[Law] Advantage after full time

[Decorily]

I note the similar thread but my specific question is this............

If time is expired and as play continues to a suitable stoppage there is a knock on which is immediately gathered by opposition, who seek to run it,should the advantage be played or whistle blown to stop play and after signalling KO blow for full time?

I THINK this scenario occurred at the end of U20s Irl V Arg semi.

 

[OB..]

Advantage should be played.

 

[Pegleg]

Indeed. Why would you not play advantage?

 

[DocY]

In a senior game, play advantage, but what about an U18's game when you've already played 70 minutes?

 

[Phil E]

In a senior game, play advantage, but what about an U18's game when you've already played 70 minutes?

You still play advantage.

 

[didds]

In a senior game, play advantage, but what about an U18's game when you've already played 70 minutes?

Its 70 minutes in the same way that a seniors game is 80 minutes. So you play 70 minutes and its no-side the next time the ball is dead (not FK/PK).

didds

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

Where does the term no-side come from? Was it used in the LotG as that term?

I know what it means but have never heard anyone other than Bill McClaren (and a few others) use it in the last 40 years. Is it a Borders thing?

 

[Pegleg]

Always called no-side back in the 60s.

 

[Camquin]

"No side is the end of the match" used to be Law 1

Advantage has to be real - so in a knock-out match like this, if the side that was behind knocked on, what advantage could the side that is ahead gain.

If you are ahead, get the ball off the field as soon as possible.

 

[OB..]

"No side is the end of the match" used to be Law 1

It was in the Defintions until 2001, but disappeared in 2002.

 

[crossref]

looking up no-side - all the dictionaries just say : the end of the game in rugby.

 

[Pegleg]

"No side is the end of the match" used to be Law 1

Advantage has to be real - so in a knock-out match like this, if the side that was behind knocked on, what advantage could the side that is ahead gain.

If you are ahead, get the ball off the field as soon as possible.

Normal game:
Bonus point try? Might be worth playing on then. Even if 8 points behind there is a losing BP to play for. Or indeed 2BP, with a losing BP and a 4T BP. So there may be a reason to play on for a winning or losing side.

In some KO events there are prizes for try scorers etc so you never know. Players call of course.

 

[DocY]

Normal game:
Bonus point try? Might be worth playing on then. Even if 8 points behind there is a losing BP to play for. Or indeed 2BP, with a losing BP and a 4T BP. So there may be a reason to play on for a winning or losing side.

In some KO events there are prizes for try scorers etc so you never know. Players call of course.

Much as I don't like it, they can always deliberately knock on.

 

[didds]

Much as I don't like it, they can always deliberately knock on.

so you are quite happy for players to break this law?

10.2 Unfair play
(a) Intentionally Offending. A player must not intentionally infringe any Law of the Game, or play unfairly. The player who intentionally offends must be either admonished, or cautioned that a send off will result if the offence or a similar offence is committed, or sent off.
Sanction: Penalty kick

and of course

12.1 The outcome of a knock-on or throw forward
(f) Intentional knock or throw forward. A player must not intentionally knock the ball forward with hand or arm, nor throw forward.
Sanction: Penalty kick. A penalty try must be awarded if the offence prevents a try that would probably otherwise have been scored.

didds

 

[Pegleg]

Just say "Ref Scrum please!"

 

[DocY]

so you are quite happy for players to break this law?

No, I don't like it, but if a player does I'd have to blow for the first offence.

As Pegleg says, I'd much rather they ask for the scrum, but they don't always do so - at least not the first time they want a scrum/PK.

 

[didds]

No, I don't like it, but if a player does I'd have to blow for the first offence.

As Pegleg says, I'd much rather they ask for the scrum, but they don't always do so - at least not the first time they want a scrum/PK.

so a PK offense doesn't trump a scrum "offense" ?

and if the BC thumped an opponent - that wouldn't take precedence then as you'd blow for the 1st infringement?

didds

didds

 

[Pegleg]

Atre you saying a deliberate knock on is foul play in your book?

The law book put a deliberate knock on in law 12 not law 10

12.1 THE OUTCOME OF A KNOCK-ON OR THROW FORWARD

(f) Intentional knock or throw forward. A player must not intentionally knock the ball
forward with hand or arm, nor throw forward.
Sanction: Penalty kick. A penalty try must be awarded if the offence prevents a try that
would probably otherwise have been scored.

Advantage law says You go back to the first offence (Scrum sanction UNLESS either offence is Foul play in which case you apply the sanction for that offence)

8.5 MORE THAN ONE INFRINGEMENT

(b) If advantage is being played following an infringement by one team and then the other
team commit an infringement, the referee blows the whistle and applies the sanctions
associated with the first infringement. If either infringement is for foul play, the referee
applies the appropriate sanction for that offence. The referee may also temporarily
suspend, or order off, the offending player.



Striking an opponant will get a PK and a card. I think we need to taking to account the nature of the offence and context. All the guy is doing, albeit in a clumsy way, is saying "we don't want the advantage ref". Are you really equating that with striking a player?

 

[DocY]

so a PK offense doesn't trump a scrum "offense" ?

No (though I sometimes wish it would). If blue had knocked on and red, while playing advantage, went offside, you'd come back for the scrum. I'd treat this in the same way (plus a 'please don't do that again' to the offender).

and if the BC thumped an opponent - that wouldn't take precedence then as you'd blow for the 1st infringement?

didds

If foul play is involved, then yes, you penalise the most serious infringement. TBH I'd not thought about it in the context of ending the game, but I think I'd have to treat it as I would during the rest of the game - card and penalty reversed.

 

[Pinky]

I know it was advantage after half time (not full time) but did anyone notice Joubert appear to offer advantage to Australia at the 11th phase, 42.20 and then appear to forget about it 10 phases later when he awarded a scrum to England for Aus losing the ball forward at 43.40?