ATP and cheating hookers

[smeagol]

On the weekend, I had a match where this sequence happened:

First scrum: both hookers had feet in early. Blew it up, asked both hookers to keep feet clear before the ball was fed. After reset, was perfectly fine.
Second scrum: same thing. At this point, as I warned that I would be escalating to a PK after warning both sides twice.
30ish minutes later: hooker had early foot, PK.
After that, no problems with early feet.

With Ask/Tell/Penalize, I felt that even though I hadn't FK'd (as in both instances I reset as both sides were guilty), the escalation was necessary as both sides had offended more than once.

 

[beckett50]

You got the result you needed, so well done you

 

[ChrisR]

PK for foot up seems harsh to me especially as non feeding side has no chance at the ball.

 

[Phil E]

I felt that even though I hadn't FK'd (as in both instances I reset as both sides were guilty), the escalation was necessary as both sides had offended more than once.

I think the escalation to a PK was a little harsh. You should have FK first. The escalation to a PK is for repeat offending, but if you didn't FK them, then technically they hadn't offended.

 

[Rich_NL]

I'd be inclined to FK one of them. At least one side will then not want to risk it, making it easier to FK the other side if they haven't got the message.

 

[smeagol]

I'd be inclined to FK one of them. At least one side will then not want to risk it, making it easier to FK the other side if they haven't got the message.

Given that both sides had infringed on more than one occasion (despite the lack of a FK), IMO it would be inequitable to ping one and not the other.

 

[VM75]

On the weekend, I had a match where this sequence happened:

First scrum: both hookers had feet in early. Blew it up, asked both hookers to keep feet clear before the ball was fed. After reset, was perfectly fine.
Second scrum: same thing. At this point, as I warned that I would be escalating to a PK after warning both sides twice.
30ish minutes later: hooker had early foot, PK.
After that, no problems with early feet.

Whilst i generally subscribe to ATP, Shortcutting to P would 'surprise all the coaches' who ask/tell their players that they will get away with there first & second attempts with little consequence!

 

[Rich_NL]

Given that both sides had infringed on more than one occasion (despite the lack of a FK), IMO it would be inequitable to ping one and not the other.

So you end up punishing a FK offence with a (far more severe) PK because the other player happened to not offend that time?

I'd argue it's fairer to consistently penalise e.g. the non-putting-in side in the event of mutual early feet, and ensure that the counterhooking hooker at least behaves.

 

[Paule23]

I'm with the first reply, penalty was appropriate event if you hadn't FK'd. You had asked and told, they hadn't listened, you can clearly argue this is deliberate offending, PK to stop it happening again is fine in my book. It's not your fault if players refuse to listen to you.

Frankly there are instances where I don't think you should have to use ATP. Say you specifically highlight something in your PMB, if it immediately happens in the game I would say you can go straight to penalise, players have been specifically warned about something, choose not to listen therefore they take the consequences.

 

[ChrisR]

I'm with the first reply, penalty was appropriate event if you hadn't FK'd. You had asked and told, they hadn't listened, you can clearly argue this is deliberate offending, PK to stop it happening again is fine in my book. It's not your fault if players refuse to listen to you.

Frankly there are instances where I don't think you should have to use ATP. Say you specifically highlight something in your PMB, if it immediately happens in the game I would say you can go straight to penalise, players have been specifically warned about something, choose not to listen therefore they take the consequences.

This is where I think you go wrong. Foot up is just a timing issue and probably immaterial anyway. If the early strike wins the ball a FK is appropriate otherwise play on.

And this is bollocks! Mention it in the Pre Match Blather and you convert a FK offence to a PK? I don't think so!

 

[SimonSmith]

Foot up is sometimes timing, sometimes a cheating so-n-so.

The piece in blue I have an issue with. If there is a prescribed sanction in law for it, to rely on the "well, I told you in the PMB so now it's a bigger sanction" defence is a bit shaky. Why would you even cover it in a PMB?

 

[Phil E]

Referee to players pre-match.

"Some of you seem to be under the misapprehension that I need to warn a player before I can card him.......so you can all consider yourselves warned!"

:biggrin:

 

[didds]

Back as a student, playing a students digs match (proper WFU/local society ref etc), I recall a ruck blown up for a scrum restart. We peeled ourselves aside and as our hooker started to stand an oppo stepped forward and smashed him with an enormous punch right in front of the ref - maybe two metres apart at most.

The ref awarded a PK and said "I can't send him off as I haven't warned him before".

Proof that 29 players on that pitch were decent civilised human beings (and maybe a tad soft) was that it didn;t turn out to be all out warfare, or at least a bunch of 29 strategic strikes afterwards.

did

didds

 

[ChrisR]

Foot up is sometimes timing, sometimes a cheating so-n-so.

. . . and sometimes it's a cheating SH trying to win his side a FK. (Then his skipper opts for another scrum :wtf: )