Advantage?

[jboulet4648]

Black is ahead of Red 19-12 with less than a minute to play. Red has ball within 22 M. Red 5 passes to Red 10 and after the pass Black 10 hits Red 5 late and high taking him out of play. Late hit was not seen but red player on ground holding his throat is, so on assumption of a late hit, play advantage. Red works the ball to a 2 v 1 overload, where upon completion of pass, Red has a good chance to score. With just seeing the overload, advantage is over, but the pass is errant and is on the ground, played by black but goes out of bound. Stop clock, bring Black Captain over, and yellow card #10 (since I did not see the actual hit, I could not go red, even if it may have been deserved). Restart with line to Red, who throw it in squint, game over.

Was this 2 v 1 overload advantage gained? Normally in sevens I would say a 2 v 1 overload is an advantage, however in this case, was I too quick, since Red was down a man (player taken out by late hit)

 

[Davet]

If I understand right you called advantage over when the overlap developed, but the pass to actually set it up went to ground, after you called advantage over?


Personally I think you were just a little sharp to call it over. I would have said advantage was over if the pass had gone to hand.

Advantage must be real, a mere opportunity to gain advantage is not advantage.

However, you have a 7 point gap - the penalty kick is not a lot of use unless they went for touch, red got a throw in anyway and muffed it - frankly I don't see it made any difference any which way.

 

[OB..]

A tap kick penalty might have led to a try, but I agree with Davet on "mere opportunity" not being enough.

 

[SimonSmith]

I have a different question, from a more legalistic standpoint.

If you know enough to give a yellow, then you know enough to give red. I was a little worried by the fact that you felt OK to give yellow (basedon balance of probabilities?), but that the only reason red didn't come out was because you hadn't actually seen it.

Slightly dangerous territory I think...

 

[OB..]

In general, I too am not comfortable with giving a penalty for something you have not seen.

There are a few exceptions - eg if a maul crashes over the line, you may not be able to see the ball actually grounded, but the probability may be strong enough.

 

[Jacko]

I dunno - if a side wins clean ball at a tackle and the ball is nicely presented as a ruck forms. My head turns to check the offside line, I look back and suddenly the ball has been stolen. I'd probably give a penalty based on the logic that there's no real way it could have been stolen legally.

 

[OB..]

.... and then the video replay shows that the presenter pushed the ball back too far ...

You have to use your judgement, of course.

 

[Dickie E]

I dunno - if a side wins clean ball at a tackle and the ball is nicely presented as a ruck forms. My head turns to check the offside line, I look back and suddenly the ball has been stolen. I'd probably give a penalty based on the logic that there's no real way it could have been stolen legally.

... or the SH has knocked it on back into the ruck. And one team is yelling "he knocked it on, sir" and the other team is yelling "there were hands in there, sir." Tricky.

 

[jboulet4648]

If I understand right you called advantage over when the overlap developed, but the pass to actually set it up went to ground, after you called advantage over?
Personally I think you were just a little sharp to call it over. I would have said advantage was over if the pass had gone to hand.

So you are saying at a high level, on a two on one, players don't have the skill to complete a pass? It is sevens, 2 v 1 on a nice wide pitch? Its a score.
They have a tactical advantage, however, they were technically a man down. Now given the same play, but their man was not down due to foul play, definitely advantage over, do you agree?

So you are saying in this instance, with a man being taken out of play by foul play, so playing 6 on 7, I can see how the argument for advantage not gained is relevant, based solely on the fact of numbers, hence since they are a man down, wait until the pass is completed to say advantage over.

 

[Dickie E]

"Now given the same play, but their man was not down due to foul play, definitely advantage over, do you agree?"

No. Irrespective of whether it is 15s or 7s, last minute or first minute, winter or summer, IMHO the situation is this:

if a penalty infringement is made by the defending team in a kickable distance from the goal posts (as determined by me on the day), then there are only 3 possible outcomes:
1. the attacking team scores a try,
2. the attacking team kicks a drop goal, or
3. advantage does not occur and we come back for the penalty.

Nothing the attacking team does or doesn't do (apart from foul play) negates this.

This is MHO.

 

[AndyKidd]

Don't all shoot me if I'm wrong but ........ Advantage is tactical or territorial ....... if they have gained ground i.e. territorial then advantage is over....... If they gain a tactical advantage (and a 2 on 1 could be considered as such) then advantage is over. I don't think that the lack of Reds ability to finish is your problem in this instance.

But then everyone who's posted above me are higher up the rungs.

My only real worry is....... you called a penalty for something you assumed happened ...... Considering, like many of us, at sometime during the match, you probably said to one team or the other, or both " I can only call what I see" or words to that effect. You could leave yourself open to lord knows what.

The other thing you could have done (Even though advantage was over) is still to blow up. You still have the offence to deal with, and a deliberate late hit still qualifies for at least yellow. Then you restart the match with a scrum to the team last in posetion of the ball (In this case red). Call it interpretation

 

[OB..]

Advantage is tactical or territorial ....... if they have gained ground i.e. territorial then advantage is over....... If they gain a tactical advantage (and a 2 on 1 could be considered as such) then advantage is over.

Ask yourself what a team would gain, in general, if you went back to the scrum or penalty. From a scrum a team expects clean possession, but little in the way of territorial gain. From a penalty - 20 or 30 metres from a touch kick followed by clean possession, or 3 points if close enough.

The two situations need to be treated differently.

Having an overlap is an opportunity to gain advantage. It confers no benefit in itself.

 

[SimonSmith]

I think that there's 2 issues here: Is 2 v 1 sufficient advanatge to call it as over? And then would that be negated by the man down?

The man down is a red herring for me. It's 2 v 1, it's sevens on a wide pitch. Massive tactical advantage. If they take that advantage, then the man down becomes irrelevant....

Or do I need to read the tread again in more detail?

 

[jboulet4648]

Simon you read it correctly. 2 v 1 in sevens is a huge tactical advantage. As is 3 on 1, etc.

I have always played tactical advantage, and have been told I applied the law correctly, as is there an advantage in front of the ball carrying team, hence in 15's if there is an overlap and it is 3 on 1, well there is an advantage there, and it is not my fault if the players do not have skills to catch the ball. By waiting until the pass is thrown and caught, is saying that the players do not have the skill to catch the pass, which is something, at the level I have been reffing, am NOT going to do, those players should have those skills.

I always tell them, if you don't want the advantage tell me, we will take the kick, otherwise, it's over when I believe it is over.

In sevens, with few players on a very wide pitch, 2 on 1 is HUGE tactically, especially at qualifier level. I was with you that 2 v 1 in sevens, man down or not, was still tactical advantage gained. The US Sevens coach felt it was not due to the 6 v 7 scenario. Our National Ref Manager thought it was. Me, I still think I was right, but in the process of trying to work with and standardize our refereeing practices in sevens, it adds an extra layer of depth to think about, one which while making the decision that advantage was over, I did not take into consideration

 

[jboulet4648]

Then you restart the match with a scrum to the team last in posetion of the ball (In this case red). Call it interpretation

I would restart it however play ended, lineout, free kick, PK, scrum, whichever.

 

[OB..]

I think we are splitting unnecessary hairs.

2 on 1 overlap, but the defender is in the ball carrier's face and tackles him before he can pass. Was that an automatic advantage over?

I'm sure we can dream up lots of similar scenarios. It remains important to distinguish actual advantage from a mere opportunity to gain an advantage. And as ever that will depend on the specific situation.

 

[David J.]

Did you call out "Advantage over" before the pass was fouled? One thing I need to work on is the quickness of my calls. I've found myself in situations similar to this where the players were upset because they assumed advantage was still on and took a risk assuming if it failed we'd go back to the infringement. Is advantage over when we think it is or when we say it is?

I always tell them, if you don't want the advantage tell me, we will take the kick.

That's interesting. How do you manage that? Is the captain or any player on the non-offending team supposed to call out "penalty sir" or something to that effect?

 

[Rich Wartner]

I agree with Dickee. I do referee lots of 7s and advantage is different than 15s possession may be enough especially at that level. In this case close to the goal line I would call it as Dickee explained. Dropped pass by Red whistle PK.

I don't know if this has been discussed but I am interested in the point of yellow/red for unseen dangerous play. In this case man on ground holding throat or perhaps bloody nose maybe broken.

You turn and see bloody nose it happened behind your back. There is not a friend in sight no TJ, old buddy nobody you are all alone.

You know the flanker must have punched or elbowed #10. A brawl nearly erupts. One suggestion is that you call the offending captain and ask him to produce the offender. If he doesn't you card the captain for not controlling his players.

Wondering what you guys think.

 

[jboulet4648]

I saw the aftermath, player on ground holding throat, so I immediately called advantage. Played the advantage, then went back. Chatted with Captain, guilty player was either 10 or 2, wasn't sure which. 10 fessed up, so I carded him. While I did not see it, players from both sides respected me enough to know I would do right by them.

I would never card the captain if I did not see something. I am all about gaining the respect of the players, and building rapport with the teams. I feel I can justify to the non offending team that I did not see it, and I understand their frustration more than binning a captain. I would lose that whole side of the pitch. Some ref coaches tell you that this is a tool you could use. My ref coach squawks at that theory.

If you have effectively managed the game to this point, an elbow or bunch should not provoke a brawl.

Advantage.... 2 v 1, irregardless of proximity of goal line in 7's should be gained advantage. IMHO

 

[SimonSmith]

You emphatically can NOT card a captain for another player's offence. If that went to a disciplinary hearing it would get laughed out.

There is no legal or indeed moral basis for that course of action, and as Judah has said, risks undermining whatever credibility you might have with the players.

If you missed it, you missed it. Don't make someone else pay the price for that!