[Law] Penalty Kick After Time.

[didds]

But he didn't want the line out - he said he wanted to end the game?

Didds

 

[crossref]

I didn't say what he wanted ..

 

[Phil E]

It's a silly question, I know, but quite entertaining!

Only for you!

 

[ChuckieB]

It's an oddity, because if he attempted to end the game legally, and ignorantly, by punting to touch, you make him have a line out (as in Lions), but because he did it illegally, he gets another go

What if he actaually wanted the line out ? does he still get a second go, or did he lose his chance? Or do we just have a lineout.


It's a silly question, I know, but quite entertaining!

This bears the hallmarks of the TJP penalty where he failed to visibly kick the ball. When the subsequent claimed try was disallowed, he persuaded Angus Gardner to allow him to take it again.

In this instance I may be inconsistent with what I said my approach would have been then, but I am going to make him take it again just to spite him but ultimately knowing it isn't likely to be material.

Make him look like the chump rather than me!

 

[crossref]

having thought about it a little, I think the best thing is to give a scrum for PK not taken correctly.. and therefore end of the game.

If they were trying to end the game, then I don't want to ask them to take the PK again -- because something could happen - what if they took advantage of the confusion to cross kick the PK to the far winger who scores to secure a BP try and deny a losing point bonus... that would be uncomfortable for the ref !

If they were thinking they would get a lineout, then bad luck you blew it - take the bloody PK properly !

 

[Christy]

having thought about it a little, I think the best thing is to give a scrum for PK not taken correctly.. and therefore end of the game.

hi cross.
do you mean because time is up , you would award scrum & not let them take it because time is up .
this would be ok for time up in open play following knock on / forward pass .

but scrum being awarded , due to a penalty kick not taken properly ,, with time up .
i think the scrum would still be awarded & played out {{ ill have to check this }}

 

[MrQeu]

I don't think you can end a half by means of an illegal move other than a knock-on.

Re: Wayne Bardes and the 22m dropout and an IRB clarification of c. 2010

 

[crossref]

I don't think you can end a half by means of an illegal move other than a knock-on.

Re: Wayne Bardes and the 22m dropout and an IRB clarification of c. 2010

hmm... perhaps... but in that case what would you do ?

(Reminder : time has expired and Red side-foot their PK directly into touch
what would you do if
a) Red are winning and you believe their intention was to end the game
b) Red are losing and you believe that their intention was to have a lineout)

 

[ChuckieB]

hmm... perhaps... but in that case what would you do ?

(Reminder : time has expired and Red side-foot their PK directly into touch
what would you do if
a) Red are winning and you believe their intention was to end the game
b) Red are losing and you believe that their intention was to have a lineout)

...and we have had the debate about trying to force the end of the game/half with a non-straight throw at the line out.

 

[Thunderhorse1986]

hmm... perhaps... but in that case what would you do ?

(Reminder : time has expired and Red side-foot their PK directly into touch
what would you do if
a) Red are winning and you believe their intention was to end the game
b) Red are losing and you believe that their intention was to have a lineout)

Award the scrum to Blue as per the law?

 

[crossref]

Award the scrum to Blue as per the law?

And with the award of a scrum the game ends as per the Law ?

 

[Thunderhorse1986]

And with the award of a scrum the game ends as per the Law ?

Sorry I thought it was implied given the flow of conversation I was following up your query in response to Mr Qeu's post that you coulnd't stop a game before the game had restarted (if that makes sense). So you award the scrum and play the scrum, in the same way you would do if a 22 drop out after time was kick straight to touch. You would restart with the scrum regardless of either team's interntion or preference for ending the game.

I don't know if that is the definitive answer, and until I saw one on this specific subject, I think I would follow the management advice Dickie E suggested (probably as much because it is likely that before this thread started I would never have remembered the sanction/restart needed for a place kick direct to touch!).

 

[Dickie E]

I think I would follow the management advice Dickie E suggested

I like this guy! A lesson to the rest of you :clap:

 

[Rich_NL]

An unsuccessful restart after time is played out until successful - a skew lineout is turned over, a wheeled scrum reset. I'd count crossref's example of an illegally kicked penalty as an unsuccessful restart, and give the scrum.

 

[ChuckieB]

An unsuccessful restart after time is played out until successful - a skew lineout is turned over, a wheeled scrum reset. I'd count crossref's example of an illegally kicked penalty as an unsuccessful restart, and give the scrum.

I do not believe the laws are quite so clear when it comes to determining completion of a lineout after an incorrect throw in.

5(e) &19.7

A reset scrum is deemed an incomplete scrum. Not the same absolute clarification as regards the line out.

Consider a lineout with 2 incorrect throws and the resulting scrum requirement. After time expiry would it not perhaps be correct to end the game after the throws and in that instance before the award of the resulting scrum?

Best award the penalty if it was perhaps in the interests of the team first throwing in to throw it in squint in their attempts to try and end the game. My view that it was likely deliberate!

 

[Rich_NL]

There's a clarification on the lineout, fairly clear:
http://laws.worldrugby.org/?domain=10&year=2016&clarification=1018

 

[ChuckieB]

There's a clarification on the lineout, fairly clear:
http://laws.worldrugby.org/?domain=10&year=2016&clarification=1018

PO asked for a review and made a suggestion.

On the face of it, the committee were of the view that the "above interpretation is correct" without making it clear that their decision was in relation to PO's request and interpretation that the LO is incomplete or the law clarification from 2009 that supported the view that the end of the game should be called and the referee was indeed correct.

"Situation 2
The referee ends the match as there has been an offence that ensures that the ball is dead after the lineout has been completed and therefore the match ends in accordance with Law 5.7 (e)."

They have hardly been clear at all. No surprise there!