[Law] Advantage after a PT offence

[DocY]

They could have scored a try in a BETTER position than the position for the PT, like under the posts. That would have been an advantage..especially for the try scorer.

I see your point, but these days that's still less advantage (objectively). There's still a small chance of missing the conversion.

 

[DocY]

Would anyone consider giving the scoring team the option?

I can't help thinking that would somehow devalue the emotional impact of scoring the try.

 

[crossref]

They could have scored a try in a BETTER position than the position for the PT, like under the posts. That would have been an advantage..especially for the try scorer.

How is that better than a PK +PT ?

 

[damo]

I understand that argument

But the other argument is

After the foul play occured was there any way in which it was possible for black to gain an advantage ?

The answer is No, black cannot gain advantage

so advantage should not be played

But you are skipping a step. Only if a PT can be awarded do you ask the question whether advantage can be played for the PT (obviously not). Here I submit that there can be no PT because the action didn't prevent a try, so the question does not arise.

 

[crossref]

Indeed that's the other - plausible - argument

This scenario would be a good one for escalation. By playing advantage a team is disadvantaged.. which is not what the advantage Law is meant to achieve

Would be good to find out what WR thought about it

 

[Dickie E]

Would anyone consider giving the scoring team the option?

I can't help thinking that would somehow devalue the emotional impact of scoring the try.

I like this idea. It has precedence with current "PK here or PK there?" practice

 

[Rich_NL]

I just mulled this over with a coffee and came to the same conclusion as damo. At the point of the offence, you give penalty advantage to the attacking team. There is no such thing as penalty try advantage, because the penalty try is not just consequent on the offence but the subsequent circumstances. A penalty try can only be awarded if no advantage arises.

Which is an illogical outcome, because it's more advantageous to have 7 points than 5 + possible 2, but logical processes can have illogical outcomes. It's an interesting point for WR.

 

[crossref]

I just mulled this over with a coffee and came to the same conclusion as damo. At the point of the offence, you give penalty advantage to the attacking team. There is no such thing as penalty try advantage, because the penalty try is not just consequent on the offence but the subsequent circumstances. A penalty try can only be awarded if no advantage arises.

Which is an illogical outcome, because it's more advantageous to have 7 points than 5 + possible 2, but logical processes can have illogical outcomes. It's an interesting point for WR.

In the old Laws it was possible to score a try that was just as good as a PT (ie under the posts) so arguably better than a PT

Under the new Laws there are no circumstances that can unfold that lead to an outcome better than a PT

 

[mcroker]

I'm also with Danno... a PT can only be awarded if foul play by the opposing team prevents a probable try from being scored, or scored in a more advantageous position

In the original post...

Black make a break and about 5m from the goal line the BC commits the fullback and passes to a support player. The support player is pulled back early (and the infringing player was YC'd) so fails to catch the ball, but it is collected by a second support player who scores.

... a try is scored, and there is nothing in the above text that leads me to believe that the support player (who was pulled back early) would have scored the try in a more advantageous position.

From a game management perspective - I wouldn't play advantage on a PT (especially now).
Irrespective of the outcome of the subsequent play, pulling play back and awarding a PT after either the ball is grounded for a 'less advantageous' try, or after the non-infringing team fail to score is IMHO going to create an unnecessary flash-point. If I'm going PT - I'm going to do it immediately and without further advantage.

 

[crossref]

.

From a game management perspective - I wouldn't play advantage on a PT (especially now).
Irrespective of the outcome of the subsequent play, pulling play back and awarding a PT after either the ball is grounded for a 'less advantageous' try, or after the non-infringing team fail to score is IMHO going to create an unnecessary flash-point. If I'm going PT - I'm going to do it immediately and without further advantage.

I think this is bang on, indeed is the key learning

Especially now that the PT is seven points

 

[Pinky]

I think you go back to Law 7 , Advantage .

When the foul play occurs black is on a PT .
There is no possibility to gain advantage , so advantage should not be played.

PT

i don't think under law you can be "on a PT" you have had foul play that may result in a penalty at least and perhaps escalation, but the advantage is being played from the foul play. You only get a PT if the foul play prevents a try being scored or scored in a less advantageous place. At that point awarding a PT is not giving an advantage, so you do not have to blow right away and stop the game and you would only award a PT if the score would have been in a better place.

 

[didds]

Ironically if there was no other player there to catch the ball it may well have been a Penalty Try.

having a brain fart... had there been a player there but that player knocked on.. ?

UPDATE: DOH! Clearly advantage didn't occur so back for initial offense and thus PT.

Angels on pins moment ! : consider a two super fast speedy wingers (red) already scored three totally run away tries from own 22 with extreme pace that no oppo can come close too... IN own 22, one red winger makes a half break History shows he will score. Black trips him ... ball spills backwards and is picked up imediately by other winger who sets off - no one near him. In black 22 he trips up and knocks on.

Advantage has been gained after all - circa 50-60m of territory. But... the intiial offense woluld have been a try albeit a 60-70m run in.

PT? scrum?

didds

 

[Pinky]

I understand that argument

But the other argument is

After the foul play occured was there any way in which it was possible for black to gain an advantage ?

The answer is No, black cannot gain advantage

so advantage should not be played

Awarding a PT is not advantage. Advantage is where play continues instead of being stopped for an offence. We call that playing advantage, and then either it is judged that advantage has been gained or no advantage and you go back to the offence and decide on the outcome. PT is, in my view, a decision on an outcome, not a decision on whether advantage has been gained.

Black can gain an advantage from the offence by, for example, scoring a try. Which they did do. The ref then has to decide if they were prevented from scoring it in a better place by the foul play before he can award the PT, so he is actually looking for disadvantage there. if no disadvantage, then try and conversion attempt. If disadvantage and it was material, then PT and 7 points.

 

[crossref]

I don't think that is in accordance with the Law

[LAWS].If a team gains an advantage following an infringement by their opponents, the referee may allow play to continue in an effort to keep the game flowing.

Advantage:
May be tactical. The non-offending team is free to play the ball as they wish.
May be territorial. Play has moved towards the offending team’s dead-ball line.
May be a combination of tactical and territorial.
Must be clear and real. A mere opportunity to gain an advantage is not sufficient.
Advantage ends when:

The referee deems that the non-offending team has gained an advantage. The referee allows play to continue; or

The referee deems that the non-offending team is unlikely to gain an advantage. The referee stops the game and applies the sanction for the infringement from which advantage was being played; [/LAWS]

All the bold bits suggest to me that Advantage should not be played .. it is impossible for black to gain any clear and real advantage

 

[Flish]

4 points down, 80 seconds to go, scenario we have above, PT or try in the corner, you could argue that try in the corner, that wins them the game and allows them to run down the clock with the kick is advantageous and secures them the match, at 6 points down the PT is most advantageous. So there can be an advantage to not immediately blowing your whistle, let it breathe and come back is what I was taught.

 

[Wedgie]

Why is ", or scored in a more advantageous position" still present in 8.3?

 

[Camquin]

Because not everyone can kick conversions from the touchline at 100% accuracy.

 

[damo]

I don't think that is in accordance with the Law

[LAWS].If a team gains an advantage following an infringement by their opponents, the referee may allow play to continue in an effort to keep the game flowing.

Advantage:
May be tactical. The non-offending team is free to play the ball as they wish.
May be territorial. Play has moved towards the offending team’s dead-ball line.
May be a combination of tactical and territorial.
Must be clear and real. A mere opportunity to gain an advantage is not sufficient.
Advantage ends when:

The referee deems that the non-offending team has gained an advantage. The referee allows play to continue; or

The referee deems that the non-offending team is unlikely to gain an advantage. The referee stops the game and applies the sanction for the infringement from which advantage was being played; [/LAWS]

All the bold bits suggest to me that Advantage should not be played .. it is impossible for black to gain any clear and real advantage

All due respect mate, but you are missing the point. You can't (at least shouldn't) award a PT because the situation described does not meet the criteria for a PT.

All this talk about whether advantage can be played or not is a bit bizarre.

 

[Rich_NL]

IUnder the new Laws there are no circumstances that can unfold that lead to an outcome better than a PT

However, the circumstances cannot unfold such that you can give a PT advantage.

 

[crossref]

All due respect mate, but you are missing the point. You can't (at least shouldn't) award a PT because the situation described does not meet the criteria for a PT.

All this talk about whether advantage can be played or not is a bit bizarre.

But then we are left with the fact that if you play advantage, the non offending team will be disadvantaged by that.
Which is certainly bizarre

It's an unintended consequence of the seven points PT , which is ripe for a clarification request IMO