In the NZ v SA game there was an incident that I think deserves some discussion.
Owens appeared to play advantage for a forward pass from Green even after another offence from Black.
https://youtu.be/GTO8dBsRMBE?t=1060
It seems to me that he accepted there was a tackle without the ball but played advantage for the previous knock on. To follow the law he should have either come back for the scrum as the first offence, or penalized the early tackle as foul play. Just playing on wasn't really an option because there was an offence by both teams.
Interesting question whether it should have been PK to Boks or Scrum to AB's. While technically foul play" it was pretty innocuous; and really just occurred because the Saffer had overrun the pass. If the pass had been decent Cane's timing would have been perfect.
I kind of suspect that Owen's explanation was more of post facto explanation rather than what actually happened (i.e. he didn't see the early tackle, but felt he had to defend his miss in a plausible way). He has form for this - In Dunedin a few weeks ago he implausibly claimed he awarded a PK rather than a try as a post facto explanation.
(As an aside, actually I think the first offence is Green 1 playing the ball in an offside position at the ruck, but that doesn't appear to be something that is enforced at any level anymore).
Owens appeared to play advantage for a forward pass from Green even after another offence from Black.
https://youtu.be/GTO8dBsRMBE?t=1060
- offload from Green 1 leading to the break was definitely forward
- Owens got a call from his AR about it (you can see him reaching for his earpiece) and then he calls "advantage over for the forward pass".
- At the next stoppage, Owens explains "the pass was forward before the tackle without the ball over there".
It seems to me that he accepted there was a tackle without the ball but played advantage for the previous knock on. To follow the law he should have either come back for the scrum as the first offence, or penalized the early tackle as foul play. Just playing on wasn't really an option because there was an offence by both teams.
Interesting question whether it should have been PK to Boks or Scrum to AB's. While technically foul play" it was pretty innocuous; and really just occurred because the Saffer had overrun the pass. If the pass had been decent Cane's timing would have been perfect.
I kind of suspect that Owen's explanation was more of post facto explanation rather than what actually happened (i.e. he didn't see the early tackle, but felt he had to defend his miss in a plausible way). He has form for this - In Dunedin a few weeks ago he implausibly claimed he awarded a PK rather than a try as a post facto explanation.
(As an aside, actually I think the first offence is Green 1 playing the ball in an offside position at the ruck, but that doesn't appear to be something that is enforced at any level anymore).
