Wales quickly taken PK...

[L'irlandais]

Where does it say the carded player has to have left the pitch before a penalty can be taken? Law 7.3 makes no mention of this. We have already established that there is no such requirement for ensuring physios have left the field of play, before the restart.
Surely, if a quick tap was taken, the referee could play on and potentially card an offending player afterwards.
Would any subsequent try be invalid, because the referee favoured the non-offending team?

 

[taff426]

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/wales-rugby-team-england-try-16774316

 

[crossref]

Where does it say the carded player has to have left the pitch before a penalty can be taken? Law 7.3 makes no mention of this. We have already established that there is no such requirement for ensuring physios have left the field of play, before the restart.
Surely, if a quick tap was taken, the referee could play on and potentially card an offending player afterwards.
Would any subsequent try be invalid, because the referee favoured the non-offending team?

I agree. We can't hand control over the timing to the YC player , allowing him to walk faster or slower to control the restart

 

[irishref]

In this case - and I see no difference between the elite game and we mortals out in the sticks - my feeling is that if the ref is happy with the kick then we play on.

The important thing, I think, is that everyone understands that the referee's Time On signal is a clear indication that the game can be restarted.

Since rarely ref with a team of 3, I do my own timekeeping in most of my games and I try my best to give the Time On/Off signals as clearly as possible.

 

[crossref]

When you make the mark, they can go. I would think this is one thing we all learned the hard way (isn't it?) the first time you make a mark when you are not ready, and didn't expect them to go, but as soon as you make it they unexpectedly quick-tap hare off.
It's a first-season-reffing type of blunder

 

[Arabcheif]

Can't tell you how many times my team has been pulled back for quick taps. Time was on, Mark was made. Can't see anything in Law that says that as soon as the mark is made the non-offending team can just go. Nothing to say they can't either and as long as the ref is satisfied that it was taken correctly then go... In normal circumstances.
Lets say the pen taker has a brain fart. Taps the ball up to tap and go, but knocks on. Technically he can complain to the ref "Sir, they've got too many players on," then he gets another pen. Technically right but you've got 3 choices.....
1. ok they do Pen over where the additional player is.
2. retake original pen
3. It's not material, you chose to take the quick pen, knock on against you.
That's why I'd wait till the carded player was off. That takes 1 and 2 out of the equation. Simples.

 

[belladonna]

My Sunday newspaper contains a still photo which shows that Watson had an arm each side of Parkes in an upright tackle

The problem is that the tackle shown in that still photo takes place after Watson had intentionally knocked the ball forward.

Prior to this, Watson has his arm outstretched (trying to block the pass) long before Parkes actually makes the pass. Thus, when the pass ultimately hits his outstretched hand, Watson can do nothing other than knock it on with his one outstretched arm, and there is no attempt to gather the ball. (And yes, after this he goes on to tackle Parkes, but the damage has already been done).

With no attempt to gather the ball the knock on is by definition deliberate, and with three players outside Parkes (as the ref clearly says on mic) this a clear and obvious yellow card offence.

Regarding the restart, the ref can clearly be heard blowing the whistle to signal "time on" and, even though the restart is off-camera, I feel certain that had Wales gone before the whistle the ref would have called them back - this is an elite level ref we are talking about after all, and not some numpty!

Looks to me like the ref & TMO got this spot on.

Highlights here - the incident is at 0:31
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eIHinEG15s

 

[oliver]

https://www.world.rugby/news/444384?lang=en

World Rugby has announced an immediate amendment to Law 3 to stipulate that a match cannot restart until a player leaving the field of play for a blood injury or Head Injury Assessment (HIA) has been temporarily replaced.

I think something good has happened as a result of this, which is good. I don't think World Rugby have ever acted so fast?

 

[L'irlandais]

Not sure it’s a good thing, if it allows the non-offending team to dictate the speed of the restart.
[LAWS]The amendments apply only to elite matches that have been approved for HIA and the use of temporary substitutions.[/LAWS]Elite squads will always look to turn amendments to their advantage, in the struggle to win by small margins.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

HIA and blood are "Special cases".

They are forced replacements, for very good reasons. You don't want a HIA being clattered into with play continuing just as you don't want a player with a bleeding wound being knocked into. Thus splattering blood everywhere.


In general, I feel that all replacements should take the shortedst route off the pitch and then be escorted around the perimeter rather than walk slowly cross the pitch. If they can't walk the extra distance maybe then need to be carried?

I'm all for waiting until a HIA is clear of the pitch before starting again. Referees should be managing it anyway.

 

[didds]

If they can't walk the extra distance maybe then need to be carried?

I'm all for waiting until a HIA is clear of the pitch before starting again. Referees should be managing it anyway.

i suppose the issue there is its another way to slow the pace of the game right down by a player needing a cart instead of walking 15m to a touchline. But I dont disagree as a general rule.

 

[crossref]

Not sure it’s a good thing, if it allows the non-offending team to dictate the speed of the restart.
[LAWS]The amendments apply only to elite matches that have been approved for HIA and the use of temporary substitutions.[/LAWS]Elite squads will always look to turn amendments to their advantage, in the struggle to win by small margins.

There is no offending team in an HIA and blood

Note there is nothing about allowing YC player to leave pitch

 

[mcroker]

Seems the incident provoked a law change (not for Watson but for the HIA exchange happening at the same time)

https://www.world.rugby/news/444384?lang=en

 

[L'irlandais]

There is no offending team in an HIA and blood

....

It is easy to imagine a mid-air collision where the reckless party stays down, feigning injury (possible HIA? Possibly blood) to slow the opposition. Negating the opportunity for a quick tap penalty. This is related to Elite rugby, they are quick to get a physio on there, not in the interests of player safety, but in the interests of win whatever the cost.

 

[crossref]

It is easy to imagine a mid-air collision where the reckless party stays down, feigning injury (possible HIA? Possibly blood) to slow the opposition. Negating the opportunity for a quick tap penalty. This is related to Elite rugby, they are quick to get a physio on there, not in the interests of player safety, but in the interests of win whatever the cost.

note that the HIA/Blood will also delay YOUR OWN PK as well as the oppos.

ie if I give a PK to Red, but the Red player is bleeding, I need to get the red replacement on the pith before they can take the PK.

 

[L'irlandais]

I have nothing against the idea that the change is good for player safety. However by making it an obligation, then it is open to abuse. In grassroots a suspected concussion means the player goes off. In Elite rugby, they send on the physio, that surely means they suspect he may have suffered a head injury? Then the player should go off and stay off, if they failed to implement the HIa protocol as it was meant to be implemented, why on earth would they adhere to this change any differently ?
[LAWS]*World Rugby has announced an immediate amendment to Law 3 to stipulate that a match cannot restart until a player leaving the field of play for a blood injury or Head Injury Assessment (HIA) has been temporarily replaced," it said in a statement.

"The amendment, approved by the international federation's Executive Committee, codifies an area that was previously at the discretion of the referee."[/LAWS]

Anyone forgotten about Quins blood gate yet?

 

[Gracie]

On balance, I'd say the law change is a sensible decision (HIA/Blood injury). Yes, it comes with some gamesmanship risks, but given that player safety is No 1 and that we all want to see a fair contest I'm happy with this change

 

[L'irlandais]

The match referee should still have some say in the matter; Scotland physios run on for Stuart Hogg. (2015 Autumn test matches.)

With the new changes can the ref send the medic off the pitch?

 

[crossref]

The match referee should still have some say in the matter; Scotland physios run on for Stuart Hogg. (2015 Autumn test matches.)

With the new changes can the ref send the medic off the pitch?

We generally play on don't we

 

[BikingBud]

It is easy to imagine a mid-air collision where the reckless party stays down, feigning injury (possible HIA? Possibly blood) to slow the opposition. Negating the opportunity for a quick tap penalty. This is related to Elite rugby, they are quick to get a physio on there, not in the interests of player safety, but in the interests of win whatever the cost.

So are we focusing on safety or another potential bloodgate incident? I think the sanctions from that were quite stringent and likely to deter similar offences.