PDA

View Full Version : question about a penalty on an awarded try



CenTexRef
22-10-07, 19:10
this past weekend, i was acting as a Touch Judge in a DII Collegiate level match. the attacking player broke through from the wing into the open field. when he got to the fullback, he made an great move that left the fullback in his wake. as he went around the fullback though, the fullback attempted a soccer-style (football-style for many) slide tackle on the winger. he barely made contact and the winger scampered in and touched down under the posts.

the referee awarded the try --- he then awarded a penalty kick to the attacking team at midfield. i had never seen this before. i have worked with this referee before and have complete confidence in his work, but i wasn't sure about that call.

has anyone else ever done this -- award the try and then a penalty at midfield instead of a kickoff?!?

thanks!

beckett50
22-10-07, 20:10
Yes, although it is rare.

Remember that if an offence occurs post try - or even in the build up that didn't prevent the try being scored (as in this case) - a penalty restart to the scoring team is an option that you can use

PaulDG
22-10-07, 20:10
has anyone else ever done this -- award the try and then a penalty at midfield instead of a kickoff?!?

I haven't done it but it is the proper thing to do when there has been misconduct after the try is scored.

It doesn't appear to have been the exactly Legal thing to do in the circumstances you describe but was perhaps preferable to yellow carding the offending back depending on the temper of the game.

Simon Griffiths
22-10-07, 20:10
There is nothing in Law to back-up his decision. Yes a PK at the centre for the restart is correct for any offences committed after the try was scored, but if the offence was before the try was scored then you can't award a PK restart. They had the advantage, simple as.

However in this situation I would probably have given a YC to the full-back - would naturally have to see it to give an accurate opinion of what sanction I would take, but I despise players who attempt soccer style tackles (far worse than a trip in my opinion).

OB..
22-10-07, 20:10
If the offence precedes the scoring of the try, then you cannot award a penalty restart. I have seen it awarded at top level when the offence and the scoring were all part of the same bit of action. Theoretically that is stretching the law, but it seems sensible.

RandybinSC
22-10-07, 21:10
By the way the OP typed the question, it looks like the penalty happened before the try. I thought that advantage was to be played, but then once the score happened advantage was gained and that ended the penalty.

Padster
22-10-07, 21:10
I awarded a penalty at the centre after a try was awarded in a match last season. The defender decided to remonstrate in a very anglo saxon way that the try hadn't been scored. He got a YC for his trouble.:) It sure shut his team up for the rest of the match. :D

CenTexRef
22-10-07, 21:10
thanks for all the replies.

personally, i would have just played the advantage and awarded the try. after the conversion, i would have verbally admonished the fullback and warned than any further problems with him of ANY type would result in a yellow card, if not a red.

Cymro
22-10-07, 22:10
Wales vs Ireland grand slam. Henson appears to attempt to trip irish try scorer (replay shows he actually pulled out at last sec) Ireland scored and Irish restart with a penalty on half way as I remember it.

Tom

Greg Collins
22-10-07, 22:10
I awarded a penalty at the centre after a try was awarded in a match last season. The defender decided to remonstrate in a very anglo saxon way that the try hadn't been scored. He got a YC for his trouble.:) It sure shut his team up for the rest of the match. :D

Similar situation on Sunday though as only Queen's English used rather than Anglo-Saxon no YC just a penalty to restart.

OB..
23-10-07, 00:10
Cymro - that was the incident I was referring to. The referee was Chris White IIRC.

Gareth-Lee Smith
23-10-07, 01:10
CenTexRef - I experienced the exact same scenario in my junior game on Sunday and was told by my assessor (simply a bystander at the time) that I should've followed through and given the PK at halfway rather than just giving the stern word that I did. Try awarded, but no PK = copout really. I should've known better, but will in future.

David J.
23-10-07, 03:10
Try awarded, but no PK = copout really
Not a cop out at all. I'd say no YC is cop out, but a PK is not warranted under law.

Gareth-Lee Smith
23-10-07, 04:10
Neither is YC. But, if you tell *team* of an offence then you refuse to penalise, there's no point of it being in the laws

Dickie E
23-10-07, 05:10
Neither is YC. But, if you tell *team* of an offence then you refuse to penalise, there's no point of it being in the laws

???

That's what 'advantage' is all about. Referee 'refuses' to penalise because the non-offending team has gained an advantage equal to or greater than the sanction.

A penalty restart if the offence occurred before the try is just wrong.

The awarding of a penalty at the place of restart only applies if the offence occurs while the ball is dead.

A more accurate (but ridiculous) option would be to award the try and then come back for the penalty at place of infringement as per Law 21.1 !!

madref
23-10-07, 09:10
Hi

I have done the same, a try awarded then a scuffle afterwards. The team who scored the try retaliated to a punch penalty restart!#

Also done it the otherway round, try awarded team didn't think it was a try some very nasty comments about my eye sight, penalty restart team who scored the try.

David


David

Pablo
23-10-07, 10:10
As Dickie E and David J observe, the order of events is crucial to your ability to justify the decision under Law. The only justification for a PK at the half-way line instead of a restart kick is Law 10.4(l) - Misconduct while the ball is out of play:


A player, must not, while the ball is out of play, commit any misconduct, or obstruct or in any way interfere with an opponent.
Penalty: Penalty Kick
The penalty is the same as for sections 10.4 (a)-(k) except that the
penalty kick is awarded at the place where play would restart. (...)

So this law should frame our examination of order of events.

Scenario 1:
Blue ground ball in Red in-goal - ball is dead, try is scored
Red full back jumps on try scorer/punches try scorer/commits some other act of foul play
Law 10.4(l) justifies a PK restart to Blue here.

Scenario 2:
Blue runs towards Red's goal line.
Red full back commits high tackle on Blue ball carrier a metre from the line - ball is live when foul play is committed.
Blue ball carrier spins away from high tackle, falls over line, grounds ball - now the ball is dead, try is scored.
Blue supporting winger runs in and punches Red full back in retaliation for the high tackle on his team mate. - foul play committed after the ball has been made dead.
Law 10.4(l) justifies a PK restart to Red here for the retaliation.

Scenario 3:
Blue runs towards Red's goal line.
Red full back commits high tackle on Blue ball carrier a metre from the line - ball is live when foul play is committed.
Blue ball carrier spins away from high tackle, falls over line, grounds ball - now the ball is dead, try is scored.
Blue players conduct themselves calmly in response to the high tackle, celebrate try, no handbags/afters/etc.
Law 10.4(l) cannot apply in this situation, so there is no justification for restarting with a PK.
Options the referee has are to YC the Red full back if he feels the tackle was dangerous enough (no, the YC does not have to be accompanied with a penalty), or to award a penalty try if the high tackle has caused the try to be scored right in the corner.
But a PK at the restart has no basis in Law.

Simon Griffiths
23-10-07, 13:10
Nice one Pablo, can there be any confusion now?

It really is that simple. If the foul play is before the try, we cannot restart with a PK, if it is after, then we can.

oldun
23-10-07, 15:10
Folks, we have a slight divergence of opinions--the Laws of course dictate a PK only if foul play had happened after the ball was made dead.

However...... As the original poster noted, this was Division II College game in Texas (there are only two divisions). Most of the collegiate players in the US (and Texas), and especially Div II players, only began playing in college. Many have played American Football or soccer previously, so there are some habits that come to the fore under pressure (or under 19-year-old brain-lock).

I would agree that in order to maintain an even keel with all the testosterone-missiles flying around, a Penalty Kick upon restart after the try is a good way to reinforce the lesson.

Especially when you have a kicker who can turn the restart into 3 points with a penalty goal!!!

Pablo
23-10-07, 15:10
Oldun - while I appreciate the point about reinforcing the need for discipline in rugby, I simply cannot bring myself to be comfortable with this approach. Many other Laws are open to some interpretation (how quickly is "immediately"?, etc.), but this one is quite unequivocal - it applies in cases of foul play after the ball has been made dead. The approach you advocate is therefore not even a shade of interpretation - it is outright disregard for a clear and unambiguous Law. If anything, it is worse to do this with inexperienced players, because it will ultimately lead to confusion for them.

The referee should manage this sort of thing within the Law. As I have noted, he is still entitled to card the offending miscreant for the foul play, but not to award the penalty. If a card was inappropriate, then he should have been talking to the player's skipper and informing the player of his need to very closely watch his step.

SimonSmith
23-10-07, 18:10
Agree w/ Pablo.

He creates an issue for the next referee that DOES apply the law correctly. I'm even more appalled that you're happy with - it seems - a team getting 3 points because the referee contracted outside the laws.

I referee D2 in MARFU, and none of the teams would stand for that here. They have a right to me applying the law.

Simon Thomas
23-10-07, 18:10
I fully agree with Pablo and Simon S.

Some Laws are applied using interpretation and materiality, but the sanctions for foul play are clear. In this specific case you cannot award a penalty, but of course can yellow or red card, if the offence was before the try was scored.

You cannot award penalties, where the LoG are very clear, and no such sanction exists.

Cymro
26-10-07, 12:10
So did anyone tell Chris White ?:chin:

OB..
26-10-07, 17:10
Cymro - grey area?

Scenario 1: player tackles the try scorer round the neck and goes to ground with him as he scores, still holding him round the neck.

Was the foul play continuing after the score? If so, you can re-start with a penalty.

Scenario 2: player trips the try scorer. Is the trip completed before it's effect is compete eg the player falling down?

I don't really think this sort of philosophical debate is much help. In practical terms the (old?) idea of equity would regard all such fouls as being part of the scoring action and liable to a penalty re-start.

Dickie E
27-10-07, 04:10
so is the concept of a penalty try, card and penalty restart for the one offence a reality?

Sorry, I don't think so.



Whenever I see the word 'equity' I think 'its just what I believe'.:rolleyes:

A bit like 'pornography' - 'I can't define it but I'll know it when I see it'. ;)

Dixie
27-10-07, 10:10
Cymro - grey area?

Scenario 1: player tackles the try scorer round the neck and goes to ground with him as he scores, still holding him round the neck.

Was the foul play continuing after the score? If so, you can re-start with a penalty.

Scenario 2: player trips the try scorer. Is the trip completed before it's effect is compete eg the player falling down?

I don't really think this sort of philosophical debate is much help. In practical terms the (old?) idea of equity would regard all such fouls as being part of the scoring action and liable to a penalty re-start.


OB - further to Dickie's comment, I struggle to reconcile your conclusion with your sentence between the two scenarios. If in equity we treat the foul play as being part of the scoring action (which I agree with), then we don't see it as continuing after the score. Consequently, no penalty restart is possible. Is there a typo? I suspect your last sentence should read: the (old?) idea of equity would regard all such fouls as being part of the scoring action and so not liable to a penalty re-start

OB..
27-10-07, 13:10
so is the concept of a penalty try, card and penalty restart for the one offence a reality?
A penalty try is (virtually always) given when a probable try was prevented by foul play. Awarding the penalty try is the sanction for the foul play.

I am not aware that anybody is arguing for a penalty re-start as well. It was certainly not part of my argument.


Whenever I see the word 'equity' I think 'its just what I believe'.:rolleyes:

A bit like 'pornography' - 'I can't define it but I'll know it when I see it'. ;)
Take a piece of paper coloured black at one end, left white at the other, but shaded continuously from the one to the other. There is no point at which you can say that one colour ends and the other begins. Yet the two concepts have value and meaning.

Equity and pornography similarly. People argue at the margins, but rarely at the extremes.

Until recently the mantra for referees in England was "1. Safety; 2. Equity; 3. Law". In the latest CRDA documents Equity has been replaced by Enjoyment. I have no idea why, nor do I understand as yet what the significance is.


If in equity we treat the foul play as being part of the scoring action (which I agree with), then we don't see it as continuing after the score. Consequently, no penalty restart is possible. Is there a typo?
No, it was not a typo.

I specifically said this is a grey area. It is an uncommon situation, so there is little evidence for what happens at top levels. I can see a case in equity for a penalty re-start because otherwise the offender loses nothing by his foul play.

A yellow card may or may not be appropriate. If it is a choice between a penalty and a card, many would argue for the penalty since it does not distort the play.

Gareth-Lee Smith
27-10-07, 14:10
Appalled that he was happy that 3 points were scored from an erroneous penalty kick?! A little too strong perhaps?

David J.
27-10-07, 15:10
A yellow card may or may not be appropriate. If it is a choice between a penalty and a card, many would argue for the penalty since it does not distort the play.

I was a referees conference in Denver a few years ago and I remember one speaker, Corris Thomas, I believe, who presented a lot of IRB statistical analyses. I never saw the data, but he claimed that in the 2003 RWC, when one team had a 15 v 14 "advantage":

-the overall rate of scoring was LESS than the rest of the game
-in not a single case did the team with 15 benefit by more than 7 points
-in over 50% of cases, the team with 15 received a nil or negative benefit
-the statistical difference in scoring when a team had a 15 v 14 advantage was between 1 and 2 points.

In short, a yellow card in 15s ain't so bad.

Dixie
27-10-07, 21:10
I specifically said this is a grey area. It is an uncommon situation, so there is little evidence for what happens at top levels. I can see a case in equity for a penalty re-start because otherwise the offender loses nothing by his foul play.

A yellow card may or may not be appropriate. If it is a choice between a penalty and a card, many would argue for the penalty since it does not distort the play.

I go with Pablo on this. If the offence occurred while the ball was in play, I see no justification for a penalty restart.

I had a situation like this today: hoops crossing the line (again), green cover defender aims chest-high. Hoops ball-carrier goes to ground the ball, the resulting tackle is high - arguably as a result of the defender not making strenuous efforts to either pull out or go lower. No PT - the try would not have been scored in a more advantageous position, as the ball-carrier was in the act of the grounding the ball on his running line. I spoke sternly to the defender, but saw no option for any other sanction, the occurence not warranting a card.

OB..
28-10-07, 02:10
I remember one speaker, Corris Thomas, I believe, who presented a lot of IRB statistical analyses. I never saw the data.
Corris Thomas is a former Welsh international referee who is now the IRB's statistical expert. He did a PhD on something to do with rugby stats (although I am not sure he ever finished it). I believe he is a very sound statistician.

There is an IRB report from 2003 which contains the following details:

In 12 of the 19 yellow cards or in over 60% of cases - there was
no points benefit at all to the team with 15 players. In another,
the team with 14 players won the game.

The beneficial points differential in the remaining 6 matches were
4,4,7,9,10,11. In all but one of these cases however, the points
difference between the two teams at the end of the game
suggested that the points benefit was of little significance. In one
game however, where the score went from 14-13 to 28-13, there
may well have been an impact.

Nevertheless, the above figures indicate that the points benefit
to the team with 15 players continues to be marginal.

The statistical base is small. Ideally you would like to see if it matters whether or not a team was winning or losing just before, but we need more data for that. You need to be able to test for other factors. Conventional wisdom is that a yellow is worth 7 points, but that could well be wrong.

However that is not a measure of "distortion". Being a man short forces you to play differently.

OB..
28-10-07, 03:10
Dixie - to illustrate the problem, I deliberately chose an example that starts before and finishes after the try is scored. I then speculated about whether or not a trip finishes when the player hits the ground or only before.

I stand by my point that a player could well be seen to have had a free shot at preventing a try by his foul play.

Dickie E
28-10-07, 07:10
Dixie - to illustrate the problem, I deliberately chose an example that starts before and finishes after the try is scored. I then speculated about whether or not a trip finishes when the player hits the ground or only before.



A bit like starting to strangle someone in France and completing the job after you've crossed the border into Germany - who's law have you broken?

I think under the banner of 'equity' the referee has to make a decison one way or the other. Did it occur before or after the try because each scenario has different sanctions and to apply both sanctions to the offender is, IMHO, 'inequitable'.

OB..
28-10-07, 16:10
The try is not a sanction.

Dickie E
28-10-07, 22:10
a penalty try is

Ian_Cook
28-10-07, 23:10
I have to agree here with Pablo et al. The Law in this case is not open to interpretation. A restart PK only applies to foul play after the ball is dead (actually applies to any foul play after ball is dead, not just try-scoring situations e.g. a punch after ball is in touch should result in a PK 15m infield on the line of touch)

However, there is nothing wrong with carding the player concerned. It is perfectly legitimate to yellow or even to red card a player without giving a penalty. Saw this in a Heartland Championship game last year; green player put up a bomb then was flattened by a blue player using a flying no-arms shoulder charge to the head. Ref called advantage, green scored the try which he awarded, then he came back to the TJ who had also seen the incident. After a very brief chat, the blue player was sent off, but there was no further sanction.

Dickie E
29-10-07, 08:10
green player put up a bomb then was flattened by a blue player using a flying no-arms shoulder charge to the head. Ref called advantage, green scored the try which he awarded, then he came back to the TJ who had also seen the incident. After a very brief chat, the blue player was sent off, but there was no further sanction.

And, of course, there doesn't even need to be a try involved at all. If green had gained sufficient advantage that the ref called advantage over there may be a red card followed by a lineout or scrum restart.

OB..
29-10-07, 12:10
a penalty try is
But then by definition no try has been scored (I have never seen the case where one is awarded for "better position") so we cannot argue whether or not the offence was committed after the score.

Account Deleted
29-10-07, 13:10
One of the botches issue on points scored whilst a side is reduced t o14 by a yellow card is this.

A penalty is awarded and a yellow card is issued. The side awarded the Penalty opt to kick at goal. Now in truth they same would happen even if there was no card. Three points follow. Now the points are as a result of the offence not the one man depletion in the one side.
So when calculating the effect of a card on scoring the immediate 3 from the resulting penalty should be ignored.

Account Deleted
29-10-07, 13:10
Ignore double posting!