PDA

View Full Version : "Can you give me any reason ....."



ex-lucy
22-11-05, 13:11
Rose: "Can you give me any reason why i should not award a try....."

Worcester v Brizzul ..... was this right ?

At the time, I thought what a wonderful clear succinct call to the Video Ref .... but was it right as far as protocol is concerned?

Bryan
22-11-05, 13:11
Technically nothing wrong. According to the IRB's TMO protocol,
In the situation where assistance is required regarding the scoring of a try, the referee may ask the TMO in the following way: "I believe the attacking/defending team scored a try/touched down, unless you tell me otherwise." Seems like David Rose did the same thing.

There's an interesting look at the TMO from a first-hand perspective here (http://www.kcrra.co.nz/Forms/Referee%20Aug%202003.pdf). Though back in this day they were using it for foul play.

ex-lucy
22-11-05, 14:11
so ... if this is good ... why dont other refs use it ... cos they were, as i said, good clear succinct instructions ....

ExHookah
22-11-05, 14:11
Seems similar to the instructions I've been given when working a team of three. The refs ask that I let them know immediately if there's an issue, so if the try goes over in my corner they will glance in my direction and look for a nod or a thumbs up, and then blow for the try.

That way they don't award the try and then look over to see their TJ shaking their head (although if you're being a really helpful TJ you make sure to never signal something that the sideline will pickup on that can undermine the ref).

Bryan
22-11-05, 15:11
so ... if this is good ... why dont other refs use it ... cos they were, as i said, good clear succinct instructions ....
From what I remember from watching it on Friday, in this case I don't think David Rose saw the ball being grounded which is why he asked the TMO if there was anything of note. Other cases are pretty obvious and clear-cut e.g. "did the player commit a knock-on", or when questioning players going into touch e.g. "was Red 14 in touch before he grounded the ball?". A lot seems to depend on the personality of the individuals in question, which is remarkable given the high intensity of some matches.
-Bryan

Simon Griffiths
22-11-05, 18:11
I seem to remember a few refs using this recently (it's certainly still not common-place), but of not was Pearson towards the end of last season. I think it's a wonderful way of phrasing it as it means nothing can be missed - which if you're going upstairs you may as well make sure.

As far as touch juding goes, make sure you nod to the right thing! :o

baaas
23-11-05, 01:11
:confused: did anyone notice in the england v australia game the ref giving a free kick in the dead ball area.
as i undersstand the laws of the game,ther can be no play in this area therefore the free kick should be awarded on the 5m line in line with the mark?

Jacko
23-11-05, 01:11
:confused: did anyone notice in the england v australia game the ref giving a free kick in the dead ball area.
as i undersstand the laws of the game,ther can be no play in this area therefore the free kick should be awarded on the 5m line in line with the mark?


No play??? How would people score tries then?! There are no scrums, rucks or mauls in in-goal, but only because the law specifically says so. It says nothing to stop a mark being in goal.
When a mark is taken, the ball becomes dead, ending that phase of play. If the ball is touched down after play is restarted, the defending player has caused it to go into ingoal (because there was a seperate phase of play - trust me on this!). Hence scrum 5, attack ball.

Simon Griffiths
23-11-05, 18:11
21.2 (b) states:

When a penalty or free kick is awarded for an infringement in in-goal, the mark for the kick is in the field of play, 5 metres from the goal line, in line with the place of the infirngement.
So this would appear to mean that the mark for the kick should indeed have been made 5 metres out from the try-line.

When a mark is taken, the ball becomes dead, ending that phase of play. If the ball is touched down after play is restarted, the defending player has caused it to go into ingoal (because there was a seperate phase of play - trust me on this!). Hence scrum 5, attack ball.
Exactly the logic I used.

Now aren't we re-hashing something that's already been discussed?

Robert Burns
23-11-05, 19:11
Might have been in the refs only area though.

Deeps
23-11-05, 23:11
Are you sure it wasn't a 'Mark'? The signal is the same.

Simon Griffiths
25-11-05, 17:11
Provided baaas is talking about the mark incident, on closer inspection (as Peter made me think on another thread), the kick is taken where it is awarded.

It is only 18.5 (How the kick is taken) that is provided for in Law 21, which would correlate with 21.3 (How...) as opposed to 21.2, which I quoted elsewhere (Where...), as 18.3 deals with where.

However, 21.2 (b), which I quoted earlier, does stand for a free-kick. So in response to your actual question, free-kick must be 5 out, in response to the intended question, taken where the mark is made.