Hurricanes v Blues Penalty Try

[Ian_Cook]

We must be certain about grounding the ball or else we can't give it. .

That statement is completely wrong.

A sole defender, 1m out from his own goal line, deliberately knocks the ball forward as it is passed between two attackers.

I don't even know whether the pass would have gone to hand, let alone if the receiver would have grounded it, and I don't care; I am going straight under the cross bar for the PT and giving the defender a YC.

I once saw a certain well known Welsh international referee of stout proportions, award a PT to Australia when an Argentine player did exactly that.... on the 22m line!!!

http://news.google.com/newspapers?n...IZWAAAAIBAJ&sjid=ruYDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6619,2683566

 

[Ian_Cook]

Where does it say in the laws that you have to Ground the ball when you are trying to prevent a try being scored? for me it was inconclusive there was no clear hit of the ball to knock it dead,

You obviously have not seen the end on view. Halai clearly bats the ball away, and as OB stated earlier, he risked the possibility that the ball might go dead off his deliberate knock.

Its professional rugby. Nothing on the field happens by accident.

 

[Dickie E]

Halai clearly bats the ball away, and as OB stated earlier, he risked the possibility that the ball might go dead off his deliberate knock.

Sure, deliberately batted the ball. But did he intend for it to go over DBL? Intent is important.

 

[The Fat]

Sure, deliberately batted the ball. But did he intend for it to go over DBL? Intent is important.

Laws are poorly worded.
10.2(a) says the offender must get a card if his actions cause a PT to be awarded.
10.2(c) makes no mention of a card when referencing a PT.


10.2 Unfair play
(a) Intentionally Offending. A player must not intentionally infringe any Law of the Game, or play unfairly. The player who intentionally offends must be either admonished, or cautioned that a send off will result if the offence or a similar offence is committed, or sent off. Sanction: Penalty kick

A penalty try must be awarded if the offence prevents a try that would probably otherwise have been scored. A player who prevents a try being scored through foul play must either be cautioned and temporarily suspended or sent off.

(b) Time-wasting. A player must not intentionally waste time. Sanction: Free Kick

(c) Throwing into touch. A player must not intentionally knock, place, push or throw the ball with his arm or hand into touch, touch-in-goal, or over the dead ball line. Sanction: Penalty kick on the 15-metre line if the offence is between the 15-metre line and the touchline, or, at the place of infringement if the offence occured elsewhere in the field of play, or, 5 metres from the goal line and at least 15 metres from the touchline if the infringement occured in in-goal.

A penalty try must be awarded if the offence prevents a try that would probably otherwise have been scored.

 

[Davet]

Is being reckless about the outcome the same as intending the outcome?

 

[Ian_Cook]

Sure, deliberately batted the ball. But did he intend for it to go over DBL? Intent is important.

"Sure, I picked him up and turned him over, but I didn't mean to drop him on his head"

Intent?

What the player intended is irrelevant, what actually happened is at hand!

You can't argue that he was batting it to another player, as there was no other player to bat it to.

A player of his experience should have realised that the result would be that the ball would go over the DBL.

IMO, what Halai did was very little different from what Ben Mowen did in this video; and that was a dead-set PT.

 

[Chogan]

That statement is completely wrong.

A sole defender, 1m out from his own goal line, deliberately knocks the ball forward as it is passed between two attackers.

I don't even know whether the pass would have gone to hand, let alone if the receiver would have grounded it, and I don't care; I am going straight under the cross bar for the PT and giving the defender a YC.

I once saw a certain well known Welsh international referee of stout proportions, award a PT to Australia when an Argentine player did exactly that.... on the 22m line!!!

http://news.google.com/newspapers?n...IZWAAAAIBAJ&sjid=ruYDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6619,2683566

I'll say it again: We must be certain about grounding the ball or else we can't give it.
I haven't mentioned anything about foul play. The statement is not completely wrong. It's intended message and your interpretation are what appears to be off from both our perspectives.
If in the normal act of scoring a try this is the case, I want to be certain over the foul play before I give a penalty try. Be it a trip, deliberate knock-on, collapsing a maul etc...
From what I've seen on the video, no I'm not certain and there is doubt in my mind. Mowen's in my eyes is clear foul play an a correct PT

 

[Dickie E]

Is being reckless about the outcome the same as intending the outcome?

Fair question. IMO a player who has eyes only to prevent the try by knocking the ball away is not guilty of intentionally knocking the ball dead.

 

[JP_Rocks]

I still dont see it, and quite frankly, dont have an issue with the second part of what Mowen did either (PT was still warranted for the shoulder tug alone). The intent in those situations is not to get the ball in to touch, it is to get the ball away from the player who is about to ground it. Awarding a PT in those spots is like hearing hoofbeats and then looking for zebras.

Based on that logic, should NZ have been awarded a PT in the 1994 Bledisloe after Gregan knocked the ball out of Wilson's hands- he intentionally knocked the ball with his arm, the ball went out, therefore PT? No, and this is the same situation. A player knocked the ball away from where their opposition was about to play it, and it inadvertently went out.

The bottom line for me is that while a PT and YC for Halai was defensible in law, it wasn't defensible in justice, which was the strangest thing for me- Vinny has always seemed like someone with such a feel for on field justice, someone who had a real skill for making consistenly fair decisions.

 

[OB..]

Fair question. IMO a player who has eyes only to prevent the try by knocking the ball away is not guilty of intentionally knocking the ball dead.

But he was reckless, and in my book that is also culpable.

- - - Updated - - -

If you beamed up the defender just prior to him touching the ball then the attacker was in "flight" to try and ground it

The fact the defender got to it first would indicate that the attacker was behind the defender and therefore his probability of correctly grounding the ball was low - ergo no PT

I don't think that logic is correct. Savea was only fractionally behind, not enough to mean he would not have grounded the ball.

 

[TheBFG]

was the Blue player YC'd after this PT?

Sorry this was a Q related to the Ian Cook video (War v Queens)

 

[Davet]

he was reckless, and in my book that is also culpable

Perhaps - but not in the law book - which says "intentionally".

 

[Dickie E]

But he was reckless, and in my book that is also culpable.

We've all seen the SH who wildly passes the ball back to the fullback in goal, only to see the ball sail over his head and over the DBL. Is that reckless too? The SH did intend to throw the ball backwards but did not intend the ball to go dead.

 

[OB..]

We've all seen the SH who wildly passes the ball back to the fullback in goal, only to see the ball sail over his head and over the DBL. Is that reckless too? The SH did intend to throw the ball backwards but did not intend the ball to go dead.

As so often, you have to use your judgement. IMHO Halai just did not care where the ball went as long as it was away from Savea.

 

[Dickie E]

IMHO Halai just did not care where the ball went as long as it was away from Savea.

That is my view too.

Slight twist: if the ball hadn't gone dead would that be an offence too in the same way that a punch that misses is an offence?

 

[Pinky]

Tpmmy Bowe was YC against NZ in 2008 (I think) for handing the ball into touch to prevent a try. Not sure what his intention was, but it seems to me that if you deliberately hit or throw the ball, and then it goes into touch, tig or dead, then you are liable to penalty.

 

[damo]

Tpmmy Bowe was YC against NZ in 2008 (I think) for handing the ball into touch to prevent a try. Not sure what his intention was, but it seems to me that if you deliberately hit or throw the ball, and then it goes into touch, tig or dead, then you are liable to penalty.

That is the way I see it as well.

 

[Chogan]

No doubt.
Tommy deliberately knocked the ball dead. Yellow card.
Richie would have scored. Penalty try.

 

[Chogan]

This one is also clear and obvious. Not sure if a YC was given

 

[Dickie E]

it seems to me that if you deliberately hit or throw the ball, and then it goes into touch, tig or dead, then you are liable to penalty.

So one size fits all?

We've all seen the SH who wildly passes the ball back to the fullback in goal, only to see the ball sail over his head and over the DBL. Is that reckless too? The SH did intend to throw the ball backwards but did not intend the ball to go dead.

As Davet says, that ain't what's written in Law.