quick tap penalty

[newref]

Hi there, just recently began refereeing in my local club. I had, what I thought was a very good understanding of the rules from playing and some coaching, but it appears all those watching the games I have reffed know a lot more about everything than me!! Anyway I was involved in a youths match over the weekend where I penalised 'team a' for offside at ruck and team b took a quick tap and go,team a had attempted to retreat in good time and team b took ball into contact after approx 6 - 7 meters, does this automatically entitle team b to another penalty 10 m form original mark or as someone had suggested to me afterwards, because team a had attempted to retreat and team b travelled more than 5 m before contact with team a, this was play on? I actually allowed play to continue as team b retained the ball and recycled?? I would appreciate some direction on this, thanks!!

[ianh5979]

Newref there are several possible answers here.
1 If team B player ran into the retreating team A player it is play on as he initiated contact.
2 If the Team A player who tackled the ball carrier came from 10 metres back and ran forward to tackle, again play on.
3 If one of team A players who was not 10 metres moved forward to tackle the ball carrier, then a 10 metre advance is correct

[The umpire]

Firstly welcome to the forum.
2nd. Well, it all depends...Advantage applies, so if they've retained possession and are good progress then why bring them back for a few yards gain and a chance for the defence to reform? But if they were only 10 from the goal line and are denied a scoring chance , then that would be different.
Every one is different but there's no automatic right to lose the10m because they tried to go back. Also you need to watch for the tapper running into retreating player and trying to buy the not 10.

[The umpire]

ianh5979 probably uses more than one finger to type!

[Adam]

Don't forget as well that a player who was 10 metres back from the mark (onside) can run forward and put his team mates in front of him onside.

It took me ages to actually process that and it be in my brain.

[Stuartg]

Don't forget as well that a player who was 10 metres back from the mark (onside) can run forward and put his team mates in front of him onside.

It took me ages to actually process that and it be in my brain.

And I'd wager 99% of players and 100% of coaches don't know this.

[Adam]

And I'd wager 99% of players and 100% of coaches don't know this.

It can be a nice get out of jail clause. Who's to say the onside winger on the far side didn't run up and put them onside?

"Gerrem onsarde ref"

[Browner]

Hi there, just recently began refereeing in my local club. I had, what I thought was a very good understanding of the rules from playing and some coaching, but it appears all those watching the games I have reffed know a lot more about everything than me!! Anyway I was involved in a youths match over the weekend where I penalised 'team a' for offside at ruck and team b took a quick tap and go,team a had attempted to retreat in good time and team b took ball into contact after approx 6 - 7 meters, does this automatically entitle team b to another penalty 10 m form original mark or as someone had suggested to me afterwards, because team a had attempted to retreat and team b travelled more than 5 m before contact with team a, this was play on? I actually allowed play to continue as team b retained the ball and recycled?? I would appreciate some direction on this, thanks!!

This part, is a befuddleration of another law and the suggestor hasn't helped by his misinformation, not worth confusing your Original Post point by discussing it, but I'd suggest removing 5m from your thinking on QTPs, as its simply a red herring.

See Law 21.7 through to 21.10.

[Browner]

It can be a nice get out of jail clause. Who's to say the onside winger on the far side didn't run up and put them onside?

"Gerrem onsarde ref"

Yep, and by the opposite token if one did, how many would honestly say they'd spot it beyond their narrower 'action' focus

[Adam]

Yep, and by the opposite token if one did, how many would honestly say they'd spot it beyond their narrower 'action' focus

I doubt the match observer would.

(Never actually had this situation before in real life.)