Firstly I think that the ref, Luke Pearce of England put in a more than competent performance and looked like he has the goods to rise through the referring ranks.
However there was an incident in the game where he reversed the penalty which I would question.
NZ were on attack and one of the NZ forwards obstructed a defender [typical ball being played behind the front line] from getting to the attacker and in the same movement a NZ attacker was tackled dangerously [head high] and LP signaled advantage NZ for that tackle and allowed play to run out before returning to give the PK – he clearly didn’t see the obstruction.
While the PK was being lined up the movement was played on the big screen [a few times it must be said] and the crowd started whistling etc. and as the kick was about to be taken LP called a halt and asked to see the movement on the big screen.
Having seen the replay he then chose to reverse the penalty “I had advantage for NZ, NZ obstructed, both were foul play, penalty reversed”
Without a replay online I haven’t been able to check the order of the actions – was the obstruction before the high tackle or after? – but my thought at the time was that the obstruction occurred before the tackle.
This raises the questions:
a) If the order was obstruction, then tackle should the PK have been reversed
b) Is obstruction really foul play, particularly when the team obstructing is hot on attack
c) If not foul play should the PK have been reversed
d) If foul play and the order was tackle, then obstruction does an obstruction override the offence of dangerous tackle
However there was an incident in the game where he reversed the penalty which I would question.
NZ were on attack and one of the NZ forwards obstructed a defender [typical ball being played behind the front line] from getting to the attacker and in the same movement a NZ attacker was tackled dangerously [head high] and LP signaled advantage NZ for that tackle and allowed play to run out before returning to give the PK – he clearly didn’t see the obstruction.
While the PK was being lined up the movement was played on the big screen [a few times it must be said] and the crowd started whistling etc. and as the kick was about to be taken LP called a halt and asked to see the movement on the big screen.
Having seen the replay he then chose to reverse the penalty “I had advantage for NZ, NZ obstructed, both were foul play, penalty reversed”
Without a replay online I haven’t been able to check the order of the actions – was the obstruction before the high tackle or after? – but my thought at the time was that the obstruction occurred before the tackle.
This raises the questions:
a) If the order was obstruction, then tackle should the PK have been reversed
b) Is obstruction really foul play, particularly when the team obstructing is hot on attack
c) If not foul play should the PK have been reversed
d) If foul play and the order was tackle, then obstruction does an obstruction override the offence of dangerous tackle
