Playing advantage AFTER the whistle.

[Pegleg]

Penalty offence by Blue 15 mtrs out from their own line. Referee blows his whistle and gives the primary Penalty signal. Ball is in the hands of Red 9 (referee "probably should have played advantage but did not) who runs through a gap to score. He doers not "tap and go" he just continues running. Referee awards the try.


Score at the time 7-5 to Blue beginning of second half.



Referee has refereed Tier 2 international games.

Thoughts?

 

[RobLev]

Penalty offence by Blue 15 mtrs out from their own line. Referee blows his whistle and gives the primary Penalty signal. Ball is in the hands of Red 9 (referee "probably should have played advantage but did not) who runs through a gap to score. He doers not "tap and go" he just continues running. Referee awards the try.

Score at the time 7-5 to Blue beginning of second half.

Referee has refereed Tier 2 international games.

Thoughts?

From "Definitions" (my emphasis):

[LAWS]Dead: The ball is out of play. This happens when the ball has gone outside the playing area and remained there, or when the referee has blown the whistle to indicate a stoppage in play, or when a conversion kick has been taken. [/LAWS]

From para (f) of Law 8.3 "When the advantage law is not applied":

[LAWS]After the ball has been made dead. Advantage cannot be played after the ball has been made dead. [/LAWS]

Oh, and from Law 21.4(d):

[LAWS]A clear kick. The kicker must kick the ball a visible distance. If the kicker is holding it, it must clearly leave the hands. If it is on the ground, it must clearly leave the mark.[/LAWS]

So; from the Definitions, we know that when the ref blew the whistle, the ball was made dead, From Law 8,3(f) we know that advantage cannot be played after the ball is made dead. So we know the PK must be taken. If the Red 9 wants to run, he must do so after taking a kick at or behind the mark. He failed to do so. No try; scrum at the mark, put in Blue.

Tier 2 International referees make mistakes - who knew?

 

[Pegleg]

Such as basic error. Surely we don't expect that at that level. Out in the sticks fair enough. Though I'd expect the ref to face a few awkward questions from his assessor.

 

[Ian_Cook]

Did the 9 run through the mark where the PK would have been awarded?

Was the referee looking toward the mark for the PK? Maybe he thought the 9 did tap & go?

I saw Aaron Smith do this once against Australia. He tapped and ran so quickly that if you blinked you missed it (and I did too, I thought he was going to be pulled back). Only the referee (CJ) saw it, the Wallabies #10 complained loudly that he didn't tap it, but the replay showed he kicked the ball up 1m into his hands.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=Ny_kjECvs7E#t=4705

 

[Pegleg]

No he did not in fact he was no where near the mark. The Referee to his arm down once he'd gone through the gap. The offence was the back being offside and the player ran from behind the ruck at least 5 yards from the offence. No tap and nowhere near the mark.

 

[Paule23]

I'm a a little confused by the question of 'thoughts'? I am not sure what you are trying to achieve here.

It seems obvious you think this was wrong, and the question is do people agree, or is there any reason in law this might have been permissible. The first reply seems to say no, so the referee made a mistake. It happens, let's move on.

 

[Rushforth]

Everybody makes mistakes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1974_Five_Nations_Championship#Twickenham.2C_Welsh_hopes_go_West for example. (One of John's proudest possessions is the white walking stick sent by a Welsh supporter.)

Out in the sticks, I need to see penalty kicks taken, and from 5 metres out they MUST leave the hands. That said, although the law is obviously for a scrum, in practice I'd allow a retake after a suitable time to Ask and Tell them (all the more so for kids than adults).

Somewhat like Ian, I think that what probably happened is that the referee took his mind (and eyes) off the game and somehow thought it plausible that the penalty had been taken quickly. Inexcusable? Well, imagine if the score had been perfectly legal (as in the video provided) and disallowed, as per my first para.

No referee would actually play advantage after the whistle, so the thread title is incorrect.

 

[RobLev]

No he did not in fact he was no where near the mark. The Referee to his arm down once he'd gone through the gap. The offence was the back being offside and the player ran from behind the ruck at least 5 yards from the offence. No tap and nowhere near the mark.

Did the ref mark the PK?

 

[Pegleg]

Nope. As described. He saw the nine hit the gap and he played on as though he was playing advantage.

 

[Pegleg]

I'm a a little confused by the question of 'thoughts'? I am not sure what you are trying to achieve here.

It seems obvious you think this was wrong, and the question is do people agree, or is there any reason in law this might have been permissible. The first reply seems to say no, so the referee made a mistake. It happens, let's move on.

THe "offer" of "Thoughts is to give people the change to give a reason why he could have allowed play on. A brain fart is the only one I could "understand". More understandable in the sticks less acceptable at approaching elite levels.

 

[leaguerefaus]

I don't think it's understandable at any level, Pegleg. Everyone knows once the whistle goes, that's it.

Very very strange if this is indeed what happened.

 

[Ian_Cook]

Pegleg. You posted this in the Professional Rugby forum, so what game was this? Gloucester v Sale?

 

[Pegleg]

I've deliberately left the game blank as I do not want this to develop into an "well he's a crap ref or whatever thread". Players on both sides received payment for the game and the ref is, as said a Tier 2 referee who has received recognition by WR in the recent past.

Who he or the teams were is not relevant to the scenario.

Iwas perplexed as were both benches Committees and the supporters of both sides. Although the one side were more than happy to take the score of course!

 

[Pegleg]

I don't think it's understandable at any level, Pegleg. Everyone knows once the whistle goes, that's it.

Very very strange if this is indeed what happened.

Understandable low down with an inexperienced referee who suddenly realises he should have waited to see what happened BEFORE blowing the whistle. "junior" refs will often blow to early and deny advantage (or indeed too late when none is remotely possible - playing on in hope". There is a temptation for a greenhorn to try to put it right in the wrong way. A senior referee should be well past such things, in my eyes.

Of course sonme one might have been able to say what I've missed. So far no one has.

 

[RobLev]

Nope. As described. He saw the nine hit the gap and he played on as though he was playing advantage.

If he didn't mark the PK then he can't have thought that the PK was properly taken; the 9 didn't go from the place of the infringement, and he hadn't marked anywhere else that the PK should have been taken.

 

[Phil E]

As described totally wrong, critical error.

Need to see a video.

 

[OB..]

If he didn't mark the PK then he can't have thought that the PK was properly taken; the 9 didn't go from the place of the infringement, and he hadn't marked anywhere else that the PK should have been taken.

The referee does not necessarily have to mark the place of the infringement. However a player taking a PK must actually kick the ball (and from close to the correct spot). If there was no kick then a PK had not been taken and the decision to award a try cannot be right.

 

[Pegleg]

The game will havre been filmed and, in due course I will get a copy. However, I'll not post it up as I'm not authorised to do so particular thanks to PhilE and OB for the clear & to the point answers.

 

[tim White]

Remember, on a field full of professional cheats the ref is allowed to make an innocent mistake.

 

[Pegleg]

Of course he is. But a critical error and such a basic one. That is why we have advisors / assessors is it not to deal with the errors to reduce them. If a referee continues to make basic errors his promotion prospects must surely be reduced.

I don't expect to see such schoolboy errors from an international referee, albeit Tier 2. Crickey, I'd expect to taken to task over such a cock up.