[Law] Incorrectly taken penalty.

[mcroker]

• [LAWS]
  • A penalty or free-kick must be taken without delay.
  • Any player from the non-offending team may take it, other than for a free-kick awarded for a mark.
  • The kicker must use the ball that was in play unless the referee decides it is defective.
  • The kicker may punt, drop-kick or place-kick (other than for touch) the ball.
  • The kicker may kick the ball in any direction.
  • Other than the placer at a place-kick, the kicker’s team must remain behind the ball until it has been kicked.
  • The ball must be kicked a visible distance. If the kicker is holding it, it must clearly leave the hands. If it is on the ground, it must clearly leave the mark. Once the kick has been successfully taken the kicker may play the ball again.
  [/LAWS]
  • But the sanction seems to have vanished... has it moved, or is it now undefined?

 

[crossref]

• [LAWS]
  • A penalty or free-kick must be taken without delay.
  • Any player from the non-offending team may take it, other than for a free-kick awarded for a mark.
  • The kicker must use the ball that was in play unless the referee decides it is defective.
  • The kicker may punt, drop-kick or place-kick (other than for touch) the ball.
  • The kicker may kick the ball in any direction.
  • Other than the placer at a place-kick, the kicker’s team must remain behind the ball until it has been kicked.
  • The ball must be kicked a visible distance. If the kicker is holding it, it must clearly leave the hands. If it is on the ground, it must clearly leave the mark. Once the kick has been successfully taken the kicker may play the ball again.
  [/LAWS]
  • But the sanction seems to have vanished... has it moved, or is it now undefined?

If the PK wasn't taken , the game hasn't restarted .. so take the PK

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Refer to your copy of the 2017 book

 

[mcroker]

Refer to your copy of the 2017 book

I was fearing that was the case :s

2017 says “Sanction: Unless otherwise stated in Law any infringement by the kicker’s team results in a scrum at the mark. The opposing team throw in the ball.” (Not using law box deliberate)

 

[Taff]

Refer to your copy of the 2017 book

Exactly. I'm pretty sure the wording for the general rule is

Any offence by the kicking side results in an opposition scrum at the mark.

 

[Dickie E]

Agree with crossref. The old "if the quick tap doesn't leave your hands it's a scrum to the opposition" is kaput.

 

[crossref]

I was fearing that was the case :s

But it's not, is it? We must all use the current Law Book , we cant pick and choose Laws from old Law Books

 

[menace]

Agree with crossref. The old "if the quick tap doesn't leave your hands it's a scrum to the opposition" is kaput.

I keep adding glue and blue-tac to keep it un-kaput! :wink:

 

[The Fat]

But it's not, is it? We must all use the current Law Book , we cant pick and choose Laws from old Law Books

Got a sanction and law reference for non-compliance with each of those actions in OP?

 

[Flish]

Also, if you work in reverse, on the Scrum page an 'incorrectly taken penalty kick' is not listed as a reason for a scrum in the table, so is it a scrum? Not sure if these tables are supposed to be all encompassing though;

https://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=19

 

[crossref]

Got a sanction and law reference for non-compliance with each of those actions in OP?

There is no sanction, that's the point .. take the PK properly to restart the game

 

[mcroker]

In summary and with a bit of sweeping generalisation...

At one end: 'the laws haven't changed, if it's undefined refer back to 2017 law book': Scrum opposition.
At the other end: 'there is only the 2019 law book, time to stop referring back to 2017': PK not taken, restart game.

Which I think leaves it for me (as a somewhere in the middle pragmatist just trying to keep the game fair/fun) to decide between retake and scrum depending on which 'feels' fair (with no real basis in law) given the details of the situation.

 

[crossref]

You are over complicating !

The Laws are what's in the Law Book

[LAWS] It is the duty of the referee to apply fairly all the laws in every match, including law trials and
variations as authorised by World Rugby.
[/LAWS]

 

[mcroker]

The Laws are what's in the Law Book

Please cite law reference where it specifies the kicking team are entirely to retake a penalty or free kick following their failure to comply with the requirements in law 20.5 - 20.11.

I understand you think the question is black and white, and your view is the only possible interpretation - but unless you can back it up with a law reference, it is just your opinion. You are of course entitled to your opinion, but I am not sure why it's more valid than mine.

Given the required course of action seems to be unspecified, I am going to use my judgement to apply the outcome that I feel is most appropriate given the game context and the specifics of the infringement.

 

[L'irlandais]

Well this doesn’t quite answer the OP. However the French have a Law, which says if the misconduct by the opposition prevent a conversion or penalty kick from being taken before the match ends. Then the referee awards the points for the kick.

[LAWS]Si l’arrêt de la rencontre intervient après qu’une tentative de but, accordée à l’équipe non fautive (but après essai ou coup de pied de pénalité), a été empêchée par les agissements de l’équipe adverse, l’équipe non fautive obtiendra le bénéfice du but.[/LAWS]Okay it doesn’t help for restarts after an incorrectly taken PK, but came up it another discussion and seemed relevant to my way of thinking. Probably only needed because of “all” the match ending mass brawls this side of the channel.

 

[The Fat]

There is no sanction, that's the point .. take the PK properly to restart the game

Well just for the fun of it, let’s start with the first one that says no delay in taking a Pk. Are you saying that if a player takes more than 60 seconds to kick at goal you have to just keep telling him to kick it until the PK has been taken? We all know that’s not how it works and we award a scrum. Once again, the current law book makes life hard for new refs because of a lack of info

 

[tim White]

If it is not specifically itemised in law -it is a scrum to the opposition.

I also subscribe to managing the situation if I can by giving the benefit of doubt and thus a re-take, but if a definite attempt to cheat is spotted I would expect the scrum immediately.

 

[thepercy]

Well just for the fun of it, let’s start with the first one that says no delay in taking a Pk. Are you saying that if a player takes more than 60 seconds to kick at goal you have to just keep telling him to kick it until the PK has been taken? We all know that’s not how it works and we award a scrum. Once again, the current law book makes life hard for new refs because of a lack of info

This offense is specifically listed in the Scrum Chart. 19.1(14 or n {why don't these have a number or letter for each box?})

 

[crossref]

Well just for the fun of it, let’s start with the first one that says no delay in taking a Pk. Are you saying that if a player takes more than 60 seconds to kick at goal you have to just keep telling him to kick it until the PK has been taken? We all know that’s not how it works and we award a scrum. Once again, the current law book makes life hard for new refs because of a lack of info

Time off, hurry up.

(Or if you are feeling really jobsworth FK under 9.7d)

You would do the same wouldn't you ? Honestly?

 

[thepercy]

time off, hurry up.

(or if you are feeling really jobsworth fk under 9.7d)

you would do the same wouldn't you ? Honestly?

or