Penalty Kick

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,315
Post Likes
1,964
A place kick at goal that ends up in touch because eg wind is not a kick for touch. That would defy a clear reading of the law as written. The "for" carries the strong implication of intent.
how do you know it wasnt a disguised kick for touch?
Or a kick towards touch for a chasing winger having got the oppo thinking its a goal attempt. That then accidentally ends up in touch.

Seems to me that there is an awful lot of assumptions being made because #10 points at the posts
 

Jz558


Referees in England
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
420
Post Likes
162
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
how do you know it wasnt a disguised kick for touch?
Or a kick towards touch for a chasing winger having got the oppo thinking its a goal attempt. That then accidentally ends up in touch.

Seems to me that there is an awful lot of assumptions being made because #10 points at the posts
But what would be the point of trying to disguise a place kick to touch or to the winger? All teams know that a failed kick at goal that stays in field is play on so you're hardly likely to catch anyone out. Punting is just as effective and has the added bonus of giving you the throw at the lineout if you make touch.
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,315
Post Likes
1,964
Ive already explained why some warped tactical decision might do it. In the quote you quoted :)
 

Marc Wakeham


Referees in Wales
Joined
Jan 5, 2018
Messages
3,067
Post Likes
1,029
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
I disagree, a place kick can remain of fop and play can continue. the only ban is that it cannot go to touch. I would also argue touch in goal and over dbl is also okay.
Obviously any missed penalty might stay in the FOP. However, this has nothing to do with the point.
 

Marc Wakeham


Referees in Wales
Joined
Jan 5, 2018
Messages
3,067
Post Likes
1,029
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
how do you know it wasnt a disguised kick for touch?
Or a kick towards touch for a chasing winger having got the oppo thinking its a goal attempt. That then accidentally ends up in touch.

Seems to me that there is an awful lot of assumptions being made because #10 points at the posts
The referee has to make a judgement call. On the basis that I've not seen a kick for the posts go into touch in 20 years of reffing and over 50 years in the game I'll not lose too much sleep over the scenario.
To be completely honest It would have to be a very good team of actors to pull it off.

Are you after Choppers crown?
 
Last edited:

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,315
Post Likes
1,964
nah. just playing devils advocate in what I genuinely perceive is a level of naivety that because kicker K points at the posts anything that happens that isn't a goal/near miss _MUST_ be an accident.

I HAVE seen a "kick at goal place kick" kicked for a winger to chase. Twice. Though neither time it ended in touch. And it had to be a winger to chase ploy becasue that is exactly what happened - short side wingers dont chase down the touchline for kicks at goal.
(no, not one of my teams. My guys and girls weren't skillful enough!)
 

Marc Wakeham


Referees in Wales
Joined
Jan 5, 2018
Messages
3,067
Post Likes
1,029
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
nah. just playing devils advocate in what I genuinely perceive is a level of naivety that because kicker K points at the posts anything that happens that isn't a goal/near miss _MUST_ be an accident.

I HAVE seen a "kick at goal place kick" kicked for a winger to chase. Twice. Though neither time it ended in touch. And it had to be a winger to chase ploy becasue that is exactly what happened - short side wingers dont chase down the touchline for kicks at goal.
(no, not one of my teams. My guys and girls weren't skillful enough!)
If I saw a "kick for goal" amazingly fielded by a winger my alarm bells would be ringing. I have once seen a missed kick at goal result in a try. But the kick missed by inches landing between the posts amongst a group of defenders who were guilty of ball watching our centre chasing the kick was fortunat to be the first to the ball. The kicker was a very good kicker woho was expected to kick the goal. But the miss was not impossible. It was i nthe first quater of an expected tough cup semi final with both teams ladn wwith interntionals and no was wwould the kicker of deliberately missed.
Clearly your "knew" the kick was deliberate. Did the ref?
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,315
Post Likes
1,964
If I saw a "kick for goal" amazingly fielded by a winger my alarm bells would be ringing. I have once seen a missed kick at goal result in a try. But the kick missed by inches landing between the posts amongst a group of defenders who were guilty of ball watching our centre chasing the kick was fortunat to be the first to the ball. The kicker was a very good kicker woho was expected to kick the goal. But the miss was not impossible. It was i nthe first quater of an expected tough cup semi final with both teams ladn wwith interntionals and no was wwould the kicker of deliberately missed.
Clearly your "knew" the kick was deliberate. Did the ref?

wrt bells ringing - I'd agree. I'm not sure without the ball going into touch what in reality could be done/called? aside from that ungentlemanly conduct thing but that's not a hill I'd die on and I'm really only guessing here, as after all its just a deception albeit one that has some innocent connivance of the ref (i.e. indicates posts)

wrt try scored by a narrow miss & defensive stupidity - yup, I suspect we've all seen that happen too :)

wrt "did the ref" ? ISTR one time he shouted "play on", the other time he said nothing. Certainly on neither occasion did the ref suggest himself that he considered anything untoward.

FTR ISTR one was a score, albeit after another couple of phases, the other was so poorly executed the bouncing rolling ball was fielded by the defending team.
 

BikingBud


Referees in England
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
789
Post Likes
276
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
nah. just playing devils advocate in what I genuinely perceive is a level of naivety that because kicker K points at the posts anything that happens that isn't a goal/near miss _MUST_ be an accident.

I HAVE seen a "kick at goal place kick" kicked for a winger to chase. Twice. Though neither time it ended in touch. And it had to be a winger to chase ploy becasue that is exactly what happened - short side wingers dont chase down the touchline for kicks at goal.
(no, not one of my teams. My guys and girls weren't skillful enough!)
Why does it need to be advised as a kick at goal
20 - Penalty and free-kick:

Taking a penalty or free-kick



5. A penalty or free-kick must be taken without delay.
6. Any player from the non-offending team may take it, other than for a free-kick awarded for a mark.
7. The kicker must use the ball that was in play unless the referee decides it is defective.
8. The kicker may punt, drop-kick or place-kick (other than for touch) the ball.
Sanction: Scrum.
In my reading the kick can be placed and kicked, if it goes into touch then sanction applies (SCRUM) but if the winger or any other player retrieves the ball in the field of play and scores 👏👏

If you elect to kick at goal a different set of rules apply:
8 - Scoring
Penalty goal
18. A penalty goal can be scored only from a penalty.
19. The kicking team must indicate their intention to kick for goal without delay.
20. If the team indicates to the referee the intention to kick at goal, they must kick at goal. The intention to kick can be communicated to the referee or signalled by the arrival of the kicking tee or sand, or when the player makes a mark on the ground.
21. The kick must be taken within 60 seconds (playing time) from the time the team indicated their intention to do so, even if the ball rolls over and has to be placed again. Sanction: Kick is disallowed and a scrum is awarded.
22. If the kicker indicates to the referee the intent to kick at goal, the opposing team must stand still with their hands by their sides from the time the kicker starts to approach to kick until the ball is kicked.
23. If the kicker has not indicated an intention to kick at goal but takes a drop-kick and scores a goal, the goal stands.
24. The kicker places the ball directly on the ground or on sand, sawdust, or a kicking tee. The kicker may be assisted by a placer. Nothing else may be used to assist the kicker. Sanction: Scrum.
25. Any player who intentionally touches the ball in an attempt to prevent a penalty goal being scored is illegally touching the ball.
26. A defending player must not shout during a penalty kick at goal.
27. If the opposing team infringes while the kick is being taken but the kick at goal is successful, the goal stands and a further penalty is not awarded. If the kick is unsuccessful, the non-offending team is awarded a penalty 10 metres in front of the original mark.
Sanction: Penalty.
So no need to conflate the 2, Captain calls "Shot please sir" clock starts and kicker tries to bisect the posts, if they fail no issue. Is ball dead or still alive, restart or play on as required.

Note also 23, you can take a drop kick at goal and score without advising any intent, sharper players may take this option as a chance and with a chasing winger if defence is poorly organised as they are waiting for and expecting notification. 👏 👏

If the kicker places the ball on the floor, no kicking tee or sand present, you may wish to confirm the intent but it appears to be perfectly acceptable to place kick down the pitch, and only demands a sanction if the ball goes into touch.

As with most issues a lack of understanding by the players of the Laws brings about some bizarre behaviour. Ruckgate anyone?
 
Last edited:

Dickie E


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
14,343
Post Likes
2,302
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
You may be aware of this, but the player has no obligation to tell you as a ref, what he is going to do UNLESS he/she plans to kick at goal.

That's not quite right. A kicker can have a shot without telling the ref (obviously a drop kick). What the kicker can't do is nominate a shot at goal then change his/her mind
 

SimonSmith


Referees in Australia
Staff member
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
9,481
Post Likes
1,619
nah. just playing devils advocate in what I genuinely perceive is a level of naivety that because kicker K points at the posts anything that happens that isn't a goal/near miss _MUST_ be an accident.

I HAVE seen a "kick at goal place kick" kicked for a winger to chase. Twice. Though neither time it ended in touch. And it had to be a winger to chase ploy becasue that is exactly what happened - short side wingers dont chase down the touchline for kicks at goal.
(no, not one of my teams. My guys and girls weren't skillful enough!)
Whoah there a second Didds.

I might be alone, but I watch the mechanics of the kicker, and it's easy to tell a genuine kick at the sticks from one that isn't.
And to go back to the OP premise, it's a gust of wind that takes it. That's easy to spot as well.

🚁
 

Marc Wakeham


Referees in Wales
Joined
Jan 5, 2018
Messages
3,067
Post Likes
1,029
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
That's not quite right. A kicker can have a shot without telling the ref (obviously a drop kick). What the kicker can't do is nominate a shot at goal then change his/her mind
Also Off the floor is a place kick. That can ONLY be for goal. So that in itself would be an indication of a goal attempt.

Another point is that if we get an indication of a kick at goal we sent the TJs / aRs behind the posts So, they are no longer placed to mark the line of touch. So, there is a pratical reason for this law as well as the simple prohibiting of the place kick.
 
Last edited:

Jz558


Referees in England
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
420
Post Likes
162
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
Why does it need to be advised as a kick at goal

In my reading the kick can be placed and kicked, if it goes into touch then sanction applies (SCRUM) but if the winger or any other player retrieves the ball in the field of play and scores 👏👏

If you elect to kick at goal a different set of rules apply:
Except the laws says the intention to kick at goal can be indicated by the arrival of the kicking tee etc etc... so you would actually have to say to the ref, before the signal was given, we arent kicking for goal but I am taking a place kick. Whilst I'm sure all sorts of intrigue is possible, I cant really get away from the fact that a lot of effort would have to go in when much simpler and better options (like a punt) are available.
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,315
Post Likes
1,964
Whoah there a second Didds.

I might be alone, but I watch the mechanics of the kicker, and it's easy to tell a genuine kick at the sticks from one that isn't.
And to go back to the OP premise, it's a gust of wind that takes it. That's easy to spot as well.

🚁
fair enough and Id agree.
So in the two times I've seen it done, why wasnt it called by the ref?
rhetorical questions obviously as we wont/cant know. But clearly there is a potential use of subterfuge that may well not actually get picked up on.
and it just comes back to wadr the naivety that an indicated kick at goal will be a kick at goal. That's all.
let alone such a place kick ending up in touch (howsoever ending there) and somehow despite place kicks not permitted for kicks to touch, clearly being accepted as such. Which makes no sense to me at all :)
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,315
Post Likes
1,964
Except the laws says the intention to kick at goal can be indicated by the arrival of the kicking tee etc etc... so you would actually have to say to the ref, before the signal was given, we arent kicking for goal but I am taking a place kick. Whilst I'm sure all sorts of intrigue is possible, I cant really get away from the fact that a lot of effort would have to go in when much simpler and better options (like a punt) are available.
a punt cannot be at goal. so the subterfuge of pretending that is the case to maybe distract the oppo is lost.

You did all read what i wrote yesterday ?
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,315
Post Likes
1,964
Also Off the follr is a place kick. That canONLY be for goal. So that in itself would be an indication of a goal attempt.
yes. I agree.

But as we see in this thread that are some that would still allow touch from it
 

Not Kurt Weaver


Referees in America
Joined
Sep 11, 2008
Messages
2,311
Post Likes
162
Also Off the follr is a place kick. That canONLY be for goal. So that in itself would be an indication of a goal attempt.

Another point is that if we get an indication ofa kick atgoal we sent the TJs / aRs behind the posts So, they ar no longer placed to mark the line of touch. o there is a pratical reason for this law as well as the simple prohibiting of the place kick.
How is follr meant to be typed? Oh, floor (my edit). See my next post , Yes off the floor is a place kick, but I give 2 examples in next post where it does not have to be a goal kick.
 
Last edited:

Not Kurt Weaver


Referees in America
Joined
Sep 11, 2008
Messages
2,311
Post Likes
162
That canONLY be for goal. So that in itself would be an indication of a goal attempt.
Simply placing the ball on the ground is not an indication of shot at goal. It would be practical to have it as such, but it is not in the scoring law.
A ball could be place either vertically or with the long axis of the ball horizontally. For a place kick at goal, the law requires sand, tee, placer, or a making mark or also a indicaction from non-offending. Nothing more is mentioned.

This above actually is practical as the horizontally placed meets the definition of a place kick, and also allow a slight kick forward a visible distance from the mark, and then played by kicker or teammate instead of a punt quick tap.

I do believe you would allow a horizontally placed ball to be kicked forward and played by kicking team, no law is against it. The same would be true of a vertically placed (albeit briefly) ball with none of the indications , no law is against it. The is also no law against how far these two types kicks can go or direction. However, these two types of kicks described above cannot go "for" touch and thus "to" touch.
 
Last edited:

Not Kurt Weaver


Referees in America
Joined
Sep 11, 2008
Messages
2,311
Post Likes
162
That's not quite right. A kicker can have a shot without telling the ref (obviously a drop kick). What the kicker can't do is nominate a shot at goal then change his/her mind
his/her?, you forgot they
 

BikingBud


Referees in England
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
789
Post Likes
276
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
Except the laws says the intention to kick at goal can be indicated by the arrival of the kicking tee etc etc... so you would actually have to say to the ref, before the signal was given, we arent kicking for goal but I am taking a place kick. Whilst I'm sure all sorts of intrigue is possible, I cant really get away from the fact that a lot of effort would have to go in when much simpler and better options (like a punt) are available.
That's why I wrote the post as I did, the two laws are different.

If you want to kick downfield from the floor so be it, crack on but if it goes into touch there is a sanction.

Law 20 Penalty and Free kick:
8. The kicker may punt, drop-kick or place-kick (other than for touch) the ball.

No tees allowed unless for conversion or penalty attempt hence the presence of a tee acts as the marker or intent. But if the kicker digs a hole Paul Thorburn style, you might ask if the are taking a shot but one cannot assume.

If you nominate kick at goal and it goes into touch then it's defenders throw in, simples

Apart from the overcomplicating that people here are introducing.
 
Top