[Law] Penalty or restart?

[didds]

Surely this is an ideal case for our old friends "Materiality" and "Contextuality". If there is a potential meaningful gain for Red by awarding the PK for foul play by Blue, then award it. If not, then call the game over following the conversion attempt.

would you do that in the 12th minute though?

didds

 

[Staffs_Ref]

would you do that in the 12th minute though?

didds

The original question specified that it took place in the last play of the game. The materiality and contextuality elements would be entirely different if it happened in the 12th minute.

 

[crossref]

would you do that in the 12th minute though?

didds

but in the 12th minute a PK is always advantageous, so of course you'd award it.

To me, the parallel you might draw is the old one of advancing a FK by 10m, and by doing so taking it outside the 22m (Parallel because again Blue commit an offence, and you punish Red)

In both cases I think the pragmatic answer is the same: don't. Blue committed the offence, you don't disadvantage Red because of it

 

[didds]

so if red are under the cosh at scrums generally and being PKd for simply not being strong enough (but not necessarily unsafe ) does this mean you are never going to award them a scrum because it ultimately punishes them?

didds

 

[OB..]

so if red are under the cosh at scrums generally and being PKd for simply not being strong enough (but not necessarily unsafe ) does this mean you are never going to award them a scrum because it ultimately punishes them?

didds

I remember reading about a rugby league cup match (final?) when the penalty for being offside was a scrum. In the days when league scrums pushed, one side so dominated that every time they lost the ball, they went offside to get it back again.

Tha laws were changed soon after, but the moral is that there is sometimes nothing the ref can do to make the game fairer.

 

[Jacko]

it just means that blue foul play is to blue's advantage - by committing foul play they force red to take a kick and blue gain one more (admittedly very slim) chance. This might be especially the case at young levels where it's not at all impossible to miss touch from the centre point

Point out that he can take the penalty from anywhere behind the mark. If he can't kick it over his own dead ball line from 2 inches away he deserves to lose.

 

[crossref]

Point out that he can take the penalty from anywhere behind the mark. If he can't kick it over his own dead ball line from 2 inches away he deserves to lose.

that's true Jacko - but is it a worthwhile motion to make everyone go through ? It smacks of a pointless ritual that benefits no one.

 

[didds]

Yes. In the same way that currently you have to drag everybody back to take a pointless PK to touch with one already kicked in open play advantage.

In the same way we still play the final 20 minutes of a game where one side is already 50+ points clear.

In the same way we still play lineouts on a day with a howling gale where neither side can manage to throw straight and every lineout ends in a scrum.

What's the point? But we still do it. I see the point being made. But its hardly unique and nobody bats an eyelid at other totally pointless acts.

didds

didds

 

[beckett50]

I think the key part of this, and the information we have yet to receive, is "what was the foul play"? Without knowing this and the severity thereof it is difficult to make a suggestion/recommendation.

 

[Pegleg]

Surely this is an ideal case for our old friends "Materiality" and "Contextuality". If there is a potential meaningful gain for Red by awarding the PK for foul play by Blue, then award it. If not, then call the game over following the conversion attempt.

Material effect does not apply to foul play.

In the grassroots game this is a moot point. The referee controls the watch and thereby time.

Several posters have said that there are often cases where the award, for example, of a scrum will dissadvantage the side awarded the scrum. That's life and not ours to second judge.

I have ended games with seconds to go where the result or bonus points are no longer in question. A really foul day with driving wind / bitter cold etc. Why risk an injury of one phase of play? I'm not "right in law" to do it, but I know how I'd feel if a player badly ripped ligaments when twisting in the mud as we played on.

Context is relevant. You don't always penalise offences a warning may be deemed sufficient. So there are ways to manage such incidents.

So the question another poster has asked several times: What was the foul play / how "bad" was it? IF it warranted a card then it warrants a PK.

 

[Phil E]

Material effect does not apply to foul play.

That's a bold statement.

A player holds back an opponent by pulling his shirt in contravention of 10.4(f), it's way off the play and has no material effect on the play so you note it and let it go, and the opponents go on to score. You have a word with the miscreant to let him know you saw it and not to do it again.

If material effect does not apply to foul play you would have blown this up and prevented a score.

 

[Pegleg]

One word - Advantage!

A fuller answer:

If the incident was that far from play you would not see it, in all probability, so I'm not to sure about your extrapolation. If you did see it play advantage. Make sure the offenders and non offenders know you've "got it". That way the score would stand and you are able to go back to the offender and deal as required.

The basic rule we are given is "Foul play is always material" Similarly at younger levels "Advantage does not apply to foul play". Yes, you never should say "never" or "always", as there is always an exception to the rule. But it is a good starting point.

I've watched too many games (at semi pro level) where referees have "managed" fould play with a chat "because it is not material" only to see the inevitable punch up as players get frustrated. Players, and supporters get frustrated at my level when they experience / see foul play that I don't give because I don't see it they get frustrated. So when they know you've seen it and still "do nothing about it" - except a "Don't do it again, please".

 

[Phil E]

One word - Advantage!

But I could give that answer to all material effect play....so materiality would never exist!

Not all foul play is foul.

 

[Pegleg]

If there is no advantage then there is no advantage. So no you cannot apply (correctly) advantage in all such instances. Advantage must be either tactical or territorial. I'd expect to be marked down if I played advantage where there really was none.

Advantage and material effect are two vert different concepts. They both can help facilitate a better game but they are not the same at all. You cant go back after ME you can after advantage. BIG difference.

Foul play (IF SEEN) is either dealt with by advantage or by sanction, if no advantage is there. As I said in my last post, care always with sweeping comments like that BUT there has to be extreemely good reasons not to deal with foul play "formally". By far the exception rather than the rule.

 

[BigClothesSir]

As far as I'm concerned there's "always time for a penalty".

End of thread.