Penalty Try vs Advantage

[Flish]

Being that a penalty try is now a straight 7 points there is clearly an advantage to having that (in case the kick is missed), so bearing that in mind, if a try is scored despite a penalty try worthy offence in the build up (ie you’ve allowed advantage or it to play out), would you award the PT instead (eg the try was scored wide so potentially a difficult kick)? Or even give the captain an option? (Although can’t think of a basis in law for doing this, but it feels fair?)

 

[didds]

I suppose the rub here is that a PT is awarded when a probably try was prevented etc etc ... and it clearly wasn't prevented...

didds

 

[didds]

Though I can see maybe what you meant was one probably try was prevented illegally, you play advantage and from anopther wave of attack a try is scored out wide.

Would a ref really play advantage though rather than award the initial PT? To what end?

didds

 

[Rich_NL]

I'm not sure what advantage you could or would play from a PT-worthy offence.

 

[Flish]

This came from seeing a clip, on SAReferees feed I think, where there was a high tackle (seatbelt style) 3m out, if the player didn't score it would be a very clear cut high tackle, PT, Yellow Card I'd think. However the player did bundle over the line and score the try, all in the matter of seconds.

Which is where the though occurred, middle of the posts then ok, YC the player, try stands, kick would (probably) be a given and status quo would be met, but if it were in the corner you might not have time enough to react / blow / signal advantage before the act of scoring. So in that scenario would you go PT instead of letting the try scored stand. I think I would?

 

[Rich_NL]

Ahh... well, the PT is for if the try would have been scored but for foul play. So technically it's not PT-worthy if the foul play doesn't prevent the try - although it most certainly may be card-worthy.

I think the design is that threat of it is meant to deter the defender, rather than to provide extra punishment after the fact.

 

[didds]

I suppose ultimately the try was scored so the foul play didn't prevent it.

And I suppose we could think that the clotheslined winger needs to be more savvy and stumble into touch before dotting down!

didds

 

[thepercy]

The questions you need to ask yourself are; was a try prevented? was a try prevented from being scored in a better position?

 

[Flish]

The questions you need to ask yourself are; was a try prevented? was a try prevented from being scored in a better position?

'in a better position' Yes

 

[thepercy]

If the player is on their way down to score the try and are high tackled/shoulder charged, and ends up touching down, try awarded, card if necessary. If the player is running to center the ball and is high tackled/shoulder charged, and then touches down, PT, card if necessary.

 

[didds]

'in a better position' Yes

underneath the posts (your example above) - where is "a better position" ?

A clothes-lined winger with no other defenders around - yep, I'd go with that.

didds

 

[Flish]

underneath the posts (your example above) - where is "a better position" ?

A clothes-lined winger with no other defenders around - yep, I'd go with that.

didds

Oh absolutely, it was the in the corner scenario that I was considering, if it's in the middle and kicker misses the kick, then they probably have bigger problems!

 

[Taff]

Being that a penalty try is now a straight 7 points there is clearly an advantage to having that (in case the kick is missed), so bearing that in mind, if a try is scored despite a penalty try worthy offence in the build up ... would you award the PT instead (eg the try was scored wide so potentially a difficult kick)?

Good question.
My gut feeling is award the try (regardless of where it was scored) but probably :noyc: the offender.

My understanding is that teams would rather score a "real" try than get given a PT. Partly because real tries are awarded to a specific player whereas PTs ..... aren't.

I'm prepared to be educated though.

 

[didds]

I hadn't scored a try for a couple of season and was about to break my barren spell from a tap PK on the crash... and was stopped just short of the line ... ref awarded a PT cos the tackler had stood in front of the line before the tap... bah!

didds

 

[crossref]

My understanding is that teams would rather score a "real" try than get given a PT. Partly because real tries are awarded to a specific player whereas PTs ..... aren't.

.

I think that's true.
but at the same time teams also prefer seven points to five.
and if they are ten points down with three mins to go, they'll also like to save the time to take the conversion.

 

[chbg]

The questions you need to ask yourself are; was a try prevented? was a try prevented from being scored in a better position?

Okay, a simple question: where in the Good Book does it state that a PT can be awarded when a try was prevented from being scored in a better position?

Yes, I thought that was the Law, but a search of World Rugby shows no evidence. Has it been written out in recent years, or it is just one of those 'management tools'?

In which case, then there is strong case for going directly to the PT. Advanatge may be played for acts of foul play (10.4(q)), but a certain 7 points are more advantageous than having to earn the extra 2.

 

[didds]

I've just searched "penalty try" in

http://laws.worldrugby.org/index.php?search="penalty+try"&x=0&y=0

- and chbg seems to be right!

didds

 

[crossref]

22.4(h)
(h) 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.

 

[Pegleg]

Crossref is spot on with his law quote. It is no "Urban Myth". Though would it not be an idea to move 22.3(h) into the same law section at PTs in general?


So it you are near the TL and are taken out but you manage to ground the ball the "beam him up" principle applies and IF you had had a clear run behin the post the PT should be awarded.

Of course we have a little problem introduced by the law trail. 7 is better than 5 so effectively a PT will very often (almost always) be the "better option". Maybe the law will be amended, if the PT trial is taken onboard fully, to read something like:


22.4(h)
(h) 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 foul play
by the defending team occurs in
the "act of a try being scored".


Or something similar.

 

[didds]

well found CR!

better than WR's own site's search function!

didds