I hadn't even looked at the video! What a dog's dinner.
I hadn't even looked at the video! What a dog's dinner.
I can see the logic for an asymmetric sanction
If the team with possession infringe , they lose possession
If the team without possession infringe .. well they don't have possession to lose .. so the sanction is a FK
That's exactly what I STILL believe.
The Ref didn't give an option because it was the player in the LO that infringed.
I'd bet £20 that if the thrower had ballsed it up and just failed to chuck the ball 5m, then he would have given the LO / Scrum option.
Last edited by Taff; 05-02-19 at 00:02.
I see your logic - BUT I can't recall any other law that provides a different sanction based on who is in possession? Are you aware of any other?
So for me - I just can't, and won't, apply a vastly different sanction for the exact same offence. That is not equitable.(noting that if I did then I've made a error in consistency and I expect to be pulled up for it!)
So for the scenario I'm applying the FK. Pretty much based on the reasons the others cite.
I think the FK can also be backed up by the similarity of the Quick Throw law
18.6. The ball must reach the five-metre line before it is played and a player must not prevent the ball from travelling five metres. Sanction: Free-kick.
Last edited by menace; 05-02-19 at 03:02.
Tell em it's Law 23 and smile
I can see all the arguments above ...
But the hard reality is that - with a year to think about it - in the Law they wrote "opponent"
That and it was already the custom of many refs to apply an asymmetric sanction here, so they very likely considered that they were simply bringing current practice into Law
Tell em it's Law 23 and smile
It was one of just two corrections they made to the 2018 book. I think we can be confident that they thought carefully about it
Plus we need to be very cautious about claiming that a Law is clearly a mistake, so we won't apply it, as that argument means you are free to reject any law you dislike, which is chaos
Last edited by crossref; 05-02-19 at 08:02.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)