Sorry to be a party pooper

[FightOrFlight]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zyr0Bpsozqg

This is no try for me and a fairly big blown call by the referee.

The thing that caught my attention when I first watched the video was the fact an attacking player is not wearing a jersey. This was before the tap was taken....I was then stunned to see said player score the try and the referee award it.

Try scorer is not properly attired to play (As he has no jersey on) and the referee should have a) noticed and told him to put a jersey on or, b) disallowed the try and penalised the attackers for a player improperly attired.

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

I recall Jean Deysel (you know DrSTU's boyfriend) running around half naked for about 5 minutes during a S15/Currie Cup game for the Sharks/Natal last year. The referee didn't penalise him AFAIK although he didn't score.

 

[crossref]

Clever PK though

 

[talbazar]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zyr0Bpsozqg

This is no try for me and a fairly big blown call by the referee.

The thing that caught my attention when I first watched the video was the fact an attacking player is not wearing a jersey. This was before the tap was taken....I was then stunned to see said player score the try and the referee award it.

Try scorer is not properly attired to play (As he has no jersey on) and the referee should have a) noticed and told him to put a jersey on or, b) disallowed the try and penalised the attackers for a player improperly attired.

Agreed the ref should probably have told the player to wear is jersey before the PK is taken. AKA "manage it".
Now, what is the materiality of the scoring player not wearing a jersey?
In other words: did that player remove his jersey on purpose before the play or did he lose it in the previous ruck and didn't have/take time to put it back on?
Come back to the referee's goal: find a reason not to blow the whistle....

Clever PK though

Yup, and funny that was tried by the Barbarians against Australia (without a score though...

 

[FightOrFlight]

Agreed the ref should probably have told the player to wear is jersey before the PK is taken. AKA "manage it".
Now, what is the materiality of the scoring player not wearing a jersey?
In other words: did that player remove his jersey on purpose before the play or did he lose it in the previous ruck and didn't have/take time to put it back on?
Come back to the referee's goal: find a reason not to blow the whistle.......

He has his jersey tucked in the back of his shorts.

Having no jersey gives him an advantage over other players as he cannot be gripped by the jersey and he is also hard to identify for the referee given that he has no jersey or number and thus no colour etc. He is committing an offence under "fitness to play" laws and scores a try while doing so.....more than material IMO.

 

[crossref]

What sort of game was it? Level etc,

That sort of move is always going to work better against amateurs than internationals..

 

[Drift]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zyr0Bpsozqg

This is no try for me and a fairly big blown call by the referee.

The thing that caught my attention when I first watched the video was the fact an attacking player is not wearing a jersey. This was before the tap was taken....I was then stunned to see said player score the try and the referee award it.

Try scorer is not properly attired to play (As he has no jersey on) and the referee should have a) noticed and told him to put a jersey on or, b) disallowed the try and penalised the attackers for a player improperly attired.

In the grand scheme of things not having a shirt on isn't the worst thing ever. He may have had it ripped off in the previous passage of play, also if you look at the referee he doesn't look at the player at all in the lead up (the player is always behind his back) so I going to give the referee the benefit of the doubt here.

If you are PKing that where is your game empathy?

 

[FightOrFlight]

In the grand scheme of things not having a shirt on isn't the worst thing ever. He may have had it ripped off in the previous passage of play, also if you look at the referee he doesn't look at the player at all in the lead up (the player is always behind his back) so I going to give the referee the benefit of the doubt here.

If you are PKing that where is your game empathy?

If he knocked it on just as he was touching it down would you let it go out of game empathy? If a player was clearly offside from the kick would you let it go? If challenged by the defenders on this what possible explanation can the referee give for awarding the try and flouting law? The day you start "letting it go" out of empathy is the day you compromise your standards and set yourself on a slippery slope.

It is not ripped off as he has it in his hand at the start and chooses not to put it back on, instead tucking it in his shorts.

I would argue not having a shirt is a big enough deal. Opposition cannot tackle on your jersey....it is harder to wrap a sweaty body without the friction of a jersey AND particularly relevant in this incident in close quarters opposition players cannot readily tell if you are friend or foe.

 

[talbazar]

If he knocked it on just as he was touching it down would you let it go out of game empathy? If a player was clearly offside from the kick would you let it go? If challenged by the defenders on this what possible explanation can the referee give for awarding the try and flouting law? The day you start "letting it go" out of empathy is the day you compromise your standards and set yourself on a slippery slope.

It is not ripped off as he has it in his hand at the start and chooses not to put it back on, instead tucking it in his shorts.

I would argue not having a shirt is a big enough deal. Opposition cannot tackle on your jersey....it is harder to wrap a sweaty body without the friction of a jersey AND particularly relevant in this incident in close quarters opposition players cannot readily tell if you are friend or foe.

Are you, by any chance, a player/coach/supporter of the team conceding the try in this video? :sarc:

 

[Simon Thomas]

Buzzer had gone, they had been stuffed, and last play of match - empathy on the day should prevail.

 

[RobLev]

Buzzer had gone, they had been stuffed, and last play of match - empathy on the day should prevail.

Just a thought; if they'd taken the time to permit the player to replace his jersey, would the try have been scored, or would the defence have been sufficiently organised to deal with what came? If not, then the problem isn't so much with the lack of jersey, but with intentionally not replacing it so as to be able to take the move quickly.

 

[FlipFlop]

Jersey not on is immaterial. At no time was the player able to be tackled (he leaps in the air to catch the ball, then fell to ground to score the try).

Yes he could have put it on and didn't, but it had no effect. If that match had carried on, a quick word, and move on.

 

[Phil E]

Pick your battles.
Clear, obvious and expected.

To penalise the shirtless player 'in that situation' is none of the above, and merely highlights you as a pedantic jobsworth who is only interested in demonstrating his knowledge of the law; rather than facilitating a game of rugby.

 

[Bunniksider]

I saw the same penalty move done succesfully in a L8 league match last year. It was at Dukinfield and by Dukinfield but I'm not 100% sure of the oppo, Oswestry I think. No shirt issues to worry about

 

[crossref]

Aside : I love the way we are discussing whether a jersey is material

 

[didds]

Yep - Hawera Athletic used this playing at home in the early 1990s - the in-goal's were a full 22m-ish (bloody big anyway!) and often visiting teams wouldn't defend deep in the in-goal but on the line. With such a deep in-goal it was almost a guaranteed score with no deep defender.

didds

 

[RobLev]

Jersey not on is immaterial. At no time was the player able to be tackled (he leaps in the air to catch the ball, then fell to ground to score the try).

Yes he could have put it on and didn't, but it had no effect. If that match had carried on, a quick word, and move on.

True, the shirtlessness seems appropriately immaterial; but was the fact that the penalty could only be taken quickly if he didn't replace his shirt material?

 

[DrSTU]

Yep, didn't score but did gain possession of the ball and attack before being tackled. No pk against him.

 

[FightOrFlight]

Jersey not on is immaterial. At no time was the player able to be tackled (he leaps in the air to catch the ball, then fell to ground to score the try).

Yes he could have put it on and didn't, but it had no effect. If that match had carried on, a quick word, and move on.

Pick your battles.
Clear, obvious and expected.

To penalise the shirtless player 'in that situation' is none of the above, and merely highlights you as a pedantic jobsworth who is only interested in demonstrating his knowledge of the law; rather than facilitating a game of rugby.

It is very material or could have been in so far as the defenders cannot tell if the player is friend or foe. A defender looking to catch the ball will be looking for opposition colours approaching not some shirtless streaker.

I was having a chat with my old games master at a schools blitz today. He is a top level assessor for the IRFU and has done some Rabo assessment too. I played him the clip on my phone and he said that had that happened in an All Ireland League game or the Rabo it would have been a critical incident and raised with the referee afterwards.
He then told me that about 10 years ago in the AIL where there was an incident sounding similar to the Sharks one there but the shirtless guy scored a try. The referee in question was down graded for the remainder of the season for allowing it.

 

[Dixie]

It is very material or could have been in so far as the defenders cannot tell if the player is friend or foe. A defender looking to catch the ball will be looking for opposition colours approaching not some shirtless streaker.

I was having a chat with my old games master at a schools blitz today. He is a top level assessor for the IRFU and has done some Rabo assessment too. I played him the clip on my phone and he said that had that happened in an All Ireland League game or the Rabo it would have been a critical incident and raised with the referee afterwards.
He then told me that about 10 years ago in the AIL where there was an incident sounding similar to the Sharks one there but the shirtless guy scored a try. The referee in question was down graded for the remainder of the season for allowing it.

So: what law are you going to quote? There is no law of the game requiring a player to wear any clothing at all. The best you can do is a definition of players' clothing in the preamble to Law 4. There is no sanction offered for wearing incorrect clothing, other than being required by the referee to remove it, and a penalty for failing to do so. Nor is there any requirement for HOW the player is to wear his jersey. It would be possible to argue that by having it tucked into the back of his shorts, the player was indeed wearing it. But the most interesting thing for me is Law 4.5(b):

[LAWS]b) The referee has power to decide at any time, before or during the match, that part of a player’s clothing is dangerous or illegal. If the referee decides that clothing is dangerous or illegal the referee must order the player to remove it. The player must not take part in the
match until the items of clothing are removed.[/LAWS]

So if the referee saw blood on the jersey, he should order it to be removed, and prevent the player from taking part until the jersey is gone. Nothing in that law requires it to be replaced.

As Phil E observes: pick your fights. This one is not worth hanging your reputation on.