call it.

As referenced above, sometimes shit happens; your role is not to act as the great equalizer or the shit umbrella.

Taff
07-10-17, 18:10
I get what you are saying, I'm just trying to be fair to the Blue team. ... I'm not sure it's fair or equitable to expect the entire team to retreat/stand still while all red players can move to the ball and begin an attack with no Blue player within 40m of them.
Don't forget Blue can still be put onside by an opponent mind.

As soon as Red have run 5m, kicked, passed or intentionally touched the ball, all the Blue players are back onside again.

11.3 Being put onside by opponents
In general play, there are three ways by which an offside player can be put onside by an action of the opposing team.
(a) Runs 5 metres with ball.
(b) Kicks or passes.
(c) Intentionally touches ball.

Paule23
08-10-17, 23:10
Don't forget Blue can still be put onside by an opponent mind.

As soon as Red have run 5m, kicked, passed or intentionally touched the ball, all the Blue players are back onside again.

11.3 Being put onside by opponents
In general play, there are three ways by which an offside player can be put onside by an action of the opposing team.
(a) Runs 5 metres with ball.
(b) Kicks or passes.
(c) Intentionally touches ball.

I understand all those options, but its very unusual for a team to have all of them in 40 metres of space, ultimately due to an accidental impact by a member of their own team.doesnt seem fair to me.

ChrisR
08-10-17, 23:10
Shit happens. The ball takes a bad bounce. Etc., etc. Referee the game to the laws and let The Force take care of the fairness.

Dickie E
09-10-17, 01:10
I understand all those options, but its very unusual for a team to have all of them in 40 metres of space, ultimately due to an accidental impact by a member of their own team.doesnt seem fair to me.

This type of incident isn't so rare. Defending team win ruck on their own goal line and ball goes back for a clearance kick by #10 who is on dead ball line. Kick doesn't find touch and #10 gets legally clattered as he is kicking the ball. All of his team mates are in front of kicker. You can't pull a PK out of your bottom to protect the defending team, can you?

Paule23
09-10-17, 08:10
This type of incident isn't so rare. Defending team win ruck on their own goal line and ball goes back for a clearance kick by #10 who is on dead ball line. Kick doesn't find touch and #10 gets legally clattered as he is kicking the ball. All of his team mates are in front of kicker. You can't pull a PK out of your bottom to protect the defending team, can you?

I'm not trying to pull a PK out of my bottom, I'm trying to prevent a PK against the chasing team. I recognise this is not allowed in law, but there are loads of things not in the laws we allow, how about some empathy with the game situation and refereeing along those lines?

Thunderhorse1986
09-10-17, 09:10
I'm not trying to pull a PK out of my bottom, I'm trying to prevent a PK against the chasing team. I recognise this is not allowed in law, but there are loads of things not in the laws we allow, how about some empathy with the game situation and refereeing along those lines?

In this case I believe it is misplaced empathy. Where is the empathy for the team catching the kick who I imagine will be seriously p1ssed off if offside players are allowed to play the ball even though the kicker has not been able to put them onside. The law is clear here that they are offside and must not move towards the ball or take part in the game. There are clear methods for them to be put onside by the catching team. There is no grey in that.

The idea of "managing it" or empathy I think would be more useful if it were a chasing player who was maybe 1-2m offside from kicker who chases the ball down. We might think "OK that was close, but not C&O SO I will let it go". But then you manage by finding the chaser at the next downtime if you can and say something like "winger, make sure you're behind the kicker when you chase, last one was 50-50".

OB..
09-10-17, 11:10
"Hard cases make bad law"

This is one of those unfortunate cases...in which,it is, no doubt, a hardship upon the plaintiff to be without a remedy but bythat consideration we ought not to be influenced. Hard cases, it has frequentlybeen observed, are apt to introduce bad law.
Judge Robert Rolf inthe case of Winterbottom v Wright in 1842

Nigib
09-10-17, 11:10
There is always another option. If you think too much advantage may/may not accrue from what you see as playing on from a genuinely accidental occurrence, take it back for a scrum to the kicking side where the incident happened. Probably as 'fair' as you can manage.

ChrisR
09-10-17, 11:10
Fair? But to whom? That may be an equitable outcome but it's not supported in law. Don't make it up. If you judge it to be a deliberate act then it's a PK. Otherwise it's "Play on!".

Taff
09-10-17, 12:10
I understand all those options, but its very unusual for a team to have all of them in 40 metres of space, ultimately due to an accidental impact by a member of their own team. doesnt seem fair to me.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean when you say "its very unusual for a team to have all of them in 40 metres of space".

If you mean all teammates, the opposition will soon put them back onside. I can almost guarantee you that the opposition will kick the ball, pass it or run 5m with it in seconds. The one thing that may catch you out is the 10m Law.

I'm sure you are trying to think of this with the best of intentions, but in reality I just don't think it's going to be as big an issue as you think. I would just shout "Wait. You're all offside. ...... OK, you've now been played onside. Play on".

Nigib
09-10-17, 22:10
Fair? But to whom? That may be an equitable outcome but it's not supported in law. Don't make it up. If you judge it to be a deliberate act then it's a PK. Otherwise it's "Play on!".

Well that's why I said 'fair' - you could also call a stop for safety, if the 'accident' warranted a stoppage. And support it in law as scrum for anything not covered elsewhere. Or, back to basics - isn't it 'Safety, equity (or today's equivalent) and law' - in that order. If so, doesn't equitable outcome/enjoyment trump the letter of the law? I'd rather have everyone accept a scrum from the kicker's position than whinging on both sides about obstruction penalties/wasn't accidental and multiple offsides. Personally not sure what I would have done, but accept each to their own view.

Dickie E
09-10-17, 22:10
Well that's why I said 'fair' - you could also call a stop for safety, if the 'accident' warranted a stoppage. And support it in law as scrum for anything not covered elsewhere. Or, back to basics - isn't it 'Safety, equity (or today's equivalent) and law' - in that order. If so, doesn't equitable outcome/enjoyment trump the letter of the law? I'd rather have everyone accept a scrum from the kicker's position than whinging on both sides about obstruction penalties/wasn't accidental and multiple offsides. Personally not sure what I would have done, but accept each to their own view.

So in my scenario (post #30) you would consider a scrum restart as a suitable outcome? Talk me through that

ChrisR
10-10-17, 10:10
Nigib, when you order the scrum (accidental obstruction? injury?) who has the feed?

20.4 (d) Scrum after any other stoppage. After any other stoppage or irregularity not covered by
Law , the team that was moving forward before the stoppage throws in the ball. If neither
team was moving forward , the attacking team throws in the ball.

My guess is you would award the feed to the team that just kicked away their possession.

Nigib
10-10-17, 11:10
So in my scenario (post #30) you would consider a scrum restart as a suitable outcome? Talk me through that

I can see a situation might be equitable if (a) I see the takeout as completely accidental (which is not your scenario as I read it) and (b) players are close enough to landing ball to make a difference. In reality in this situation I attempt to manage the players in an offside position by calling them to get onside/not interfere.

Nigib
10-10-17, 11:10
Nigib, when you order the scrum (accidental obstruction? injury?) who has the feed?

20.4 (d) Scrum after any other stoppage. After any other stoppage or irregularity not covered by
Law , the team that was moving forward before the stoppage throws in the ball. If neither
team was moving forward , the attacking team throws in the ball.

My guess is you would award the feed to the team that just kicked away their possession.

Sure - but my premise is that in this particular instance, Equity may outrank Law - hence I can see a scrum as a possible outcome. Are you saying it should always be the other way round? As I said in reply to Dickie E, the reality is we are unlikely to see a bona fide accidental collision with the kicker, so play on and manage the players in offside positions.

ChrisR
10-10-17, 11:10
Sure - but my premise is that in this particular instance, Equity may outrank Law - hence I can see a scrum as a possible outcome. Are you saying it should always be the other way round? As I said in reply to Dickie E, the reality is we are unlikely to see a bona fide accidental collision with the kicker, so play on and manage the players in offside positions.

. . . . but when it happens it's "Play on" and if you judge it not to be accidental then the laws cover it. I think the point we are making is that there is no call for a scrum except for an injury that needs emergency attention. In that case I'd order the scrum where the ball is next played (in this scenario) by the receiving team.

Nigib
10-10-17, 14:10
. . . . but when it happens it's "Play on" and if you judge it not to be accidental then the laws cover it. I think the point we are making is that there is no call for a scrum except for an injury that needs emergency attention. In that case I'd order the scrum where the ball is next played (in this scenario) by the receiving team.

ok, agree not in Law, but I would still argue a feasible option is a scrum at the kick under Equity - we can differ in views. And on Equity before Law? Would you blow for an offence in Law rather than manage a situation to Equity? My example is restraining a running player offside at a kick by calling them back, rather than let them get to the ball and PK them? Surely you manage wherever you can (equitably) rather than blow, and in situations such as this wouldn't you call out the offside players to back off?

Thunderhorse1986
10-10-17, 14:10
ok, agree not in Law, but I would still argue a feasible option is a scrum at the kick under Equity - we can differ in views. And on Equity before Law? Would you blow for an offence in Law rather than manage a situation to Equity? My example is restraining a running player offside at a kick by calling them back, rather than let them get to the ball and PK them? Surely you manage wherever you can (equitably) rather than blow, and in situations such as this wouldn't you call out the offside players to back off?

In this scenario the management element would be calling all the players in front of the kicker to stay still, until they are put onside when you can call "all onside" rather tha award a scrum which appears completely arbitrary and not inline with any law. In the same way you "manage" a player from running forward if he's offside, if he doesn't do it, you don't award a scrum, you award a penalty, because that's the law.

I really don't think the catching team would see it as equitable to conceed a scrum where the kick happened, considering otherwise they would have had possession with a chance to run at a disorganised defence!

ChrisR
10-10-17, 15:10
ok, agree not in Law, but I would still argue a feasible option is a scrum at the kick under Equity - we can differ in views.

OK, so under the 'rule of equity over law' you award a scrum at the kick. Who feeds? The side that just kicked away their possession? If you do that you are assigning guilt.

Let's change the scenario a tad. Let's say the kicker is not accidentally tripped by the opponent but is tripped by a dog that runs onto the pitch. Now I'd agree that some equity can apply but the scrum would be to the opponents at the place the ball is next played because he (the kicker) had played the ball away before he was tripped.

didds
10-10-17, 15:10
I think the bottom line here is "Shit happens".

didds

OB..
10-10-17, 16:10
OK, so under the 'rule of equity over law' you award a scrum at the kick. Who feeds? The side that just kicked away their possession? If you do that you are assigning guilt.No. 20.4 (d) provides for giving the throw-in without implying guilt.

In a court of law, Equity was introduced to trump Law when strict application of Law was seen to be unfair.

crossref
10-10-17, 17:10
Let's change the scenario a tad. Let's say the kicker is[is tripped by a dog that runs onto the pitch. Now I'd agree that some equity can apply but the scrum would be to the opponents at the place the ball is next played because he (the kicker) had played the ball away before he was tripped.

That's a fun scenario (and not so strange, at the start of the season I reffed a game with deer on the pitch, and for a short moment it did look like the deer might stop play)

So there are two questions
1 - where's the scrum. Where he kicked it? where he fell over the dog, or where the ball landed?
2 - whose put in ? the kicking team were the last to play it, and moving forward, but minus the dog the receiving team would have gained possession

My instinct is scrum where the ball lands, to the receiving team.