Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 91

Thread: France v Scotland

      
  1. #41
    Coach/Referee

    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Select Grade
    Join Date
    03 May 13
    Posts
    1,103

    Default Re: France v Scotland

    And PTs are to ensure foul play doesn't stop a score, which it didn't.[/QUOTE]

    Or a 'score' in a more advantageous position!

  2. #42
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    Yet to join
    Grade
    Select Grade
    Join Date
    08 Oct 11
    Posts
    226

    Default Re: France v Scotland

    Quote Originally Posted by Rich_NL View Post
    And PTs are to ensure foul play doesn't stop a score, which it didn't.
    So why does the law say what it does: "or scored in a more advantageous position"?

    Where across the pitch is the dividing line between more or less advantageous?

  3. #43
    Coach/Referee

    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Select Grade
    Join Date
    03 May 13
    Posts
    1,103

    Default Re: France v Scotland

    Quote Originally Posted by BikingBud View Post
    So why does the law say what it does: "or scored in a more advantageous position"?

    Where across the pitch is the dividing line between more or less advantageous?
    If you need a line on the pitch for this then you shouldn't be refereeing! !

  4. #44

    Referees in Australia
    Dickie E's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    VRRA
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    19 Jan 07
    Posts
    13,004

    Default Re: France v Scotland

    its a good & interesting point. There is certainly an unwritten rule that a try resets things and a referee will be disinclined to award a deserved YC or a PT. Jeez, I've even done it myself on a number of occasions.
    I, for one, like Roman numerals

  5. #45
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    Cardiff Society of Welsh Rugby Union Referees
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    05 Jan 18
    Posts
    2,068

    Default Re: France v Scotland

    Quote Originally Posted by Decorily View Post
    And PTs are to ensure foul play doesn't stop a score, which it didn't.
    Or a 'score' in a more advantageous position![/QUOTE]

    Which it didn't either a point already made.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Rich_NL View Post
    You can absolutely give a card for foul play even if the opposition get the advantage and no penalty is called.

    However, cards are management tools, not sticks to beat naughty players with. And PTs are to ensure foul play doesn't stop a score, which it didn't.
    Yep. That's on the money.

  6. #46
    Rugby Club Member Rich_NL's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Rugby Nederland
    Grade
    WR level 2
    Join Date
    13 Apr 15
    Posts
    1,426

    Default Re: France v Scotland

    Quote Originally Posted by BikingBud View Post
    Where across the pitch is the dividing line between more or less advantageous?
    Yes, or score in a better position, but I don't take that as meaning a metre or two further infield, personally. There was already a defender sweeping in at full pace and another chasing behind; it's not like he'd have regathered and sauntered under the posts.

    My point is more that the reasons for giving a PT seem to be more based on punishing the tackler for doing something naughty, than for the actual effect on the game. PTs are not designed to be used for that; cards can be.

    Otherwise you as a ref are giving points to a team as a present based on "making the game fair" rather than what that team actually achieves, which personally I'd keep to under-7s age grade matches.

  7. #47
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    Yet to join
    Grade
    Select Grade
    Join Date
    08 Oct 11
    Posts
    226

    Default Re: France v Scotland

    Quote Originally Posted by Decorily View Post
    If you need a line on the pitch for this then you shouldn't be refereeing! !
    No really!

    We seem to be having a discussion on a referee's forum, where people come for advice from similar minded and more experienced people and to further their understanding, about penalty tries and the principle of where it may be deemed less advantageous and that is your contribution. Thanks very much for that insightful and helpful response.

    So by your reckoning, recounting all other queries about knocks on, tap penalties and marks, timing, scrummage and line out issues not to mention more complex problems about jumping tackles and dangerous tackles or the very hypothetical which will seldom if ever occur should not be raised because if we cannot decide we should not be refereeing. MUPPET!

    Do you tell the teams you're coaching to catch better and to run faster. With such insights you must be revolutionary!

  8. #48

    Resident Club Coach
    didds's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    N/A
    Grade
    Club Coach
    Join Date
    27 Jan 04
    Posts
    10,383

    Default Re: France v Scotland

    Quote Originally Posted by Decorily View Post
    And PTs are to ensure foul play doesn't stop a score, which it didn't.
    Or a 'score' in a more advantageous position![/QUOTE]

    IF the try would PROBABLY (by extension etc) been scored in a more advantageous position. Each to their own but i think its pretty unlikely that try would have been scored significantly closer to the posts. YMMV natch.

    The law was blown as it is written.

  9. #49
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Select Grade
    Join Date
    28 Aug 12
    Posts
    59

    Default Re: France v Scotland

    I was reflecting on this and wondering if the introduction of YCs (which I still regard as novel, even though it's 20+ years) has reduced the incidence of PTs and/or increased the threshold where a PT is awarded?

    It does seem to me that a PT is now only awarded where there is a near certainty of a try.

  10. #50

    Resident Club Coach
    didds's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    N/A
    Grade
    Club Coach
    Join Date
    27 Jan 04
    Posts
    10,383

    Default Re: France v Scotland

    Quote Originally Posted by KoolFork View Post

    It does seem to me that a PT is now only awarded where there is a near certainty of a try.
    That does seem to be a consensus of opinion. But refect this against the PT situation 20 years ago and PTs were hardly ever awarded then. Go back another 20 years and they were NEVER awarded (except by Clive Norling!)

    didds

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
  •