didds
Resident Club Coach
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2004
- Messages
- 12,214
- Post Likes
- 1,896
particularly when generally speaking commentators and players are roundly criticised here for not knowing the laws anyway.
didds
Unusual Incidents
- Thread starter crossref
- Start date
particularly when generally speaking commentators and players are roundly criticised here for not knowing the laws anyway.
didds
winchesterref
Referees in England
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2009
- Messages
- 2,014
- Post Likes
- 197
- Current Referee grade:
- Select Grade
I think he's given it as French hand knocking the ball dead.
It doesn't make any difference which hand touched it last. The argument I have been fighting for 100 posts says that if at any point in the action gold knocked it forward (which they did) then it should be a scrum.
77 minute mark of Wales v Japan
What happens?
Wales attacker knocks-on in in-goal following a kick ahead by Wales. Japan don't get the ball back into the FoP.
5m scrum to Japan.
I've looked at the Wallabies v France one from both angles and I still can't tell if gold definitely gets a touch. GJ says it's a 22 but doesn't elaborate so we don't know how he has seen it.
He either thinks that gold has kicked and that white get the touch on the ball OR
Gold has kicked it dead OR
Gold has knocked it on and he just F@%&$ up the decision.
As I said earlier, some of his non-decisions in this game make life hard for other referees. When I get time to watch a full replay, I'll list them for you.
Possibly.
I would love to know what he got from his AR on this one.
Would have been a good one to get the TMO to look at to see how the ball was made dead.
(a) Dead from kick = 22 DO
(b) off Gold hand = 5m scrum to White
(c) off White hand = consider PK to Gold for deliberate knock/throw into touch/TiG
I'm thinking he got something clear from his AR
Cuthbert, right? IIRC he knocked the ball on before he got to the goal line, then again in in goal.
Or nothing clear - no clear infringement and it's a vanilla ball-went-into-in-goal-and-was-made-dead.
of course it doesn't matter whose hand it came off.
- If you are of the school that a gold knock would make it a scrum, then it doesn't matter if white touched it before or after or not at all. What would matter to you is only whether gold touched it. If you are of that school you'd have to go to the TMO to tell you the restart.
(I am discounting the PK for a deliberate knock into touch- I don;t believe anyone would serously argue for a PK in that particular incident, which was a simple scramble for the ball
Last edited:
I think the fact that he didn't call for the TMO to tell him the correct restart is significant : he evidently didn't think it was important to see if gold had touched the ball.
I didn't see the incident in, but was there any question of the ball being grounded? If not, it's not TMO-able, is it?
Or perhaps he was clear that Gold had not touched the ball? Let's stop guessing.
Quite a funny one on Saturday.
I awarded a penalty try at a 5m scrum and (following the advice on the other thread) didn't run straight to the posts. I was glad I didn't as I got to see the the defending hooker and tight head break out into a scuffle - yes, two players on the same team - and the hooker taking a swing (which missed).
They were being hammered and there was only about 5 minutes left, so I just had a chat with them both and carried on with the game, but had it been a different situation, we'd have been looking at a penalty and possible YC.
It made me chuckle, though - perhaps 10.4 should replace "an opponent" with "a player"!
I awarded a penalty try at a 5m scrum and (following the advice on the other thread) didn't run straight to the posts. I was glad I didn't as I got to see the the defending hooker and tight head break out into a scuffle - yes, two players on the same team - and the hooker taking a swing (which missed).
They were being hammered and there was only about 5 minutes left, so I just had a chat with them both and carried on with the game, but had it been a different situation, we'd have been looking at a penalty and possible YC.
It made me chuckle, though - perhaps 10.4 should replace "an opponent" with "a player"!
Another interesting one:
Cross field kick landing close to the touch line. The away team winger running back, goes to gather, knocks the ball backwards and in field, then falls on his face.
The home winger gathers and is well clear when the TJ (who, *cough* coincidentally I'm sure, was provided by the away team) puts his flag up.
Nothing too unusual, but I was sure the ball wasn't in touch. I had a talk with the TJ and he said he'd flagged because the winger (who didn't gather the ball) had his foot on the touch line.
The eventual outcome was that I awarded the try, explaining to the captains that the TJ had 'made a mistake', which felt like a fair outcome to me and I mentioned the incident in my match report.
What are anyone's thoughts about how I handled this? I thought it was fair, but I'm not sure where I stand in law.
Cross field kick landing close to the touch line. The away team winger running back, goes to gather, knocks the ball backwards and in field, then falls on his face.
The home winger gathers and is well clear when the TJ (who, *cough* coincidentally I'm sure, was provided by the away team) puts his flag up.
Nothing too unusual, but I was sure the ball wasn't in touch. I had a talk with the TJ and he said he'd flagged because the winger (who didn't gather the ball) had his foot on the touch line.
The eventual outcome was that I awarded the try, explaining to the captains that the TJ had 'made a mistake', which felt like a fair outcome to me and I mentioned the incident in my match report.
What are anyone's thoughts about how I handled this? I thought it was fair, but I'm not sure where I stand in law.
Decorily
Coach/Referee
- Joined
- May 3, 2013
- Messages
- 1,677
- Post Likes
- 472
- Current Referee grade:
- Select Grade
That's more than enough to overrule the TJ.......even if he is an officially appointed one!
Normally it's not practical to play on when a TJ puts his flag up, because it's totally reasonable for the players to stop when the flag goes up.
In this case, if the flag didn't affect the play then I guess you were correct
In this case, if the flag didn't affect the play then I guess you were correct