Position of penalty

[breako]

Scrums can't be awarded within 5M of the touchline. Are my correct in saying the mark for Penalities and FKs can be within 5M of the touchline? Thanks

 

[Waspsfan]

FKs and penalties can indeed be within five metres of the touchlines and within 5 metres of the try line if awarded to the defending team.

 

[Taff]

Scrums can't be awarded within 5M of the touchline. Are my correct in saying the mark for Penalities and FKs can be within 5M of the touchline?

Yes.

If they opt for a scrum instead of a FK or PK, then it gets taken 5m infield.

FKs and penalties can indeed be within five metres of the touchlines and within 5 metres of the try line if awarded to the defending team.

Sorry, but that's not my understanding. Check out where the sanctions for late tackling a kicker standing in-goal; the book specifically says that the mark for one of the PKs is taken out 5m.

It appears that Allain Rolland agrees. In the last RWC Wales were awarded a PK when a Samoan player got tackled just short of the line and didn't release. AR definitely took the mark out to the 5m line.

 

[chbg]

Sorry, but that's not my understanding. Check out where the sanctions for late tackling a kicker standing in-goal; the book specifically says that the mark for one of the PKs is taken out 5m.

It appears that Allain Rolland agrees. In the last RWC Wales were awarded a PK when a Samoan player got tackled just short of the line and didn't release. AR definitely took the mark out to the 5m line.

21.2a - "If the place for the PK or FK is within 5m of the opponents' goal line, the mark is 5m from the goal line." Nothing about it being within 5m of your own goal line.

21.2b - "When a PK or FK is awarded in in-goal, the mark is 5m from the goal line." But if the place for the PK or FK is within 5m of the goal line, the mark is also there.

A top class referee possibly made one small mistake in Law? Never, I don't believe it. Nor does it re-write the Law book.

 

[ChrisR]

You is correct.

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

I offered a kick/scrum option on Saturday.

I had my arm up - arm out pointy signal on display and enthusiastic #10 opted for a kick.

"Are you sure?" said I "It's over there near touch" (offside winger hugging touchline from a kick through)

"Yes" said he.

He looked well pissed off when I walked him to within a metre of the touchline! :biggrin:

I can only assume he thought it would be 5m in.

They won the lineout.

 

[TheBFG]

It appears that Allain Rolland agrees. In the last RWC Wales were awarded a PK when a Samoan player got tackled just short of the line and didn't release. AR definitely took the mark out to the 5m line.

He got it wrong :wink:

 

[Taff]

Then I don't get this.

I can sort of understand why the mark for a PK in-goal is taken into the FoP, but why is it taken out 5m then? My point is, why not 4m or 2m or 6" for that matter? :chin:

 

[OB..]

Then I don't get this.

I can sort of understand why the mark for a PK in-goal is taken into the FoP, but why is it taken out 5m then? My point is, why not 4m or 2m or 6" for that matter? :chin:

Because there is a convenient 5m line?

Personally I would like to see all PKs taken at least 5m from a touchline or goal line.

 

[Ronald]

Apologies if I am repeating earlier points made, but my understanding:

PK or FK to defending team 2m from goal line...mark is at that spot. PK or FK to attacking team at same spot, mark on the 5m line.
PK or FK 2m from touchline, usually on the spot as well, but there is exceptions where it will be on the 15m line. If receiving team choose a scrum from PK or FK, mark will be on the 5m line.

 

[crossref]

Apologies if I am repeating earlier points made, but my understanding:

PK or FK to defending team 2m from goal line...mark is at that spot. PK or FK to attacking team at same spot, mark on the 5m line.
PK or FK 2m from touchline, usually on the spot as well, but there is exceptions where it will be on the 15m line. If receiving team choose a scrum from PK or FK, mark will be on the 5m line.

the anomaly is
- PK to the defending team in their own in goal -- move it out to the 5m line.

So a PK 2m inside your own ingoal turns out more advantageous to the PK 2m outside it. It's this anomaly in the Laws that causes one to want to advance all kicks to the same line.

 

[Ronald]

Agree 100% with your sentiment crossref...this is when I tell players and coaches that I don't make the laws, I only enforce them.

 

[Browner]

Because there is a convenient 5m line?

Personally I would like to see all PKs taken at least 5m from a touchline or goal line.

Yep, would certainly shrink the things we have to consider at any such 'moment'

 

[Taff]

... my understanding: ... PK or FK 2m from touchline, usually on the spot as well, but there is exceptions where it will be on the 15m line.

I find it easier to remember that the mark for all LO offences are on the 15m line.

the anomaly is
- PK to the defending team in their own in goal -- move it out to the 5m line. So a PK 2m inside your own ingoal turns out more advantageous to the PK 2m outside it. It's this anomaly in the Laws that causes one to want to advance all kicks to the same line.

Because there is a convenient 5m line? Personally I would like to see all PKs taken at least 5m from a touchline or goal line.

Exactly. Which is how Allain Rolland applied it - whether through accident or design I suppose we will never know.

Eg if defending Red smacks Blue 1m out in the FoP, the mark is taken 5m out. Yet if an attacking Blue player smacks a defending Red player in the exact same spot, the mark is at the place of infringement. Exact same offence - exact same position - yet 2 different marks. I vote for a tidy up of the laws.

 

[TheBFG]

I vote for a tidy up of the laws.

You may have a point, but I think that particular one may be a very long way down the list of tiding up to be done!

 

[crossref]

Eg if defending Red smacks Blue 1m out in the FoP, the mark is taken 5m out. Yet if an attacking Blue player smacks a defending Red player in the exact same spot, the mark is at the place of infringement. Exact same offence - exact same position - yet 2 different marks. I vote for a tidy up of the laws.

but that I find OK actually. An attacking PK 1m from the try line would be chaotic, I think, and likely dangerous. I can see the point of all attacking PK being 5m from a tryline.

 

[OB..]

Eg if defending Red smacks Blue 1m out in the FoP, the mark is taken 5m out. Yet if an attacking Blue player smacks a defending Red player in the exact same spot, the mark is at the place of infringement. Exact same offence - exact same position - yet 2 different marks. I vote for a tidy up of the laws.

But they are not exactly the same. The impact of an attacking penalty 1m from the line is quite different from the impact of a defending penalty 1m out.

You may have a point, but I think that particular one may be a very long way down the list of tiding up to be done!

I agree, though it is certainly one of the simples and least fraught.

 

[menace]

Eg if defending Red smacks Blue 1m out in the FoP, the mark is taken 5m out. Yet if an attacking Blue player smacks a defending Red player in the exact same spot, the mark is at the place of infringement. Exact same offence - exact same position - yet 2 different marks. I vote for a tidy up of the laws.

But they are not exactly the same. The impact of an attacking penalty 1m from the line is quite different from the impact of a defending penalty 1m out.

Following on from OB regarding impact. I too had always considered why the difference and the attacking team had to go back to the 5m line and then I saw a couple of times when the ref had not applied 5m to the attacking team's PK, and in 100% of the cases when this error was made within 2m the attacking side scored a try without trouble. With the defenders having to retreat to the try line, they virtually have no chance of defending against the tap and charge player. Therefore allowing the PK mark too close to the line weighted the favour too heavily to the attacking side. You may as well just award a PT at that spot when you award a PK within 2m of the line if that's where the mark is going to be. Some would say that is justified. I'm not sure about that. But I have accepted there seems good reason to retreat the attacking players back to the 5m line.

As to why the defenders aren't given the same liberty with their PKs....that I struggle with to explain too! But I go along with OBs explanation that the impact is not quite the same and pretty much everywhere else the PK is at the spot so why change it.

 

[Taff]

Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting that the attacking PK could be taken closer than 5m; what I'm suggesting is that the mark for a defending kick be taken out to the same 5m line. There's no adverse "impact" then surely.

 

[Browner]

Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting that the attacking PK could be taken closer than 5m; what I'm suggesting is that the mark for a defending kick be taken out to the same 5m line. There's no adverse "impact" then surely.

Aside from 'ease of recall' there is no justification for aligning the decisions.