[Law] 21.4 d Why is this a law and when should and shouldn't be called

[crossref]

The difficulty with that is the player in question here (#8) may well not have been involved in the brief. At young age group level I have always allowed the retake for the first cock-up - and I see no issue allowing each team one error. But with teams that have been playing for several years, they should know better - and a harsh lesson will be the most effective tool in ensuring they learn the lesson.

if they are 12 yrs old, then it's different, yes.
but at older levels I always have the SH, captain present, and almost always the coach is there as well.
I tell the the SH and capt they must take quick taps properly (explain) and tell the capt/coacj that if anyone other than the SH is likely to take a tap, then relay to whole team.

 

[OB..]

The purpose of 21.4 (d) is to make it clear to the referee and the opposition that the PK has been taken.

If it is not done properly, that is either deliberate or through ignorance. Neither is a valid excuse for breaking the law. I can understand an initial warning at junior levels, but not otherwise.

 

[ChrisR]

I find it to be incongruous that if a player takes the tap PK from the wrong place he gets a do-over but gives the opponents a scrum if the kick is taken incorrectly.

Feel free to blame the coaches and the poor practice of foot tapping the ball as it is held to restart in touch 7s.

 

[Dickie E]

The purpose of 21.4 (d) is to make it clear to the referee and the opposition that the PK has been taken.

If it is not done properly, that is either deliberate or through ignorance. Neither is a valid excuse for breaking the law. I can understand an initial warning at junior levels, but not otherwise.

What would you do if the player didn't even bring his foot to the ball and just ran from the mark. Scrum?

I'd treat it the same as if a player took a fresh air shot at a kick off. Once the laughter died down, take it again ... properly this time.

 

[crossref]

I hear you but look at the OP's dilemma. There was so much "grief" with that decision that he has now concluded that he should have awrded the try! Emapathy for the game at hand is needed.

I find it hard to believe that awarding the try wouldn't have led to at least the same amount of grief.

In this situation you have three options, and all three will lead you to experience some grief.

The options are, in ascending order of grief, I would say

A - make them take it again
B - award the scrum
C - award the try

So if your sole criteria is grief-minimisation go for (A)

(TBH grief-minimisation this is probably exactly the reason why A is so often chosen)

It's odd one, though, in Law either it was taken correctly (try) or incorrectly (scrum), so do-over is the one option that, technically, you shouldn't choose.

like other posters - C seems to me to be the worst option.

 

[Dickie E]

I sometimes have lineouts where wrong things happen somewhat simultaneously - thrower takes a long time to throw, his team pretend to jump, some chinese fire drill, opposition go early, thrower baulks the throw then throws it crooked.

Obviously someone must have offended first. But usually best to blow it up, a quick "let's get is sorted chaps" and start again. Grief minimisation.

 

[buff]

What's a CMO?

Coach of match officials.

 

[Pegleg]

what I do in youth games - seriously - is talk to the skipper and the scrum half before the game in the PMB (and in youth games usually the coach is present as well) and tell them that I will be enforcing this Law on quick taps, for both teams, so they need to take a quick tap properly. Tell the skipper and the coach that if anyone else in the team is likely to take a quick tap, he should relay this message on to them well.
Then you have given them the warning, everyone knows the position, and it can applied no problem

this is NOT a technicality -- it's MUCH faster, and much easier to control a quick pk if you can take it without the ball leaving your hands!

That's why I PMB the entire team. No one can say they did not know. also when you ping a player his team mates will often say: HHe did warn you!" (but not in quite those words!)

 

[Christy]

By not stopping an incorrect penalty ,,weather team do quickly ,,or with opposition already back 10.
You are denying opportunity for opposition to react from a properly taken penalty in a legal & safe manner.
A team who does not kick ball from floor a visable distance ,,or clearly droping ball from hands.
You are denying opposition who are looking for just that.

It not only stops opposition from charging at ball carrier & by default result in ball carrier being hurt from a tackle , that should never of took place

It also stops ball carrier from running at opposition ,
Unless taken quickly & properly

Last season in same match
Both teams infringed a quick penalty
1 each
Team a ,,didnt kick ball a visable distance ( ball on floor ) he did put his studs on top of ball ,but ball not move
Team b ., did not allow ball to fall from hands & kick back to him self

I always call out if penalty near goal line.
Lads no cavarly charge or flying wedge .

 

[Dickie E]

Also, I'd bet London to a brick that Red weren't all running from the mark when the penalty was awarded and weren't back on their goal line when the faulty tap was taken and that one or more offside Red players attempted to tackle the White player. What sanction against them?

 

[L'irlandais]

What sanction against them?

i guess it depends. in this video clip, the match referee whistles immediately, as he hadn't seen the quick tap. Unfortunately the offside player tackling the quick witted scrum-half sparks the red mist which covers all.

 

[Rawling]

Has the sanction for taking the tap in the wrong place changed recently (...in the last decade)? I always thought it was a scrum, just never enforced.

 

[Dickie E]

Has the sanction for taking the tap in the wrong place changed recently (...in the last decade)? I always thought it was a scrum, just never enforced.

[LAWS]21.2 (c)
If a quickly taken penalty kick or free kick is taken from the wrong place the referee will order the kick to be taken again.
[/LAWS]

 

[didds]

Also, I'd bet London to a brick that Red weren't all running from the mark when the penalty was awarded and weren't back on their goal line when the faulty tap was taken and that one or more offside Red players attempted to tackle the White player. What sanction against them?

errr...

None.

the ball wasn't ever live.

A BIG chat with the red skipper though at an appropriate time asap.

didds

 

[didds]

Feel free to blame the coaches and the poor practice of foot tapping the ball as it is held to restart in touch 7s.

Why would generally a coach coach something that he knows is a gotcha non-starter? Yes there are a few idiots out there but its hardly a smart piece of coaching etc.


This might surprise you, but sometimes players don't always do what their coach coaches them... ;-)

didds

 

[L'irlandais]

i guess it depends. in this video clip, the match referee whistles immediately, as he hadn't seen the quick tap. Unfortunately the offside player tackling the quick witted scrum-half sparks the red mist which covers all.

Well, The ref is not happy that Gold 9'has taken the free kick from the mark, and blows immediately, for it to be retaken. Despite the ball being dead, we still see a yellow for interfering/tackling while offside, not retreating 10 and a red card for retaliating against being tackled robustly.

 

[Pegleg]

Thwe big issue, as with all the laws, is why is it there and does it achieve the its aim? This is the crux of the OP's question
"21.4 d Why is this a law and when should and shouldn't be called?"


Why?

I think its rational is to make it clear when the PK has been taken. So letting all players know what there legal options are. It is also to prevent "buying cheapo offences".

When?

Well both can be answered together. It should be called when it is material (and you the referee are the judge of that). For example; near goal lines, in high tension games, and following foul play, are just some of the times when we need to be especially carefull with regard to complience. Even if we "let it go" we need to be pointing out that we did so because it was not material, but that may not be the case next time. Thus keeping control and helping to ensure the players know what is expected. Otherwise you concede control to the players. Again in my PMB I tell players to leave the law to me and Ill let them play. I'll keep the whistle to a minimum BUT if they was to be stupid there will be less and less advantage and more and more whistle. THEIR CHOICE, BUT MY DECISION!

I guess simply the question we need to ask is "Do I need to blow for that or can I manage it quietly?" The less sure of the answer you are, I suggest you edge towards the blow option (better safe than sorry). At least you are correct in law and can justify the whistle.


Of course, this all presupposes we have seen the offence.

 

[crossref]

I think it's always material - the whole point of a tap penalty is to catch the opposition on the hoof, and to move very quickly to get the advantage of this, tapping the ball against your boot, rather than kicking it, gives you an advantage in both - it's not clear that you have taken it, and you are able to move much faster, with no risk of fumbling.

So I'd suggest that you should never let it go, but rather you should always pull them back.

Do you let them take it again, or do you give a scrum?

In England quick taps come into the game at u13 level (other regions may differ) so if it's the first half of the season I suppose it's possible that some of the kids didn't understand about how to take one properly, so if you like you can let them take it again (but then I think you'd have to let the other team have a second chance the first time they do it).

If you are very generous you might feel that even a year or two later at U14 level, they still don't know how to do it .....

 

[Phil E]

Well, The ref is not happy that Gold 9'has taken the free kick from the mark.............

fftopic: is it only me that finds it odd how you post something and then if no one replies you answer your own question, occasionally having a posted conversation with yourself because no one else joins in? Just saying.

If no one answers this...............

 

[L'irlandais]

I was actually trying to multi quote #34, where didds suggested there could be no sanction against the tackler since the ball was dead.
That certain folks ignore my posts, doesn't bother me Phil, since I prefer not to get dragged into the typical unending arguments of those very people.

- - - Updated - - -