Thoughts on this one?

[Dave Elliott]

https://x.com/loosest_the/status/1708172629645877437?s=48&t=XTtRixovZALuT74I5Djr7w

 

[Decorily]

"Thoughts on this"....I presume you mean the ref's attire!

 

[Decorily]

Correct decision in my opinion.

 

[belladonna]

Bonkers!!

 

[Decorily]

Bonkers!!

Which bit?

 

[RemainingInTheGame]

Was it a conversion or penalty kick? (I assume conversion from player positions and movement).

Conversion has:

Law 8.17:
If the opposition touches the ball and the kick is successful, the goal stands.

But I can't find similar for penalty kick at goal.

 

[Dickie E]

Had a similar one a few years ago.
Player under posts had a replacement ball in hand ready for the kick off.
As he jogged out, he let the conversion kick (which fell short) hit ball in hand.
The conversion kick ball took off like a rocket and over the cross bar

 

[didds]

pillock.

 

[belladonna]

Which bit?

That a defender would kick the ball through his own posts

 

[Nilo]

It is 100% the correct decision as @RemainingInTheGame stated.

But I can't find similar for penalty kick at goal.

I believe it's because it's more inferred through several sections of the same law:

LAW 8
22. If the kicker indicates to the referee the intent to kick at goal, the opposing team must stand still with their hands by their sides from the time the kicker starts to approach to kick until the ball is kicked.
(...)
25. Any player who intentionally touches the ball in an attempt to prevent a penalty goal being scored is illegally touching the ball.
A defending player must not shout during a penalty kick at goal.
(...)
27. If the opposing team infringes while the kick is being taken but the kick at goal is successful, the goal stands and a further penalty is not awarded. If the kick is unsuccessful, the non-offending team is awarded a penalty 10 metres in front of the original mark. Sanction: Penalty.

Essentially, the opposing team must stand with their hands by their sides until the ball is kicked, they cannot touch the ball in an attempt to prevent a penalty goal, then if they do, it stands if the kick is successful anyway, or another penalty is awarded 10m ahed.

 

[didds]

Essentially, the opposing team must stand with their hands by their sides until the ball is kicked, they cannot touch the ball in an attempt to prevent a penalty goal, then if they do, it stands if the kick is successful anyway, or another penalty is awarded 10m ahed.

But HAD the OP been a PK... then the defender kicking the ball wouldnt have been trying to prevent a goal... cos it wouldnt have been a goal at that point. </pedantry>

 

[Nilo]

But HAD the OP been a PK... then the defender kicking the ball wouldnt have been trying to prevent a goal... cos it wouldnt have been a goal at that point. </pedantry>

I can understand that argument, I was just replying to not being able see similar laws in the penalty context.
I'd *argue* as a referee that them kicking it before it's gone anywhere is still an infringement under that wording. On the day, I'd give the penalty score.

 

[Pedro]

I thought it was 8.4
Conversion, penalty goal and dropped goal

1. For any goal to be successful, the ball must be kicked over the crossbar and between the goal posts without first touching a team-mate or the ground.

Didn't hit the ground
Didn't hit a team-mate
= Successful kick.
Same for a PK and dropped goal I think.

 

[Aphrodite007]

The referee is none other than formal international referee Malcolm Changleng! He was a touch judge at Rugby World Cup 2007

 

[Stu10]

I can understand that argument, I was just replying to not being able see similar laws in the penalty context.
I'd *argue* as a referee that them kicking it before it's gone anywhere is still an infringement under that wording. On the day, I'd give the penalty score.

It's not an infringement to kick the ball like this from a conversion or a penalty... notably from a penalty, if the kick falls short as per the video, the defender is 100% entitled to catch the ball and then counterattack. As per 8.4, this example would be a successful goal if a conversion, penalty goal or dropped goal.

 

[Decorily]

From a penalty it could be argued that the defender played the ball ,as entitled, and played the ball into their own ingoal and subsequently dead. Therefore 5m scrum.

 

[Phil E]

It's not an infringement to kick the ball like this from a conversion or a penalty... notably from a penalty, if the kick falls short as per the video, the defender is 100% entitled to catch the ball and then counterattack. As per 8.4, this example would be a successful goal if a conversion, penalty goal or dropped goal.

So if a defender wants to kick the ball out to end the game, and in trying to kick it dead through in-goal, he inadvertently kicks it between his own posts, is that 3 points to the opposition?

 

[Locke]

From a penalty it could be argued that the defender played the ball ,as entitled, and played the ball into their own ingoal and subsequently dead. Therefore 5m scrum.

I agree with this. For a conversion, as in OP’s video, conversion is good.
For a PK attempt, defender has played a live ball and made it dead.

 

[Locke]

So if a defender wants to kick the ball out to end the game, and in trying to kick it dead through in-goal, he inadvertently kicks it between his own posts, is that 3 points to the opposition?

If he punts, it can’t be points, same as it wouldn’t be points if an attacking player punted it through the posts he’s trying to score under.

I also don’t think a drop kick through his own posts counts either. Law book gives a definition of “goal” as involving only the “opponents cross-bar”. There’s no mechanism to award points for a penalty or drop goal to the team who didn’t kick it.

 

[Stu10]

So if a defender wants to kick the ball out to end the game, and in trying to kick it dead through in-goal, he inadvertently kicks it between his own posts, is that 3 points to the opposition?

Do you mean on the volley from a kick at goal, as per the video, or the defender kicks the ball from hand or from the floor and it goes through the posts?
If the later, that is definitely not 3 points to the opposition.

For the former, despite my previous comment, maybe we have a gap...

Law 8.4 indicates that a conversion, penalty goal or dropped goal is successful if it goes over the crossbar and between the goal posts without first touching a team-mate or the ground... there is no mention of the opposition here, but a volleyed ball as per the OP is not in conflict with 8.4 regarding a conversion, penalty or drop goal.

8.17 specifically addresses the defending team touching the ball from a conversion; but we don't have similar information in 8.18-21 regarding a penalty kick or drop goal. I do not think the OP example falls under law 8.25 (intentionally preventing a successful penalty goal).