PDA

View Full Version : Sevens Penalty Try



jboulet4648
18-06-06, 13:06
Blue player is attacking on a nice run, about 7 meters from the try line. He has been breaking tackles all match long. Two defenders are converging on him. ONe defender tackles the player high, basically an unintentional clothesline. Giving the strength of the runner, I awarded a penalty try, and yellow the player. The US National coach at the game said he agreed with the yellow for the dangerous tackle but thought the penalty try was harsh....opinions?

chef11
18-06-06, 14:06
The questionI have is, Would he havescored the try from seven meters out. If yes,then correct on both but if not then, correct on the yellow and maybe to harsh on the Penalty try.

OB..
18-06-06, 15:06
It is down to your judgement on the day. There is nothing wrong in theory with your decision, so it turns purely on the facts.

The only query I would have is that you described it as "an unintentional clothesline". IRB Ruling 9 of 2004 said that if you had an "unintentional reactionary high tackle, but not dangerous" leading to a penalty try, the yellow card was not mandatory.

jboulet4648
18-06-06, 17:06
It was dangerous....and are not all penalty trys supposed to be accompanied by a yellow?

Simon Griffiths
18-06-06, 18:06
I think OB just referred to the IRB ruling that cliarified that not all PTs had to be accompanied by a yellow.

I'd say, from the info given, that the PT was almost certainly correct and a yellow may well have been correct too - an intentional 'clothesline' high tackle in my book should be an automatic red.

spmilligan
18-06-06, 20:06
I have had a similar situation during a match, at 5 metres out, where the full back came across and high tackled, around the neck, the attacking player. My decision was Red for the full back and a penalty kick for the non-offending team. My reasoning was, that if the tackle had been made properly a try was not certain to be scored.
At the end of the day you were there and by all accounts can fully justify the decision made. No problems.

Deeps
18-06-06, 21:06
It was dangerous....and are not all penalty trys supposed to be accompanied by a yellow?

When the edict was published concerning cards and penalty tries you may remember there was a 'rustling in the leaves' as referees felt that the wording seemed to infer that automatic award of a card as well as the penalty try would remove the normal discretion that had been applied by referees previously.

I then read a senior referee's view to the effect that the intent was to prevent referees from thinking that a penalty try was sufficient in all cases. In other words the criteria for awarding a penalty try remains the same but if you thought previously that this would have been sufficient a penalty for an offence for which you would have awarded a card elsewhere on the field then you should not be so constrained and a card would be appropriate as well.

If you would have awarded the card in normal course then you should do so in addition to the penalty try. Hope this makes sense.

OB..
18-06-06, 22:06
My decision was Red for the full back and a penalty kick for the non-offending team. My reasoning was, that if the tackle had been made properly a try was not certain to be scored.The alternative view is that if a player makes foul tackle, why should he be given any credit for what might have happened if he had done it properly? He didn't, and that is his fault. Discount the tackle and ask yourself if a try would probably otherwise have been scored.

I tend to that view, but it is a judgement call on the specifics.

jboulet4648
18-06-06, 23:06
I agree with OB....

Take the dangerous tackler entirely out of the picture, erase him from the scenario and would that try be scored? In my case I think there was a very good possibility yes.

ex-lucy
19-06-06, 11:06
i think the wording with 'o/wise' in it infers to me... that what OB is saying is correct.... and in effect what jboulet's thinking is ... I would think along the lines ... but for the foul play woudl a try probably have resulted ...

been in that situation a few times before ... and awarded a pen try .... but not yellow card .. have thought about them a few times since but still not sure whether it warranted a card or not ... attacking teams were happy with 7 pts .... toughie ... depends on intent i guess ...

ExHookah
19-06-06, 14:06
The area surrounding intentional or unintentional high tackles can be a bit of a tricky one. I often have tacklers complain "he ducked into it" when they are penalized for a high tackle. My view is that the tacklers have made a decision to tackle relatively high to begin with, typically going to the chest high tackle, and they need to be responsible for what develops as a result of that. Had they tackled at the legs then the "ducking" would have had no effect, but they chose to go higher and have to accept that the ball carier is a moving object.

Any objections to this approach?

OB..
19-06-06, 15:06
In general I agree. The same applies to the argument that "I tackeled his shoulder and my arm slipped up higher." The tackler took the risk, and is therefore responsible if it went wrong.

The basic point is that a high tackle is dangerous whether intended or not, so players are not entitled to take the risk with impunity.

SONA
20-07-06, 18:07
Blue player is attacking on a nice run, about 7 meters from the try line. He has been breaking tackles all match long. Two defenders are converging on him. ONe defender tackles the player high, basically an unintentional clothesline. Giving the strength of the runner, I awarded a penalty try, and yellow the player. The US National coach at the game said he agreed with the yellow for the dangerous tackle but thought the penalty try was harsh....opinions?
The only question I have is, was the second player converging involved in the tackle. If the second defender was involved in the tackle and contact was made at nearly the same time the high tackle was made the penalty try was not warranted. If the second player was not involved in anyway then you were spot on with the penalty try. I have not issued a yellow card with a penalty try in the past and have not really thought about it. It would depend on the harshness of the offense.

As others have discussed, there are varying levels of the development of a high tackle. Penalties for them are awarded accordingly. I do not think every "dangerous tackle" (since the law book actually does not use the word High) requires a yellow card. Some are unintentional, some are slipped tackles, some are pretty downright ugly. You are the judge.