Penalty try or regular try, which should be given?

[iansimcox]

So playing on the wing today, our centre grubbed the ball through, I ran on dribbled it in goal and then got a shove in the back from a defender. Managed to get a finger on the ball and ground it, and the ref came over and gave the try, saying "Don't worry, it would have been a penalty try had you not grounded it anyway".

Well damn, I thought, I'd rather have had the penalty try under the posts for the easy 7 pts rather than this one in the corner, giving my kicker a trickier kick (which he missed). So question is, should it have been a penalty try? Technically the offense didn't prevent me scoring.

 

[KML1]

A common misconception. AS a rule, we'd always try and let players get on the scorecard unless unavoidable.

Law says: Penalty try. A penalty try is awarded if a try would probably have been scored but for foul play by the defending team. A penalty try is awarded if a try would probably have been scored in a better position but for foul play by the defending team.

So in your example, it wouldnt have been, so he was right to award the try. Had you not have got the grounding then a PT would have been OK.

 

[iansimcox]

Well I'm not precious about getting on the scorecard, but that's interesting. The try definitely wouldn't have been scored in a better position, so by the sound of it the referee was correct. Thanks for reply.

Seems a strange law though because I'd get rewarded had I gamed the situation by not touching it down (assuming the refs view isn't obstructed at the moment of the shove) but I can't quite think how you might word it otherwise. "If foul play that could have prevented a try occurs, then a penalty try should be awarded if the penalty try results in a better position than the try was scored in" is both messy and subject to so much interpretation that its even worse than the current law.

Still, we won and I got a try, so all good in the end.

 

[KML1]

Good work Ian! One more player educated!

 

[Dickie E]

Seems a strange law though because I'd get rewarded had I gamed the situation by not touching it down

Remember that the ref is there to protect you from foul play. If he suspected that he had been 'gamed' by you then certainly no try, no penalty try and you might be in the naughty corner for 10 mins.

Sensible to do your best to score the try.

 

[Browner]

Well I'm not precious about getting on the scorecard, but that's interesting. The try definitely wouldn't have been scored in a better position, so by the sound of it the referee was correct. Thanks for reply.

Seems a strange law though because I'd get rewarded had I gamed the situation by not touching it down (assuming the refs view isn't obstructed at the moment of the shove) but I can't quite think how you might word it otherwise. "If foul play that could have prevented a try occurs, then a penalty try should be awarded if the penalty try results in a better position than the try was scored in" is both messy and subject to so much interpretation that its even worse than the current law.

Still, we won and I got a try, so all good in the end.

that's a gamble on whether the referee has seen it, I wouldn't recommend relying on that - touch it down ! That said, he saw your pinky achieve the touchdown , so he's got great eyes!