Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 40

Thread: Eng vs Aus - Disallowed Hooper try

      
  1. #21

    Advises in England
    OB..'s Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Glos & District
    Grade
    Adviser (grass roots)
    Join Date
    07 Oct 04
    Posts
    21,768
    Thanks (Received)
    85
    Likes (Received)
    1148

    Default Re: Eng vs Aus - Disallowed Hooper try

    Quote Originally Posted by WoodyOne View Post
    I think that calling his movement 'sideways' is being a little generous. Looking at the playback, he advances from being a good 5m (the directional stripes on the grass are 5m wide) short of the 22 at the time of the kick to being just about on it by the time he is put onside. That's a significant/material amount of progress up the field.
    Even if he was offside only relatively briefly, the question is did he benefit from his movement while offside? My answer is yes, definitely.
    He trudg’d along unknowing what he sought,
    And whistled as he went, for want of thought.
    The Referee by John Dryden

  2. #22

    Advises in England
    OB..'s Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Glos & District
    Grade
    Adviser (grass roots)
    Join Date
    07 Oct 04
    Posts
    21,768
    Thanks (Received)
    85
    Likes (Received)
    1148

    Default Re: Eng vs Aus - Disallowed Hooper try

    From today's times - article by Rob Debney, former Test referee

    Michael Hooper disallowed try
    The correct decision. Hooper was in front of the ball when Tevita Kuridrani kicked ahead, which put him out of the game, and he did not do enough to get back onside. He tracks diagonally a bit and puts his arms up in the air, but that is a token gesture. It does not play you onside. The question I would ask as referee would be: if he had been onside when the ball was first kicked, would he have been in a position to score the try? Answer: no.
    He trudg’d along unknowing what he sought,
    And whistled as he went, for want of thought.
    The Referee by John Dryden

  3. #23

    Referees in Switzerland
    FlipFlop's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Swiss Rugby Federation
    Grade
    Swiss Federation
    Join Date
    13 Jun 06
    Posts
    3,227
    Thanks (Received)
    17
    Likes (Received)
    208

    Default Re: Eng vs Aus - Disallowed Hooper try

    The problem with that argument is:

    In most games a lot of players are offside, and run offside lines. If they didn't, they won't be there to support/tackle/clear out rucks etc. So why do we not argue about them being penalised. Look at most flankers running lines from scrums etc.

  4. #24

    Advises in England
    OB..'s Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Glos & District
    Grade
    Adviser (grass roots)
    Join Date
    07 Oct 04
    Posts
    21,768
    Thanks (Received)
    85
    Likes (Received)
    1148

    Default Re: Eng vs Aus - Disallowed Hooper try

    Quote Originally Posted by FlipFlop View Post
    The problem with that argument is:

    In most games a lot of players are offside, and run offside lines. If they didn't, they won't be there to support/tackle/clear out rucks etc. So why do we not argue about them being penalised. Look at most flankers running lines from scrums etc.
    Do they always interfere with play? In this case the interference could hardly have been greater. There is no doubt that in many cases the technical offside is immaterial.
    He trudg’d along unknowing what he sought,
    And whistled as he went, for want of thought.
    The Referee by John Dryden

  5. #25
    Coach / Referee

    Soc/Assoc
    LSRFUR
    Grade
    12
    Join Date
    17 Oct 16
    Posts
    6
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Default Re: Eng vs Aus - Disallowed Hooper try

    Quote Originally Posted by FlipFlop View Post
    The problem with that argument is:

    In most games a lot of players are offside, and run offside lines. If they didn't, they won't be there to support/tackle/clear out rucks etc. So why do we not argue about them being penalised. Look at most flankers running lines from scrums etc.
    Because 11.1(a) is clear that if there is no interference then there is no sanction. And a flanker running a line diagonally across the pitch towards an a anticipated breakdown might be in front of the ball, hence offside, which means they don't fall foul of the 2nd bullet of that law "Moves forward, towards the ball". Hooper's position and line would have been fine, apart from the kick which immediately invokes that point.

  6. #26
    Moderator Attention - New Usergroup Required

    Soc/Assoc
    LSRFUR
    Grade
    6+1
    Join Date
    22 Dec 15
    Posts
    186
    Thanks (Received)
    1
    Likes (Received)
    68

    Default Re: Eng vs Aus - Disallowed Hooper try

    Quote Originally Posted by WoodyOne View Post
    Because 11.1(a) is clear that if there is no interference then there is no sanction. And a flanker running a line diagonally across the pitch towards an a anticipated breakdown might be in front of the ball, hence offside, which means they don't fall foul of the 2nd bullet of that law "Moves forward, towards the ball". Hooper's position and line would have been fine, apart from the kick which immediately invokes that point.
    I think FlipFlop's argument is that we often do get interference at the next phase - eg a clearout at a ruck. Maybe not as obviously "material" as a try, but material nonetheless if he prevents opposition contesting/winning the ball etc.

    Question on wording (which may or may not matter). "Moves forward, towards the ball" does that mean both parts of the sentence or either one... So if you are offside, but the ball is between you and your deadball line, you can move backwards but only away from the ball, or is any backward movement sufficient. Similarly, if you are moving forwards but away from the ball, is that a penalty offence... I know we shouldn't get too legalstic about things but it does raise a question...

  7. #27

    Resident Club Coach
    didds's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    N/A
    Grade
    Club Coach
    Join Date
    27 Jan 04
    Posts
    8,465
    Thanks (Received)
    42
    Likes (Received)
    685

    Default Re: Eng vs Aus - Disallowed Hooper try

    Flip-flops point is a very fair one. I suspect the real answer is that yes it doies happen "all tihe time" and yes may of those times are material such as TH1986 describes.

    I guess though that the availability of a TMO at a dead ball situation such as a try/no-try call is where it WILL be spotted. And its just not practical to do so for every other phase.

    them's the rubs.

    And TBH had the try been awarded I don;t suppose anybody would have really been surprised - and before the advent of the TMO it would have been I suspect.

    Be careful what you wish for etc

    didds

  8. #28

    Referees in Australia
    menace's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    ACTRRA
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    20 Nov 09
    Posts
    3,216
    Thanks (Received)
    48
    Likes (Received)
    335
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Eng vs Aus - Disallowed Hooper try

    I don't really want to keep this going..as I get it as an interpretation from WR.

    But it is hard to see how Hooper who is put onside within 2 steps actually 'interfered' with play...ends up 5m behind the play until 20m further downfield. The law says he can get involved...the WR interpretation/directive says he can't. So for how long does Hooper have no rights in that situation? Pity WR couldnt amend the laws more closely to their imposed interpretations. I wonder if the WR interpretation wasnt meant to cover this scenario? 999/1000 times that try is awarded....as already mentioned only a TMO slo mo changes the outcome. Funny how the TMO strips away the major thing we all try to achieve as a referee......... empathy!
    Last edited by menace; 21-11-17 at 23:11.
    Tell em it's Law 23 and smile

  9. #29
    Rugby Club Member Flish's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Durham
    Grade
    Level 15 - 11
    Join Date
    02 Sep 13
    Posts
    160
    Thanks (Received)
    4
    Likes (Received)
    27

    Default Re: Eng vs Aus - Disallowed Hooper try

    Quote Originally Posted by menace View Post
    I don't really want to keep this going..as I get it as an interpretation from WR.

    But it is hard to see how Hooper who is put onside within 2 steps actually 'interfered' with play...ends up 5m behind the play until 20m further downfield. The law says he can get involved...the WR interpretation/directive says he can't. So for how long does Hooper have no rights in that situation? Pity WR couldnt amend the laws more closely to their imposed interpretations. I wonder if the WR interpretation wasnt meant to cover this scenario? 999/1000 times that try is awarded....as already mentioned only a TMO slo mo changes the outcome. Funny how the TMO strips away the major thing we all try to achieve as a referee......... empathy!
    Things like this are why am hoping the Southern Hemisphere trial of making your on field decision before going to the TMO gets rolled out globally, you get to see what the ref is thinking with all immediate factors taken into account (including empathy), and hopefully needs a very clear and obvious reason from the TMO to overrule.

  10. #30

    Referees in Scotland
    Pinky's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Edinburgh Rugby Referees Society
    Grade
    8
    Join Date
    09 Apr 10
    Posts
    1,056
    Thanks (Received)
    7
    Likes (Received)
    83

    Default Re: Eng vs Aus - Disallowed Hooper try

    Empathy is about allowing feelings to over-ride facts, so I am not too surprised that the TMO does reduce that somewhat. However in this circumstances I think there is a need for guidance as to how long Hooper was out of the game, even if it is just to confirm law that that is the case until opponents have run 5m or never under 10m law unless there is an advantage to the defenders. Maybe, though this will change behaviours of attacking players in front of the ball carrier - there are lots of passes behind and then collisions with the defence - that they really have to try hard to get back on side and can't just jog on waiting to be passed by an on-side player.

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
  •