Further advantage on top of existing advantage confusion

[CrouchTPEngage]

I was challenged in my game yesterday by a player who asked how i handled the advantage law.

Scenario 1 : Red were attacking Blue try-line with repeated phases. I shouted 'penalty advantage' for a ruck offence at a ruck 12 m out. Red got nearer the try-line where, with increased desperation, a Blue player didnt relase the tackled player very quickly, i declared "nw penalty advantage" as this one was only 5 m out. But Red still had the ball and could have gone on to score a try. they didnt so i came back for the penalty which was 5 m out. Cue questions about the positon of the offence from the Bkue captain.
was i ok ?

Scenario 2: Red knock on whilst attacking blue try line. blue then have a couple of phases and i expect them to clear their 22 but their player charges into a ruck with his shoukder. I saw this as dangerous play and therby immediateky cancelling out the advantage for the knock on. The Blue captain said something like (but Sir,you didnt say 'Advantage Over!' ).
My reasoning is that, just because a teAm have an advantage, this does not give them the right to infringe with impunity. Am i right ?

If it was a technical ruck offence (i.e. not dangerous) then should i go back for the knock on?

Advice please ?

 

[Waspsfan]

Correct on both fronts.

May be worth reflecting on how you delivered the decisions though. Nice clear secondary signals, and an appropriate verbal with each one, especially the latter.

 

[Blackberry]

Scenario 1, spot on as I see it.
Scenario 2, spot on as i see it although I quite like the alternative interpretation where until the ref has called "Advantage Over" the benefiting team can kick/punch/bite/gouge/impale the opposition with, as CTPE says, impunity.

 

[Ian_Cook]

Scenario 1 : Red were attacking Blue try-line with repeated phases. I shouted 'penalty advantage' for a ruck offence at a ruck 12 m out. Red got nearer the try-line where, with increased desperation, a Blue player didnt relase the tackled player very quickly, i declared "nw penalty advantage" as this one was only 5 m out. But Red still had the ball and could have gone on to score a try. they didnt so i came back for the penalty which was 5 m out. Cue questions about the positon of the offence from the Bkue captain.
was i ok ?

except that you should award the PK at the most advantageous position for the non-infringing team.

[LAWS]LAW 8.5 MORE THAN ONE INFRINGEMENT
(a) When there is more than one infringement by the same team:
• If advantage cannot be played or does not accrue to the second offence, the referee
applies the appropriate sanction to the offence which is most advantageous to the non-offending
team.[/LAWS]

If one offence was 12m out directly in front of the infringing team's posts, and the second was 5m out and a metre in from the left touchline, which one is most advantageous to the non-offending team? This could depend on the game situation, the score and the amount of time left. IMO, the referee ought to be allowed to offer the non-offending team captain the option.

Scenario 2: Red knock on whilst attacking blue try line. blue then have a couple of phases and i expect them to clear their 22 but their player charges into a ruck with his shoukder. I saw this as dangerous play and therby immediateky cancelling out the advantage for the knock on. The Blue captain said something like (but Sir,you didnt say 'Advantage Over!' ).
My reasoning is that, just because a teAm have an advantage, this does not give them the right to infringe with impunity. Am i right ?

[LAWS]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.[/LAWS]

If it was a technical ruck offence (i.e. not dangerous) then should i go back for the knock on?

1. Red knocks on, advantage Blue. Then Blue side entry at the next tackle - scrum - Blue to throw in - at the mark for the knock on

2. Red knocks on, advantage Blue. Then Red side entry at the next tackle - new PK advantage or PK to Blue at the most advantageous position for Blue

3. Red knocks on, advantage Blue. Then Blue dangerous charge into ruck - PK to Red at the mark for the dangerous charge.

4. Red knocks on, advantage Blue. Then Red dangerous charge into ruck - PK to Blue at the mark for the dangerous charge.

 

[Browner]

I was challenged in my game yesterday by a player who asked how i handled the advantage law.

Scenario 1 : Red were attacking Blue try-line with repeated phases. I shouted 'penalty advantage' for a ruck offence at a ruck 12 m out. Red got nearer the try-line where, with increased desperation, a Blue player didnt relase the tackled player very quickly, i declared "nw penalty advantage" as this one was only 5 m out. But Red still had the ball and could have gone on to score a try. they didnt so i came back for the penalty which was 5 m out. Cue questions about the positon of the offence from the Bkue captain.
was i ok ?

Scenario 2: Red knock on whilst attacking blue try line. blue then have a couple of phases and i expect them to clear their 22 but their player charges into a ruck with his shoukder. I saw this as dangerous play and therby immediateky cancelling out the advantage for the knock on. The Blue captain said something like (but Sir,you didnt say 'Advantage Over!' ).
My reasoning is that, just because a teAm have an advantage, this does not give them the right to infringe with impunity. Am i right ?

If it was a technical ruck offence (i.e. not dangerous) then should i go back for the knock on?

Advice please ?

1. Good decision
2. Good decision

But with regard to 5m or 12m, why wouldnt you let them choose which location they prefer?:shrug:

 

[Dickie E]

[LAWS]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.[/LAWS]

Ian, where it says "foul play" should we interpret this as "Dangerous Play or Misconduct"? ie not all Law 10 offences would apply, only those from Law 10.4?

 

[andyscott]

1. Correct decision and Yellow card him, seems nailed on and ends the debate.

2. Foul play trumps everything, joining ruck dangerously, then PK him, bollock him at the very least.

 

[Ian_Cook]

[LAWS]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.[/LAWS]

Ian, where it says "foul play" should we interpret this as "Dangerous Play or Misconduct"? ie not all Law 10 offences would apply, only those from Law 10.4?

That is a very good question!

Red knocks on, advantage Blue. Then Blue obstructs Red player from getting to the ball (law 10.1)

You surely wouldn't award a PK to red?


WorldRugby's Grade school proof readers strike again!