[Law] Penalty at end of game

[JohnP]

Is it still the case that a game can’t finish on a penalty? And that the team awarded such penalty can kick to touch and take the lineout even if time up?

 

[Ciaran Trainor]

Yes it is

 

[Decorily]

Yes....and in fact the team MUST take the lineout unless the penalty is taken prior to kicking to touch.

 

[Volun-selected]

Sure is, see Law 5.7:
[LAWS]
5.7 A half ends when the ball becomes dead after time has expired unless:

a) A scrum, lineout or restart kick following a try or touchdown, awarded before time expired, has not been completed and the ball has not returned to open play. This includes when the scrum, lineout or restart kick is taken incorrectly.
b) The referee awards a free-kick or penalty.
c) A penalty is kicked directly to touch without the ball first being tapped and without the ball touching another player.
d) A try has been scored, in which case the referee allows time for the conversion to be taken.​

[/LAWS]
Though for d they can always decline the conversion, for the rest they have to play on and either win the ball and play or make it dead. (And watch out for a player who throws the ball into touch - that's another penalty.)

 

[crossref]

Note the Law wording though .. if they kick the PK directly to touch the half has not ended and we have the line out .

If it bounces into touch that's the end of the half

 

[SimonSmith]

As Samoa learned today at half time

 

[TheBFG]

If it bounces into touch that's the end of the half

Fishing, right? You didn't ref at Windsor a few years back in a youth game did you :biggrin:

 

[crossref]

Fishing, right? You didn't ref at Windsor a few years back in a youth game did you :biggrin:

Shrug .. it's just what it says in the Law Book see post 4

No, not me at Windsor but a few years back all pks to touch ended the game, didn't they ?

 

[didds]

we've had this debate before so its a case of blow it how you see it, but I really cannot see the law makers intended to make a distinction between sailing into touch on the full or bouncing first. Their use of "direct" is somewhat ambiguous IMO. Others mileage may vary of course.

didds

 

[Arabcheif]

we've had this debate before so its a case of blow it how you see it, but I really cannot see the law makers intended to make a distinction between sailing into touch on the full or bouncing first. Their use of "direct" is somewhat ambiguous IMO. Others mileage may vary of course.

didds

I'm with you on this one. the definition of directly mentions numerous Laws but not the Law governing end of half/game. I think for this situation, directly just means kicked straight from the hands to in-touch.

 

[crossref]

I'm with you on this one. the definition of directly mentions numerous Laws but not the Law governing end of half/game. I think for this situation, directly just means kicked straight from the hands to in-touch.

Are there any other laws where you interpret "directly" as meaning it doesn't matter if it bounces or not. Or is it just this one

 

[Camquin]

Law 18.8.c

Ball is kicked from a penalty.
A player kicks the ball into touch (either directly or first bouncing in the field of play or hitting a player or the referee).

So as the exception proves the rules in that case directly means without bouncing.
It also means without bouncing in the definition of Directly Caught.

 

[crossref]

Yes that Law clearly uses "directly" in the defined way .. to mean without bouncing

(As do all the laws ! )

 

[UpandUnder]

My take on it is If the ball bounces in play and then goes out, the game has successfully restarted before into touch and therefore time is up

 

[TheBFG]

So when you give a pen and the side kicks for touch and it bounces into touch you give the throw in to the other side?

 

[Arabcheif]

So when you give a pen and the side kicks for touch and it bounces into touch you give the throw in to the other side?

Literally just away to post this. hahaha.

 

[crossref]

So when you give a pen and the side kicks for touch and it bounces into touch you give the throw in to the other side?

No because that Law is different , it actually specifies EITHER directly OR first bouncing, the kicking team get the throw

[LAWS]A player kicks the ball into touch (either directly or first bouncing in the field of play or hitting a player or the referee). Where the ball reaches the touchline. The kicking team[/LAWS].

"Directly", you see, means "without bouncing" and always has meant that

 

[crossref]

So when you give a pen and the side kicks for touch and it bounces into touch you give the throw in to the other side?

No because that Law is different , it actually specifies EITHER directly OR first bouncing, the kicking team get the throw

[LAWS]A player kicks the ball into touch (either directly or first bouncing in the field of play or hitting a player or the referee). Where the ball reaches the touchline. The kicking team[/LAWS].

The case of it hitting a player is also different
For purpose of who throws in doesn't matter
For whether the half is over, it does matter

 

[Camquin]

I found the definition it is under K for Kicked Directly into touch rather than under D.

 

[crossref]

I found the definition it is under K for Kicked Directly into touch rather than under D.

Without bouncing, right ?