Connacht-Munster: You can't take the kick until the change is permanent

[MrQeu]

2nd half try. Player is out due to concussion assessment. Replacement intends to kick the conversion. Ref denies him to kick because the change is not permanent.

Wow.

Is it the same in a blood substitution scenario?

 

[Phil E]

2nd half try. Player is out due to concussion assessment. Replacement intends to kick the conversion. Ref denies him to kick because the change is not permanent.

Wow.

Is it the same in a blood substitution scenario?

A player cannot kick for goal as his first action after coming onto the pitch.
Doesn't matter why or how he came to enter the game.

 

[Jacko]

An HIA replacement cannot kick at goal (until the player fails the assessment and the change becomes permanent). Different to blood.

 

[Dave Sherwin]

A player cannot kick for goal as his first action after coming onto the pitch.
Doesn't matter why or how he came to enter the game.

Isn't this only for matches with interchanges, Phil? I've had this clarified by match commissioners previously, but I know there are different regs for different competitions. Whenever refereeing in another country's league, this is one of the first things I confirm in the applicable regs.

 

[L'irlandais]

Hi Dave, It's also part of the WR Law Amendment trial :

Law 3.10 (d)

[laws](d) A player who temporarily replaces a player who is being assessed at the pitch side for head injury must not take penalty kicks at goal or conversion kicks.[/laws]

 

[Phil E]

Have to admit, I thought it was the same for blood, but cant immediately find it written down anywhere.

 

[Dave Sherwin]

Hi Dave, It's also part of the WR Law Amendment trial :

Law 3.10 (d)

[laws](d) A player who temporarily replaces a player who is being assessed at the pitch side for head injury must not take penalty kicks at goal or conversion kicks.[/laws]

Sorry - I really must improve my clarity of expression!! I appreciate that a temporary replacement for HIA cannot kick for goal, but other temporary (or indeed permanent) replacement can kick for goal as their first action, so far as I am aware (hence, of course, the explicit statement in 3.10(d)), though I know that RFU regs prevent this in matches with interchanges for obvious reasons. Apologies for any confusion!

 

[Jacko]

Have to admit, I thought it was the same for blood, but cant immediately find it written down anywhere.

Phil - if you've got your Tigers hat on (presume you have, as interchanges make blood irrelevant) then blood and HIA are definitely different for this.

 

[crossref]

interchanges don't make blood completely irrelevant -- there's still the obligation to leave the field if bleeding, so you can still have the unfortunate situation where a fit #10 who is otherwise just about to take a kick, is forced to leave the field by the ref because he is bleeding -- and the replacement who comes on to the field is unable to take the kick.
Which would be rough.

 

[Jacko]

interchanges don't make blood completely irrelevant -- there's still the obligation to leave the field if bleeding, so you can still have the unfortunate situation where a fit #10 who is otherwise just about to take a kick, is forced to leave the field by the ref because he is bleeding -- and the replacement who comes on to the field is unable to take the kick.
Which would be rough.

Good point. Never thought of that. Make a prop take it...

 

[Dave Sherwin]

Using the discretion granted under the laws, we've tweaked our interchange regs down here so that you receive one or two fewer interchanges than under the RFU regs (depending on the size of your match-day squad), but blood continues to operate as it did prior to interchanges. Seems to work for all concerned.

 

[MrQeu]

Hi, Phil, it's true it was the wannabe-kicker first action, but the ref insisted in the temporary vs permanent replacement, not on the fact that it was his first action.

I do understand the idea behind this (don't allow free temporary substitutions for kickers), but, what about the other way around? If you have a kicker who should be assessed, not letting another kicker come from the bench and take the kick will result in players trying to hide the possible concussion.

Personally, I'd say let the replacement take the kick and safety will always win.

 

[crossref]

Hi, Phil, it's true it was the wannabe-kicker first action, but the ref insisted in the temporary vs permanent replacement, not on the fact that it was his first action.

I do understand the idea behind this (don't allow free temporary substitutions for kickers), but, what about the other way around? If you have a kicker who should be assessed, not letting another kicker come from the bench and take the kick will result in players trying to hide the possible concussion.

Personally, I'd say let the replacement take the kick and safety will always win.

It's the same problem for Front Row -- where man-off applies then in a situation where leaving the pitch will trigger uncontested scrums then teams are incentivised to hide bleeding and concussion in front row players.

 

[L'irlandais]

... but the ref insisted in the temporary vs permanent replacement, not on the fact that it was his first action....

Hi MrQeu, See my earlier post for clarification. In the event, with their number 10 (Craig Ronaldson) off the pitch for that concussion assessment, the winger (Darragh Leader) did the honours from the tee, reducing the gap to two points. Source

It's true their fullback (Mils Muliaina) doesn't have a great kicking game, but he'd have been forgiven for missing, had he attempted the conversion.

 

[L'irlandais]

Perhaps the Law change is to tackle incidents like this one in the Ireland Autumn International. Both players are still suffering the effects of those concussions, and yet their (club/national) coaching staff wanted them to stay on the pitch.

 

[MrQeu]

And Stade Toulousain's Florian Fritz incident.

Very sad that was.

 

[Browner]

interchanges don't make blood completely irrelevant -- there's still the obligation to leave the field if bleeding, so you can still have the unfortunate situation where a fit #10 who is otherwise just about to take a kick, is forced to leave the field by the ref because he is bleeding -- and the replacement who comes on to the field is unable to take the kick.
Which would be rough.

If the #10 wants to kick a conversion ( different to a PK) whilst he's bleeding then id be tempted to let him, after all its blood 'sharing' that were trying to avoid, he could then go off immediately after the kick.

After a PK the ball isn't guaranteed to be dead, so that's different.

Just a thought

 

[L'irlandais]

And Stade Toulousain's Florian Fritz incident.

Very sad that was.

The Top 14 has a "travelling road show" at the moment raising awareness in these clubs about the seriousness of concussion. Unfortunately not sinking in by the looks of that - Guy Noves rushing the player back on the pitch to call it a "blood sub" rather than a concussion. Sad is the operative word, with 20 stitches on his forehead. Where's the player safety in that call?

The concussion protocol is every bit as strict, as in the Premiership ; third diagnosed concussion in 12 months and the player has a mandatory 3 months off. Problem is, if the coach gets away with calling it something other than concussion it doesn't count in the eyes of the protocol. How can we stop this nonsense?

Racing Metro taking things seriously : Jonathan Sexton cannot play 14 December 2014 until 14 of February 2015. He received 2 knocks to the head in the Ireland versus Wallabies test, making it his fourth concussion in 12 months. Any increase in heart rate is giving headaches and nausea, so unable to even train last month.

Source