Penalty advantage - I don't see the point of it

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

:redface: = embarrassed

 

[Davet]

I would not say an immediate advantage, but certainly one that arises fairly quickly.

I go back to my original question which you answered no to, though your subsequent comments seem to contradict that.

Actually I'll rephrase it slightly. How long would you play on, waiting for some advantage to actually appear probable before you decide that if you let things drag on any longer it will just be silly?

I suspect that you will say you stop things when no advantage looks likely.

All I am saying is read the game and avoid boring everyone with pointless running around in the name of advantage. If it's not going to come then let's award the PK and get on with the game.

 

[Account Deleted]

Advantage is one of those things that differentiates the best refs from the rest. SO of us "think" our long advantages are helping the "spectacle". Why? because we read the game poorly. The better guys can see, more often than not, that there is no real likelihood of a REAL advantage so PK and move on.

 

[DrSTU]

OK, a view point from the other side of the pond. Personally I think DaveT is spot on with this, you have to know when to let the play breathe and when not to. For example, attacking team have 3 men running towards the 22, ball passed and the recipient knocks it on. The only person at home for the defence is the full back and he gathers the ball only to find 3 attackers bearing down on him 15m from his own goal line. We all know what going to happen next, the full back gets mullered, the attackers try and win the ball and we come back for the KO. Why waste time? there's no advantage, blow the whistle, restart the game with a scrum and the original defending team are now free to exercise their options.

One thing we get taught over here is that you say the offence and take a 3 count before saying advantage (if it looks like it's on); this way you cut down on a lot of wasted time for playing advantage that was never going to go anywhere (plus we get marked on percentage of advantage gained).

 

[B52 REF]

davet- if you think time wasted= lots of rugby being played but going nowwhere i suppose all englands recent efforts= time wasting so all pingable under 10.2 b ?/ unless of course you then play advantage to the oppo but go straight to PK as soon as they attempt pick and drives, fruitless multiple rucks (time wasting in your book?). of course if you think they are doing that intentionally waiting for a break/mistake/pk (advantage)(which they are) you could always reverse the PK for intentionally infringing 10.2 b :smile:

 

[Davet]

B52

I appreciate the humour, though you seem not to understand the point. Just because they can't actually do anything with the ball anyway isn't the point.



Red offend - Award PK (creation of a fixed point)
or play advantage. No advantage. Bring play back for PK (ie return to previous fixed point)

If the advantage was long then what you have done is simply brought the game to point we would have been at had you played no advantage, and the time taken up by advanatge is irrecoverable, and effectively has been cut from the game.

The ref needs to balance the concept of keeping a game going with not wasting everybody's time.

Which means when there is a realistic opportunity to play advantage then by all means do so. But when there is not, or it comes to nothing, then don't keep flogging the horse, it's dead.

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

Which means when there is a realistic opportunity to play advantage then by all means do so. But when there is not, or it comes to nothing, then don't keep flogging the horse, it's dead.

Is that not what we do?

 

[Jacko]

For example, attacking team have 3 men running towards the 22, ball passed and the recipient knocks it on. The only person at home for the defence is the full back and he gathers the ball only to find 3 attackers bearing down on him 15m from his own goal line. We all know what going to happen next, the full back gets mullered, the attackers try and win the ball and we come back for the KO. Why waste time? there's no advantage, blow the whistle, restart the game with a scrum and the original defending team are now free to exercise their options.

I see where you're coming from DrSTU, but you appear to have overlooked the fact that it's always funny to see the full back get creamed in this way.

 

[Davet]

Is that not what we do?

One would hope so, but it may be that some feel that they shoud keep playing advantage until something happens, perhaps more in hope than expectation.

 

[B52 REF]

davet-o.k we agree we allow a reasonable time for advantage to accrue -"reasonable" may be v.short if blindingly obvious no advantage coming -may be longer if team making some progress even if a bit sideways/multiple phase but still with a chance of accruing a "clear and real" advantage , where we disagree (i agree with na) is that "reasonable" period is not "time wasted" as it is still rugby.

 

[DrSTU]

I would never let that happen :biggrin:

I see where you're coming from DrSTU, but you appear to have overlooked the fact that it's always funny to see the full back get creamed in this way.

 

[OB..]

davet-o.k we agree we allow a reasonable time for advantage to accrue -"reasonable" may be v.short if blindingly obvious no advantage coming -may be longer if team making some progress even if a bit sideways/multiple phase but still with a chance of accruing a "clear and real" advantage , where we disagree (i agree with na) is that "reasonable" period is not "time wasted" as it is still rugby.

If the length of advantage played is excessive, then the extra time has been wasted. Up to a reasonable amount, it is not wasted. "Reasonable" is not a precise unit of measurement, but everybody recognises the extremes.

 

[Davet]

If you are driving from a to c, but at b you take a detour that adds several miles to you journey whilst eventually bringing you back to b -from where you continue your journey then I would suggest the detour has proved a waste of time.

It had potential when you embarked on it, but ended up as a waste.

The trick is to work out when the potential drops to less than reasonable.

 

[Jacko]

If you are driving from a to c, but at b you take a detour that adds several miles to you journey whilst eventually bringing you back to b -from where you continue your journey then I would suggest the detour has proved a waste of time.

It had potential when you embarked on it, but ended up as a waste.

The trick is to work out when the potential drops to less than reasonable.

I think the point that some people are making is that if the scenery on the detour was good, it wasn't a waste after all.

 

[OB..]

If you are driving from a to c, but at b you take a detour that adds several miles to you journey whilst eventually bringing you back to b -from where you continue your journey then I would suggest the detour has proved a waste of time.

It had potential when you embarked on it, but ended up as a waste.

Exactly what happened to me when I came across a flooded road on the way to a match. The detour was badly marked. I arrived about 20 minutes late. :frown::redface:

 

[Davet]

Whether the rugby is attractive or not it effectively never happened as far as the game is concerned.

You point would only be valid if rugby was some form of entertainment for the spectators, WWF style perhaps, rather than a competitive game.

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

I think you'll all find it's a diversion.

 

[Phil E]

If you are driving from a to c, but at b you take a detour that adds several miles to you journey whilst eventually bringing you back to b -from where you continue your journey then I would suggest the detour has proved a waste of time.

If I was going to c, I wouldn't start from a :booty: