Protocol awarding PT
- Thread starter crossref
- Start date
Marc Wakeham
Referees in Wales
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2018
- Messages
- 2,779
- Post Likes
- 842
- Current Referee grade:
- Level 2
Teams will try to get every advantage they can legally (or not insome cases). But a well placed kick is more likely to result in the desired outcomes than taking a massive chance.
Futhermore if I deem that a player was deliberately trying to hit me. He "might" be facing some time on the sidelines as well as a penalty against him.
Last edited:
Ciaran Trainor
Referees in England
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2005
- Messages
- 2,850
- Post Likes
- 363
- Location
- Walney Island
- Current Referee grade:
- Level 7
I regularly stand 3-4 meters into the defensive side for kick offs and restarts especially as the game wears on. Not as fast as I used to be and you can then clearly see any attackers in front of the kicker. If for some bizarre reason the kick struck me (accidentally) , I'd order it to be taken again. No idea if that is correct in law but nobody would question it.
Flish
Referees in England
And :deadhorse: …. Any negative outcomes as a result of his cowardice?
Dickie E
Referees in Australia
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2007
- Messages
- 14,132
- Post Likes
- 2,152
- Current Referee grade:
- Level 2
just so we can get a head's up ... every time you see a PT on telly, are you going to post?
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2004
- Messages
- 9,365
- Post Likes
- 1,466
Your point? This is getting tiresome and advancing discussion not a jot.
Well said.
Arabcheif
Player or Coach
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2018
- Messages
- 680
- Post Likes
- 74
- Current Referee grade:
- Level 1
I think RedCapRef wasn't suggesting they would kick at the ref, merely into the space he was occupying. But I don't think that's a massive issue either (working under the assumption your directly in front of the kicker). Just move 5ms or so if that's the case. You'll have a good couple of seconds to move, even I reckon I could get out the road lol.
You are right i think I have provided enough evidence now to show conclusively that it is normal practice to run off quickly , away from the action, to get under the posts
So we all accept that now ?
So then it's just a question of how often this leads to negative consequences.. more examples of that required. I will keep my eyes peeled
Last edited:
Flish
Referees in England
Why do you do that? sneak in extraneous words to try and get other people to agree to your narrative? You know we can see through it right? I've reworded it to something closer;
... i think I have provided enough evidence now to show conclusively that it is normal practice to get under the posts
No 'running away', no 'running off quickly', no 'away from the action' (What action? - barring one, when the ref had support)
Accept what? that rugby referees mostly signal a PT as required? And that you have a bee in your bonnet about it?
To achieve what? Seriously, what do you hope to achieve by dragging this on? We've had the conversation around best practice, we've had the normal conversation about 'them vs us' in the sticks, we've also gone off at a few tangents (as normal) - but what do you want achieve? (Or is it just a desperate need to get everyone to agree with you?)
chbg
Referees in England
- Joined
- May 15, 2009
- Messages
- 1,486
- Solutions
- 1
- Post Likes
- 445
- Current Referee grade:
- Level 7
I agree with Flish.
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2004
- Messages
- 9,365
- Post Likes
- 1,466
It's entirely possible that the absence of readily-to-hand evidence suggests that there may not actually be a problem?
Well, obviously PT are rare, and then only a few PT lead to scuffles , (IE where it would be helpful for the referee to be present)
So obviously we are discussing something quite unusual (as we often do)
Here's one where it didn't help the ref in managing it, that he had to move 30m away to perform the PT signal
I notice that he ran backwards, so that he could keep an eye on what happened. He also had two ARs.
I see no reason whatsoever why a referee should not simply blow his whistle to stop play, possibly wait to see if anything untoward develops, and then signal a PT in the usual way.
I see no reason whatsoever why a referee should not simply blow his whistle to stop play, possibly wait to see if anything untoward develops, and then signal a PT in the usual way.
because if he doesn't run off immediately, the attacking side are left with the impression that there isn't going to be a PT and then they are even more stoked about the foul play ?
this is the point - awarding the PT is part of the conflict management. An important part, as when the attackers realise they have the try they are not so angry about the offence..
Flish
Referees in England
How do you get to that conclusion? There’s plenty of ways of communicating it to the players before you make the official signal, me, I tend to verbalise it before deciding next action. Probably the card then posts, but it’s not this great unsolvable problem you’re making out
i started with my solution .. to have a different signal !
so exactly as you say : moving away under the posts is not a great signal, so you have find another way to communicate (alas a way that the spectators, coaches and players far away don't get to see)..
all I have ever said is that a different signal (one that can be done on the spot rather than 30m away) would be better...
clear signals, that evetyone can see, are imptt in reffing..
It's only a small thing, and really shouldn't be controversial
Flish
Referees in England
No, that's not what I said, that's you putting words in my mouth to suit your narrative - see my my earlier point :-(
There are multiple ways of communicating, speaking is a key one - there's nowhere in the law book that says we have to verbalise our decisions, the official signals are visual. But if you give a penalty for not rolling you would verbalise it no? Colour, number etc ... and then make the signal. Same here. Use the best method to achieve your goals, talk to the players, wave your arms about for the touchline.