Intention to Kick at Goal

[Donal1988]

Penalty Kick is awarded. The offending player and his team retreat back 10m. Red #10 picks up the ball and makes a mark on the ground using his heel. Green team turn their back assuming he is kicking at goal. Red#10 taps the ball and runs off down the wing.

Do you:

a) Play on; Green shouldn't have turned their back
b) Call him back and ask him to clearly clarify his intentions to avoid confusion
c) Call him back and award a scrum to Green; he took a tap and hasn't kicked at goal

We had a good debate about this last night at our referee meeting.

 

[crossref]

play on :smile: good for him

but there is a shady line, scratching a mark on the ground is an OK subterfuge, many players will make a mark to kick through if they are just going for touch - and indeed no one kicks a ball from a mound of earth anymore anyway. If, however, a kicking tee were to appear on the pitch (say) I would count that as indicating an intention to kick

 

[OB..]

[LAWS]Law 21.4 (b) [...]The intention to kick is signalled by the arrival of the kicking tee or sand or when the player makes a mark on the ground.[/LAWS]This case sounds borderline to me. Yes, players do sometimes make a small mark when kicking to touch. Yes, the defenders should wait for a signal from the referee before assuming a kick at goal. However if the player looks to be making preparations for a kick at goal, that for me is a step too far. The referee should enquire at that point.

 

[Donal1988]

OB that law was the subject of the debate last night. My own personal take on it:

- If I see the player weighing up him options, I'll manage him before hand and clarify.
- If he makes the mark as described and then taps and runs, I'll award the scrum.

 

[crossref]

[LAWS]Law 21.4 (b) [...]The intention to kick is signalled by the arrival of the kicking tee or sand or when the player makes a mark on the ground.[/LAWS]This case sounds borderline to me. Yes, players do sometimes make a small mark when kicking to touch. Yes, the defenders should wait for a signal from the referee before assuming a kick at goal. However if the player looks to be making preparations for a kick at goal, that for me is a step too far. The referee should enquire at that point.

but that law is antiquated - in the modern game from pros to u13s you never see a kicker build a mound to kick from.

- making a mark on the ground preceding a kick at posts -- never see it
- making a mark on the ground preceding a kick for touch -- see it frequently

I reckon the kicker was misleading them into thinking he would kick for the corner, and then tapping. Which I have seen done, and which is clearly legal.

 

[OB..]

but that law is antiquated - in the modern game from pros to u13s you never see a kicker build a mound to kick from.

Most times, yes, but I quite often see teams who have lost the tee, or forgotten it etc.

I reckon the kicker was misleading them into thinking he would kick for the corner, and then tapping. Which I have seen done, and which is clearly legal.

Nothing clear about it at all. It depends on the circumstances, but I agree with Donal that the referee should manage it.

 

[Donal1988]

Within kicking range the need to manage it becomes more intense.

I refereed a match last weekend where 5m from goal line a flyhalf acted as though he meant to kick to touch, weighed it up for about 4-5 seconds and then ran it. No problems with that.

This was a bit differnet.

 

[crossref]

the Laws on Intention to Kick certainly need to be revised anyway

Law 21.4 (b) actually refers to timing and the minute

[LAWS]21.4
(b) No delay. If a kicker indicates to the referee the intention to kick a penalty kick at goal, the kick must be taken within one minute from the time the player indicates the intention to kick at goal. The intention to kick is signalled by the arrival of the kicking tee or sand, or when the player makes a mark on the ground. The player must complete the kick within one minute even if the ball rolls over and has to be placed again. If the one minute is exceeded, the kick is disallowed, a scrum is ordered at the place of the mark and the opponents throw in the ball. For any other type of kick, the kick must be taken without undue delay.[/LAWS]

If that was all there was to it, a player could tell the referee he was going for posts, and then change is mind -- because according to 21.4(b) there has been no mark, sand or tee yet, so he hasn't actually signalled.

Well of course that's not the case. Although for time purposes he hasn't 'signalled' and therefore the minute isn't running, but for changing his mind purposes, once he has told the ref of course he can't change his mind.

This is because changing his mind isnt' covered by 21.4(b) it is covered by by 21.5 (b).

[LAWS]21.5 SCORING A GOAL FROM A PENALTY KICK

(a) A penalty goal can be scored from a penalty kick.
(b) If the kicker indicates to the referee the intention to kick at goal, the kicker must kick at goal. Once the kicker has made the intention clear, there can be no change of the intention. The referee may enquire of the kicker as to the intention.[/LAWS]

In this Law signalling intention isn't defined... So it's common sense know it when he does it.. And in that context I would argue that making a mark on the ground doesn't -- on its own -- commit you.

 

[Na Madrai]

My take on this situation for what it's worth, is that until the player taking the kick confirms to the referee his intention to kick at goal, he is not going to do so. This instruction may be verbal, by calling for a tee or by building a dirt kicking tee. When he confirms his intention, I will notify the opposition by instructing my TJs/ARs by pointing at the posts. If I fail to do so, he cannot kick at goal and once I have indicated, he must go for goal. Seems to work

NM.

 

[OB..]

the Laws on Intention to Kick certainly need to be revised anyway

Yes indeed, and we have discussed that before.

 

[crossref]

so I would say that scratching the ground (on it's own)
- doesn't indicate an 21.5(b) irrevocable intention
- but does in theory start the 21.4(b) clock.

Although even there in real life it probably wouldn't even do that...

consider

1 - I indicate PK red
2 - capt says 'we'll have shot'
3 - I signal the TJs and make a mark on the ground
4 - the ball is som metres away where the oppo left it, so the 10, before he fetches it, he enlarges my mark a bit so that he doesn't misplace it
5 - the 10 returns with ball and waits at the mark for the tee
6 - tee arrives
7 - 10 takes kick

In that every-day entirely normal sequence

- the moment he is committed to the kick is (2)
- the one minute countdown starts at (6)

It would be a pedantic ref indeed who started his 1 minute countdown at (4) in accordance with 21.4(b)

 

[MrQeu]

This reminds me of NZ vs Fra on RWC group stage. All the forwards were near the SH even the FR were binding as if a scrum was to happen,so the kiwis thought the intention of the french was to have a scrum after the PK, but the SH took a QT and, voilà, try on the wing.

I don't think that making a mark nor any other action except from asking for tee or telling the ref his intention should be taken into stone for the defensive team.

 

[Davet]

Law says minute starts when intention to kick at goal is signalled.

Telling the ref is a clear an unambiguous signal.

Law also helps avoid misleading opponents by stating other things that are also to deemed as declaring an intent to kick, sort of default position.

Personally I would start the minute from when the intent to kick is signalled, however it is signalled. However I would also start the minute for the conversion kick from the moment the try is scored. Encourage them to get a shuffle on.

But I recognise this approach is unconventional - pity.

 

[Simon Thomas]

Until the last few seasons, it was best practice foir most players to check with the referee where the 'mark' is exactly and then make a mark theirself (as the kicker) to confirm it with the referee - I did this my whole playing career (ending 2000). This avoids the whole issue of "stealing" yardage at the kick, not taken from the mark, etc.

Either a heel mark or a stud rake was the way most players did it.

A PK at posts, is usually preceeded by a skipper or kicker saying "posts please sir", or "shot please sir", and then the referee signals to the TJs / ARs, or the tee arrives !

I totally agree that the Law as written is out of date and needs amendment.

In this case I suspect (b) is the best management choice.

 

[crossref]

Law says minute starts when intention to kick at goal is signalled.

Telling the ref is a clear an unambiguous signal.

Law also helps avoid misleading opponents by stating other things that are also to deemed as declaring an intent to kick, sort of default position.

Personally I would start the minute from when the intent to kick is signalled, however it is signalled. However I would also start the minute for the conversion kick from the moment the try is scored. Encourage them to get a shuffle on.

But I recognise this approach is unconventional - pity.

it's not just unconventional - - its actually wrong though

-- there was a a law clarification to answer the question of exactly when the minute starts, and the answer was the arrival of the tee, or sand, or making mark on ground.
-- that law clarification was subsequently imported into the Laws, but clumsily, giving us two different moments both labelled 'intention to kick'

In terms of not being able to change your mind, there is no definition, we must use common sense and the ordinary meaning of the word

In terms of when the minute starts - it's when the tee gets there.

I guess this was to stop people hiding tees...

How long does a team have to get the tee there? that's a manage it question, and you might well stop the clock.

 

[Ciaran Trainor]

Play on, good try

 

[Davet]

Crossref

Yes I know.

Hence the euphemism.

But I think the law would be better if it was as I would prefer it.

Not sure who is hiding tees, but frankly I don't care. The teams should have them to hand and be aware if where they are, if not then incompetence deserves no protection.

 

[OB..]

I still prefer the old law: 40 seconds of clock time, then time off. If you take too long, it is time-wasting.

The change was intended to speed things up but I don't think it does.

 

[crossref]

I still prefer the old law: 40 seconds of clock time, then time off. If you take too long, it is time-wasting.

The change was intended to speed things up but I don't think it does.

I agree with that. Indeed there are now scenarios which amount to legalised time wasting. Eg conversion under the posts with 75s to go. 15s to fetch the tee then you can take the whole minute to line up the easy conversion....

 

[Dixie]

but that law is antiquated - in the modern game from pros to u13s you never see a kicker build a mound to kick from.

consider

1 - I indicate PK red
2 - capt says 'we'll have shot'
3 - I signal the TJs and make a mark on the ground
4 - the ball is som metres away where the oppo left it, so the 10, before he fetches it, he enlarges my mark a bit so that he doesn't misplace it
5 - the 10 returns with ball and waits at the mark for the tee
6 - tee arrives
7 - 10 takes kick

In that every-day entirely normal sequence

- the moment he is committed to the kick is (2)
- the one minute countdown starts at (6)

It would be a pedantic ref indeed who started his 1 minute countdown at (4) in accordance with 21.4(b)

I am that pedantic ref. I am aware of nothing in law or clarification that would say I am wrong.

it's not just unconventional - - its actually wrong though

-- there was a a law clarification to answer the question of exactly when the minute starts, and the answer was the arrival of the tee, or sand, or making mark on ground.

That clarification must have preceded 2002, as it does not appear on the iRB website - or at least, not in relation to Law 21. What we now have, nine years later, is a clear statemetn in Law 9.B.1 that the minute starts when the kicker makes a mark on the ground as an indication of his intention to kick. IMO, the fact that the drafter didn't include as an "indication to kick" the situation in which the kicker says "I'm going to kick" does not mean that this statement is NOT, in fact, an indication to kick. I have reffed on plenty of rutted pitches in midwinter, where it is perfectly possible for the kicker to upend a ball in one of the myriad pockmarks on the pitch. If he says to the ref: "I'm kicking for goal, ref", and then tees up his ball on a pre-existing pockmark, lines it up for 57 seconds and then a tee comes on, it would be a foolish ref indeed who allowed a further minute with the oppo reminding him of the minute.

IMO, the intention to kick is indicated by the verbalisation of that intention. I offer as support Ruling 3 of 2005, 2which is actually very much on point for Donal's original post:

Request
The FPR has requested a ruling with regard Law 21-Penalty & Free Kicks

Black team are penalised for a tackle infringement 30 metres from their goal line; Blue team opt for a kick at goal, placing the ball on the mark and informing the referee as to this intention. Black team gather behind their goal posts. Blue team kicks (chips) the ball forward a few metres from the mark, allowing for an on-side team member to gather the ball and run unhindered across the goal line to score a try.

1. Law 21.5(b) states that ‘If the kicker indicates to the referee the intention to kick at goal, the kicker must kick at goal. Once the kicker has made the intention clear, there can be no change of the intention. The referee may enquire of the kicker as to the intention.’ Does this mean that the abovementioned scenario is illegal, and if so how would the referee restart the match? Can the interpretation of Law 21.5(b) be that once the kicker has made his intention to kick at goal clear, he may not then change his intention by then kicking to touch, taking a tap kick and passing or running with the ball himself? If this is correct then the abovementioned situation is legal and the referee should award a try.

Ruling of the Designated Members of the Rugby Committee
The abovementioned scenario is illegal, and the referee would order a scrum at the place of the original penalty, with the put in to the black team.

it is hard to see why a verbalisation is an indication of the intention for the purpose of fixing the type of kick, but not for fixing the timeframe within which that kick must take place.