Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread: Dangerous Play - Penalty Try

      
  1. #11

    Referees in Scotland


    Soc/Assoc
    .
    Grade
    Level 7
    Join Date
    13 Dec 08
    Posts
    131
    Thanks (Received)
    1
    Likes (Received)
    18

    Default Re: Dangerous Play - Penalty Try

    Thank you for the feedback - the consensus does seem to be PT and then a card. Based upon instinct for me it was a red. I know a couple of posters have noted was the dangerous tackle deliberate; my coaching has always informed me to ignore 'intent' (a term we hear lots of in TV commentary) - the guidance has always been that foul play is simply a matter of fact i.e. was it dangerous? If so then apply the appropriate sanction, I think this is where instinct does come into play perhaps.

  2. #12

    Advises in England
    OB..'s Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Glos & District
    Grade
    Adviser (grass roots)
    Join Date
    07 Oct 04
    Posts
    22,542
    Thanks (Received)
    110
    Likes (Received)
    1549

    Default Re: Dangerous Play - Penalty Try

    Quote Originally Posted by Gracie View Post
    my coaching has always informed me to ignore 'intent' (a term we hear lots of in TV commentary) - the guidance has always been that foul play is simply a matter of fact i.e. was it dangerous? If so then apply the appropriate sanction
    That is not entirely correct. Ruling 9 of 2004 specifically distinguishes intentional from unintentional fouls in the context of a penalty try..
    He trudg’d along unknowing what he sought,
    And whistled as he went, for want of thought.
    The Referee by John Dryden

  3. #13

    Referees in England
    Dixie's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Retired from Berkshire
    Grade
    8
    Join Date
    26 Oct 06
    Posts
    12,770
    Thanks (Received)
    30
    Likes (Received)
    330

    Default Re: Dangerous Play - Penalty Try

    Quote Originally Posted by OB.. View Post
    That is not entirely correct. Ruling 9 of 2004 specifically distinguishes intentional from unintentional fouls in the context of a penalty try..
    RULING 9: 2004
    Law Ruling by Designated Members of Laws Committee
    23 December 2004
    The IRFU has requested a ruling with regard Law 10-Foul Play and Law 22-In Goal Law 10 - Foul Play
    Rewrite and amendment of 10.2(a), and consequential addition to Law 22.
    The first paragraph states:
    Intentionally Offending. A player must not intentionally infringe any Law of the Game, or play unfairly. The player
    who intentionally offends must be either admonished, or cautioned that a send off will result if the offence or a
    similar offence is committed, or sent-off. After a caution a player is temporarily suspended from the match for a
    period of ten minutes playing time. After a caution, if the player commits the same or similar offence, the player
    must be sent-off.
    Penalty: Penalty Kick
    The final paragraph states:
    A penalty try must be awarded if the offence prevents a try that would probably otherwise have been scored. A
    player who prevents a try being scored through foul play must either be cautioned and temporarily suspended or
    sent off.
    The final paragraph does not appear to offer the possibility of an 'admonishment' by the referee; nor does it refer to 'intentionally'.
    The clarification sought is:
    Is it the intention of the Law (as now rewritten) to ensure that in each and every circumstance, where a penalty
    try is awarded, that the offending player is temporarily suspended, whether or not the foul is intentional?
    Is it the intention to remove the discretion of the referee to admonish, rather then temporarily suspend or send
    off a player in such circumstances? The reason clarification is sought is that there are circumstances where the
    offence is not intentional: e.g. mistimed (early or late, but not dangerous) tackle; unintentional instinctive high,
    but not dangerous, tackle - when an attacker steps inside a defender; certain incidences of scrum collapsing.
    In these circumstances, the sanction of a penalty try, and a temporary suspension appear exceptionally severe.
    While it will not be a frequent occurrence, the effect on a match outcome could be hugely significant. It could
    also, in the event of a front row forward, lead to uncontested scrums. Finally, it would appear inconsistent for an
    offence which, taking place in mid-field, would not merit a temporary suspension but would merit a temporary
    suspension close to a goal-line.
    The Designated Members have ruled the following in answer to the question raised:
    Ruling
    Law 10.2(a) is Unfair Play relating to Intentional Offending.
    The two paragraphs in Law 10.2(a) must be read in conjunction, having due regard to the heading 'Intentionally
    Offending'.
    Therefore, if a penalty try is awarded as the result of a player intentionally offending, then the player must be
    either be cautioned and temporarily suspended or sent off.
    Examples of this would be after penalty tries resulting from:
    • a collapsed scrum
    • a collapsed maul
    • a defending player intentionally offside
    • a defending player intentionally knocking down the ball.
    If a penalty try is awarded as the result of a player unintentionally offending, the player, as well as being liable
    to cautioning and temporary suspension or send off, can be admonished by the referee.
    Examples of this may be after penalty tries resulting from:
    • mistimed tackle (early or late, but not dangerous)
    • unintentional reactionary high tackle, but not dangerous.
    Don't feed the pedant!

  4. #14
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Level 3
    Join Date
    03 Sep 14
    Posts
    3,330
    Thanks (Received)
    29
    Likes (Received)
    507

    Default Re: Dangerous Play - Penalty Try

    Quote Originally Posted by Browner View Post
    I don't agree that "intention" is the only consideration when determining card colour of Foul Play offences.
    And you miss my point.I did not say that.

    If there is no PT then you judge the offence on your normal criteria. If there is a PT and there is intent it must be a card, There is no option to judge intent and take the view that a warning is sufficient. The difference is slight but important.

    My post was in two parts:

    High tackle is a PK. Did it prevent a probable try? If so it's a PT.

    1; Now about the card? That depends on several things. the old "You know when it's red" comes into play.

    2; However, assuming you go for a PT, The following applies:

    Law 10.2 UNFAIR PLAY
    (a) Intentionally Offending. A player must not intentionally infringe any Law of the Game, or
    play unfairly. The player who intentionally offends must be either admonished, or cautioned
    that a send off will result if the offence or a similar offence is committed, or sent off.
    Sanction: Penalty kick
    A penalty try must be awarded if the offence prevents a try that would probably otherwise
    have been scored. A player who prevents a try being scored through foul play must either
    be cautioned and temporarily suspended or sent off.


    You have a call to make. Was the High tackle (FP) intentional? If so it is either a yellow or red card.
    Last edited by Pegleg; 01-12-14 at 00:12.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •