Pen try criteria

[Shelflife]

In todays Treviso V Ulster game, Treviso engineered a 2 on 1 on the Ulster 5m line. Ulster 11 shot up in a offside position and killed the overlap.

Ref TC Ulster 11 for killing the overlap but no pen try.

Is the criteria for a Pen try to take the transgressor out of the equation all together (ie beam them up) and make the decision based on that?

 

[Dixie]

Is the criteria for a Pen try to take the transgressor out of the equation all together (ie beam them up) and make the decision based on that?

Yes, that's correct. Presumably the ref has seen enough overlaps butchered in the elite game (God knows, I have) to make him think that even with the transgressor out of the equation, a score was not probable.

 

[Browner]

Is BMUp always the case, or is it only for 'foul' play?

 

[RobLev]

Is BMUp always the case, or is it only for 'foul' play?

The only time the Laws provide for the award of a PT without express reference to foul play is in Law 12.1(f); which is an intentional knock or throw forward - and an intentional offence is foul play (Law 10.2(a)).

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

a score was not probable.

That's certainly true is Twelvetrees is involved!

 

[Browner]

That's certainly true is Twelvetrees is involved!

:nono:

 

[Browner]

The only time the Laws provide for the award of a PT without express reference to foul play is in Law 12.1(f); which is an intentional knock or throw forward - and an intentional offence is foul play (Law 10.2(a)).

So this means: if you subscribe to the view that all offsides 'are' intentional then offsides in such cases as the OP ( assuming that elite players catch the ball probably more often than they butcher it) are always BMUp, presumably?