PK Advantages

[crossref]

So I have detected now a definitive trend at the elite level for referees to call "advantage over" when playing PK adv.

I think I have seen it four times in the RWC (twice from WB in the same game) and yesterday from Adam Leach reffing Quins v Exeter ("you made two line breaks and a decent amount of territory")

Hmm

Anyone else noticed this generally , perhaps outside the RWC?

I have a feeling this might backfire, presumably the intention is done to try and keep ball in play, but I wonder if the consequence will be that teams will worry that adv will be called over when they haven't really got any, and instead stop playing and take the PK

 

[Zebra1922]

TV rugby very different to ours, I don’t worry about trends on TV.

 

[crossref]

TV rugby very different to ours, I don’t worry about trends on TV.

So why are you bothering to post on a thread about trends in TV rugby ?

 

[Phil E]

So why are you bothering to post on a thread about trends in TV rugby ?

...and why are you attacking people for making a comment?
It's not needed.

 

[crossref]

...and why are you attacking people for making a comment?
It's not needed.

Not attacking!
Just dunno why anyone would seek out threads that they aren't interested in, and post that they arent interested.
Would be a very dull forum if we all did that!

Forums work best if people post on the threads they ARE interested in !

 

[didds]

Well I suppose they could keep schtumm and just decide advantage is over on their head. Then the team with the advantage initially can play a guessing game ;-)

 

[Balones]

Adam Leal not Leach.

 

[BikingBud]

So I have detected now a definitive trend at the elite level for referees to call "advantage over" when playing PK adv.

I think I have seen it four times in the RWC (twice from WB in the same game) and yesterday from Adam Leach reffing Quins v Exeter ("you made two line breaks and a decent amount of territory")

Hmm

Anyone else noticed this generally , perhaps outside the RWC?

I have a feeling this might backfire, presumably the intention is done to try and keep ball in play, but I wonder if the consequence will be that teams will worry that adv will be called over when they haven't really got any, and instead stop playing and take the PK

Perhaps because he was berated by some, even on here with the usual circuitous discussion, for telling them they had 55 metres to make use of the advantage!

At the very real risk of restarting that discussion.

What is the issue with intention to encourage play that you are perceiving?

The game is about keeping the ball in play! Don't you want to see that in the games you manage?

Broken field possession from advantage is great ball to attack from.

If you have players with speed of thought and awareness, let teams exploit advantage, if none accrues then come back, if it does call advantage over.

 

[crossref]

What is the issue with intention to encourage play that you are perceiving?

i fear it might backfire (unintended consequences etc) as explained in post #1 !

 

[BikingBud]

So you think that in a game that has the primary aim of running and playing the ball in order to score tries that teams will stop running and playing the ball because they have a fear that at some point during the game someone might decide that an offence has occurred and that any perception of advantage will never materialise and will call them back?

I really do hope not!

 

[crossref]

So you think that in a game that has the primary aim of running and playing the ball in order to score tries that teams will stop running and playing the ball because they have a fear that at some point during the game someone might decide that an offence has occurred and that any perception of advantage will never materialise and will call them back?

I really do hope not!

no, no ! you misunderstand.

Red commit a PK offence, and ref plays adv to blue.

the risk is : blue become worried that if they play on the ref might suddenly call adv-over when (in their view) they haven't really got any adv at all.
So instead, to be safe, they stop playing and take the PK on offer.

 

[Dickie E]

If you have players with speed of thought and awareness, let teams exploit advantage, if none accrues then come back, if it does call advantage over.

Yes, but while there are words about tactics & territory in the law, what does 'accrued advantage' mean in a consistent manner esp. for penalties?
Red commit a penalty offence on halfway and several phases later Blue knock on over Red goal line. Is that 1. 'advantage over' or 2. back for penalty shot at goal on halfway? And if some refs say 1. and some say 2., how is a team to know which ref they have on the day?

 

[BikingBud]

no, no ! you misunderstand.

Red commit a PK offence, and ref plays adv to blue.

the risk is : blue become worried that if they play on the ref might suddenly call adv-over when (in their view) they haven't really got any adv at all.
So instead, to be safe, they stop playing and take the PK on offer.

Sorry don't see the difference between this and what I offered.

Teams are scared of playing and will therefore not get anything because they do not chance anything.

 

[BikingBud]

Yes, but while there are words about tactics & territory in the law, what does 'accrued advantage' mean in a consistent manner esp. for penalties?
Red commit a penalty offence on halfway and several phases later Blue knock on over Red goal line. Is that 1. 'advantage over' or 2. back for penalty shot at goal on halfway? And if some refs say 1. and some say 2., how is a team to know which ref they have on the day?

Blue knock on in goal after attacking from half way line and Blue feel that they are going back. That's a long way out, territory gain, and a serious skill fail by Blue, so for me that's too much cake, too many bites and too much eating it!

In the same way that you brief about scrums, line outs etc, every week's ref might be different. But if you advise; play to my whistle, I will not blow for everything immediately, I will try to give you time to develop advantage. The onus is then on the team to make of it what they will. If they are unable to exploit due to low skill, poor decision making eg the winger picks the knock on and goes hairing through the middle and gets creamed very quickly, then likely come back but if they beat 3 defenders and then drop it themselves, advantage over but good effort mate.

Or we just blow for everything and throw one of the best laws in the bin and get called out for being attention seeking, power crazy, over officious twits (insert other words as appropriate) with no understanding of or empathy for the game.

Advantage and materiality go hand in hand, and can demonstrate how a referee can be in touch with or completely distant to supporting the purpose of the match.

 

[Dickie E]

Blue knock on in goal after attacking from half way line and Blue feel that they are going back. That's a long way out, territory gain, and a serious skill fail by Blue, so for me that's too much cake, too many bites and too much eating it!

In the same way that you brief about scrums, line outs etc, every week's ref might be different. But if you advise; play to my whistle, I will not blow for everything immediately, I will try to give you time to develop advantage. The onus is then on the team to make of it what they will. If they are unable to exploit due to low skill, poor decision making eg the winger picks the knock on and goes hairing through the middle and gets creamed very quickly, then likely come back but if they beat 3 defenders and then drop it themselves, advantage over but good effort mate.

Or we just blow for everything and throw one of the best laws in the bin and get called out for being attention seeking, power crazy, over officious twits (insert other words as appropriate) with no understanding of or empathy for the game.

Advantage and materiality go hand in hand, and can demonstrate how a referee can be in touch with or completely distant to supporting the purpose of the match.

You're missing the point. While BikingBud may see the scenario as too much cake, next week's ref may not. How are the teams to know this? "Play to the whistle etc" doesn't really help

 

[jdeagro]

You're missing the point. While BikingBud may see the scenario as too much cake, next week's ref may not. How are the teams to know this? "Play to the whistle etc" doesn't really help

At risk of being shat on again, this is precisely why I feel territorial advantage should be quantifiable and consistent...

 

[Dickie E]

At risk of being shat on again, this is precisely why I feel territorial advantage should be quantifiable and consistent...

I agree. But as there are so many variables, I don't know how that would be achieved

 

[jdeagro]

I agree. But as there are so many variables, I don't know how that would be achieved

Throw away most of the variables, idk. Could you please jog my memory on some of them?

 

[Rich_NL]

The variables are there, you can't throw them away. Either it's worth it to a team to play the advantage, which you want, or it's not and they stop the game and take the penalty/scrum.

Personally, I can't see any team taking a penalty on the halfway because analysts have told them prematch that they'll lose advantage if they knock on over the goal line :/ I've not yet seen it happen when it wasn't C&O a benefit, so don't share the worry; if it does happen, it's maybe useful feedback to the ref.

 

[crossref]

The variables are there, you can't throw them away. Either it's worth it to a team to play the advantage, which you want, or it's not and they stop the game and take the penalty/scrum.

Personally, I can't see any team taking a penalty on the halfway because analysts have told them prematch that they'll lose advantage if they knock on over the goal line :/ I've not yet seen it happen when it wasn't C&O a benefit, so don't share the worry; if it does happen, it's maybe useful feedback to the ref.

So, until a month ago I don't think I have ever seen an elite ref call "PK adv over" when it wasn't clearly and obviously so (ie because they have scored)

But in the RWC it happened I think four times , and then again at the weekend at Quins

Coincidence? Could be but I detect a change in guidance , and I am intrigued in how it will play out and what the consequences might be

(If there has been a change I wonder if it was communicated to coaches)