retaken conversion

[Rich_NL]

I played half a match with a broken wrist at school. The coach said if I could move my fingers it wasn't broken; apparently greenstick fractures don't work that way. Back in the 80s, men were men, rugby these days, blah blah...

Back to the OP: my reply to Red would be that if they're going to try to unsettle the kicker illegally, they can't having successfully unsettled him then complain that the other team want someone else to take it.

 

[Arabcheif]

Fellas, while there's no need for the mentions of "Grammar Nazi" and "pedantic" individuals etc. As we all will have our own opinions and views of the Laws. CR's interpretation is his and the important thing is that he applies that consistently, which I'm sure he does.

I do disagree with his opinion and I would also allow the change of kicker. As the Law doesn't specify, for me, that "The Kicker" must be the same kicker that attempted the first kick. The kicker is simply the player about to take the kick. One thing I noticed in the event of an injury though - I'd allow the substitute to take the kick too. Can't see anything prohibiting this.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

We're drifting off topic (how unusual!) here, but I would advise a better way of managing those questions is simply to tell the player how long you have left on your watch. It's then up to them to know the law well enough about time allowances to decide their course of action.

Off topic, indeed slightly. Hence my opening sentence. I made it clear to him that "acts contrary to good sportsmanship" were not going to work. His call after that.

My watch. I am the only one who sees it or needs to!

 

[crossref]

I played half a match with a broken wrist at school. The coach said if I could move my fingers it wasn't broken; apparently greenstick fractures don't work that way. Back in the 80s, men were men, rugby these days, blah blah...

Back to the OP: my reply to Red would be that if they're going to try to unsettle the kicker illegally, they can't having successfully unsettled him then complain that the other team want someone else to take it.

Off topic, indeed slightly. Hence my opening sentence. I made it clear to him that "acts contrary to good sportsmanship" were not going to work. His call after that.

My watch. I am the only one who sees it or needs to!

Yes you can get away with it , but I am strongly against the idea that
.. to the best of your judgement/knowledge time is up
.. but you will restart anyway

I don't think that is the right approach

 

[Pinky]

Off on a slight tangent.


7s on Saturday.

Blue team goes into a small lead (1 point) with the conversion to come. We are very close to time.


Kicker: " Will there be a restart?"
Me: "Depends whether you kick the ball before or after time is up."
Kicker: "How long do I have until that happens?"
Mw: "If you delay unduly you might find that there is a second left when you kick it!" (Said with a knowing look).

He got the message.

We don't want "gamesmanship" deciding matches. I was not going to let him run the clock down. His normal preperation ? Fine. A tad longer on this one? Who'd notice? Taking the piss? No way!

Same with the OP. Big pressure on the kicker and the side CHEATING try to gain by ramping up the pressure (unfairly) on him. I'd have no problem with changing the kicker.

For me the player had to take the kick within 30s. So if there is 30s or more still on the clock there will be a restart, but other than that he can choose to get a hurry on if he wants a restart or not, but he runs the risk of not taking the kick in time or kicking it when there is still a few seconds left!

 

[thepercy]

This site is was supposed to be about "Better Officials, Better Game", not about showing what clever Dicks posters could be in their attempts to be the edgelords of rugby refereeing. It is about helping referees with decisions and situations they encounter, either during their own matches, or matches they have seen, and for them to seek and receive good, sound advice from more experienced referees.

Your constant taking of a deliberately opposite view from the more experienced members here serves only to confuse rather than enlighten those who come here for advice, and thereby, diminishing the value and effectiveness of the site.

One of the main reasons I don't post here as often as I used to is you. Your constant contrarian attitude, your insistence reinterpreting Laws in strange and unconventional ways that no-one else does, grew tiresome and boring, and I got sick of it.

You can disagree with a poster without personal attacks and/or being a dick.

 

[thepercy]

Off on a slight tangent.


7s on Saturday.

Blue team goes into a small lead (1 point) with the conversion to come. We are very close to time.


Kicker: " Will there be a restart?"
Me: "Depends whether you kick the ball before or after time is up."
Kicker: "How long do I have until that happens?"
Mw: "If you delay unduly you might find that there is a second left when you kick it!" (Said with a knowing look).

He got the message.

We don't want "gamesmanship" deciding matches. I was not going to let him run the clock down. His normal preperation ? Fine. A tad longer on this one? Who'd notice? Taking the piss? No way!

Same with the OP. Big pressure on the kicker and the side CHEATING try to gain by ramping up the pressure (unfairly) on him. I'd have no problem with changing the kicker.

You wouldn't allow the kicker to take the full 30 seconds allowed by law?

 

[thepercy]

You wouldn't allow the kicker to take the full 30 seconds allowed by law?

Thinking about this more, I'd think a smart player/team who scored with 25 seconds left on the clock to go up by 1 point could even wait the whole 30 seconds, never kick the conversion, and then the referee would disallow the kick, and blow the whistle for full time.

Why would you keep the time a secret?

 

[Marc Wakeham]

You wouldn't allow the kicker to take the full 30 seconds allowed by law?

I'd allow him time as long as he was not just wasting time. The player in question had no intention of making a serious attempt he just did not want a restart. All the conversions up to that point had been taken very quickly. He just stood there, ball in hand making no attempt to prepare his kick. THe 30 seconds are there t oalow the kicker to prepare for and kick the ball in a reasonable. Not for him to waste time.

 

[crossref]

I'd allow him time as long as he was not just wasting time. THe player in question had no intention of making aerious attempt he just did not want a restart. All the Conversions up to that point had bee ntaken very quickly. He was just stood there ball in hand making no attempt to prepare his kick.

the way they wrote the Laws, he's entitled to his 30s though. You can't take them away from him, and you can't cheat with the clock - you're the ref, you have to be straifght

 

[Rich_NL]

I disagree. The 30 seconds are the player's privilege, not your grace.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

I disagree. The 30 seconds are the player's privilege, not your grace.

Ok so I award a try and tell the player we have 28 seconds left. He promptly places the ball on the tee and proceedes to sit down. Checking how much of the 28 seconds is left at regular intervals, all whilst staying in a sitting position. You think that would be acceptable?

 

[Dickie E]

Ok so I award a try and tell the player we have 28 seconds left. He promptly places the ball on the tee and proceedes to sit down. Checking how much of the 28 seconds is left at regular intervals, all whilst staying in a sitting position. You think that would be acceptable?

I wouldn't have a problem with it. He can do what he likes with the 30 secs IMO

 

[crossref]

I do think they should change the Law, though . I would like to see it that if there is still time on the clock when the try is scored then we have a restart

Alternatively we could stop the watch for all conversions

 

[Marc Wakeham]

I wouldn't have a problem with it. He can do what he likes with the 30 secs IMO

We will need to agree to differ. For me the time if to allow the preparation for the kick. I think the term is "manage it".

Back to OP I seem no reason, in law, to prevent another player taking the second kick.

And on that point I'm out.

 

[Rich_NL]

Ok so I award a try and tell the player we have 28 seconds left. He promptly places the ball on the tee and proceedes to sit down. Checking how much of the 28 seconds is left at regular intervals, all whilst staying in a sitting position. You think that would be acceptable?

I tell him the time once.

Are you going to lie about the time, fabricate an offence, or make up a reason to stop the clock? I don't think any of them reflect well on a referee, and all leave you open to the charge of favouring the other team.

 

[Elpablo73]

I do think they should change the Law, though . I would like to see it that if there is still time on the clock when the try is scored then we have a restart

Alternatively we could stop the watch for all conversions

Interesting thoughts, but I would take this a bit further and combine these?

• Try scored;
• Clock stops;
• Referee consults with AR's and TMO to ensure the try is valid, once it is declare as valid no further reviewing;
• Scoring team decide whether they want to attempt a conversion;
• If they do want an attempt, 30 seconds to kick a conversion attempt;
• If time remaining or failed to attempt a conversion within 30 seconds,
  • Line up on halfway line for restart,
  • Clock starts;
  • Restart the game and continue play
• If no time remaining, blow whistle to end of the half/game.

 

[ChrisR]

Back to the OP.

The kick is to be re-taken. The kicker is the player about to take the kick. The previous kick is a no-op, it never happened so the kicker is the player now designated not the previous.

Now . . . .

if the kicker's team had a player in the sin-bin and his time expired as the first kick was taken could he now enter the field and take the kick? Yep, I think so.

 

[Dickie E]

here's the latest.

I had a referee coach with me on Saturday and we discussed the incident post match.

Due to the ambiguity, he kicked it upstairs to Rugby Australia.

Apparently the question has now gone to WR!

You've heard of the Giteau Law ... watch this space for the Dickie Clarification epper:

 

[crossref]

here's the latest.

I had a referee coach with me on Saturday and we discussed the incident post match.

Due to the ambiguity, he kicked it upstairs to Rugby Australia.

Apparently the question has now gone to WR!

You've heard of the Giteau Law ... watch this space for the Dickie Clarification epper:

Excellent.

For all the reasons people give in this thread the Law should be that you can change the kicker.

Unfortunately the way the Law written is that you can't

A clarification is a good idea