Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 400 - Out Now!

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD MAGAZINE - ISSUE 400 - OUT NOW!
84 pages, 38 years of history from Open Rugby to the present day.
Click here for the digital edition to read online via smartphone, tablet and desktop devices including iPhone, iPad, Android & Kindle HD.
Click here to order a copy for delivery by post. Annual subscriptions also available worldwide.
Find out what's inside Issue 400
/ View a Gallery of all 400 covers / WH Smith Branches stocking Issue 400
Read Jamie Jones-Buchanan's Top 5 RLW Interviews including Marwan Koukash, Lee Briers, Gareth Thomas, Steve Ganson & Matt King OBE


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

29/03/13 - Wigan Warriors v St Helens - KO 12.15pm


  • Please log in to reply
146 replies to this topic

Poll: Who will win? (16 member(s) have cast votes)

Who will win?

  1. Voted Wigan Warriors (11 votes [68.75%])

    Percentage of vote: 68.75%

  2. St Helens (5 votes [31.25%])

    Percentage of vote: 31.25%

  3. Draw (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#121 Saintslass

Saintslass
  • Coach
  • 4,199 posts

Posted 31 March 2013 - 11:27 AM

Sorry if this has been already said but I wonder if the fair call for the Smith kick would have been a penalty try. After all it was a deliberate offence that prevented a try to be scored ( if I recall well, a Saints' player was about to reach the ball when Smith kicked it out of the field ). I assume League rules are not that different from Union in this regard.

Wasn't a penalty try as we weren't in the act of scoring.

#122 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 14,159 posts

Posted 31 March 2013 - 11:41 AM

Wasn't a penalty try as we weren't in the act of scoring.

i thought that line you used relates to an eight point try.

#123 bobrock

bobrock
  • Coach
  • 141 posts

Posted 31 March 2013 - 12:33 PM

Wasn't a penalty try as we weren't in the act of scoring.


But I remember a penalty try awarded by the referee ( Ganson maybe ? ) to New Zealand against Australia in some final ( don't remember if World Cup or Four Nations ) when the man had been taken out without the ball, so he certainly wasn't "in the act of scoring".

#124 MrFussy

MrFussy
  • Coach
  • 1,425 posts

Posted 31 March 2013 - 02:20 PM

I could be mistaken, but I thought that for a penalty try to be given the only requirement was that the officials were as close to certain as possible that the try would have been scored if foul play hadn't taken place. I assume they weren't confident enough that the on rushing Saints players would definitely have beaten an onside Wigan defender to the ball.

There's no question that Smith should've got ten minutes, but I don't have any hard feelings towards him. I can't imagine many players would've just stood there and watched the try be scored.

Edited by MrFussy, 31 March 2013 - 02:23 PM.


#125 bobbruce

bobbruce
  • Coach
  • 5,979 posts

Posted 31 March 2013 - 03:50 PM

But I remember a penalty try awarded by the referee ( Ganson maybe ? ) to New Zealand against Australia in some final ( don't remember if World Cup or Four Nations ) when the man had been taken out without the ball, so he certainly wasn't "in the act of scoring".


As Dave T say the line in the act of scoring is for the eight point penalty try and is their to prevent players taking late cheap shots.

#126 Saintslass

Saintslass
  • Coach
  • 4,199 posts

Posted 31 March 2013 - 05:36 PM

i thought that line you used relates to an eight point try.

My bad. I read the post I was replying to as an eight point try.

#127 hindle xiii

hindle xiii
  • Coach
  • 20,984 posts

Posted 31 March 2013 - 06:37 PM

Just to be clear (it is good this!) Raynor in Tomkins 2011 was a penalty try, and Foster on Whitehead 2012 was an 8-point try.

I'm not entirely sure if these are true, but by starting my post in such manner means anything I write has to be true. FACT.

2826856.jpg?type=articleLandscape

 

On Odsal Top baht 'at.


#128 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 17,939 posts

Posted 31 March 2013 - 08:01 PM

A penalty try and ten mins in the bin would have been the call for me. Doubt anyone could have much of an argument against that.

(And then again... :rolleyes: )


You wouldn't have got one from me.

Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com
Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007
Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.


#129 bobrock

bobrock
  • Coach
  • 141 posts

Posted 31 March 2013 - 08:50 PM

I could be mistaken, but I thought that for a penalty try to be given the only requirement was that the officials were as close to certain as possible that the try would have been scored if foul play hadn't taken place. I assume they weren't confident enough that the on rushing Saints players would definitely have beaten an onside Wigan defender to the ball.



That's my point : there were no onside defenders a part from Tomkins and the other wiganer who were both behind the try line when the ball was touched, but they didn't move towards the ball and just watched the other wiganer kicking the ball. All the Wigan defenders who actually had the chance to reach the ball before the Saints' player were certainly off side, and they knew it.

#130 dkw

dkw
  • Workington
  • 4,447 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 09:48 AM

Is rule in the process of scoring,or just a try scoring opportunity in the ref's opinion?

#131 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 14,159 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 10:13 AM

Is rule in the process of scoring,or just a try scoring opportunity in the ref's opinion?

it used to be if the ref was 100% certain a try would be scored. I think that has been softened now so its just if a ref feels a try would have been scored.
It really should have been a penalty try.

#132 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 14,159 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 10:19 AM

Just to be clear (it is good this!) Raynor in Tomkins 2011 was a penalty try, and Foster on Whitehead 2012 was an 8-point try.

I'm not entirely sure if these are true, but by starting my post in such manner means anything I write has to be true. FACT.

Just to be clearer - Tomkins' was just a try. He grounded the ball. It really should have been an 8pt try.

#133 dkw

dkw
  • Workington
  • 4,447 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 10:30 AM

it used to be if the ref was 100% certain a try would be scored. I think that has been softened now so its just if a ref feels a try would have been scored.
It really should have been a penalty try.

If that's the rule then yes, penalty try in my opinion.

#134 hindle xiii

hindle xiii
  • Coach
  • 20,984 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 10:49 AM

Just to be clearer - Tomkins' was just a try. He grounded the ball. It really should have been an 8pt try.

But writing those two clichés means it's never wrong. :(

(Just watching it now)

2826856.jpg?type=articleLandscape

 

On Odsal Top baht 'at.


#135 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 14,159 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 10:54 AM

But writing those two clichés means it's never wrong. :(

(Just watching it now)

obviously you dobt have the power.
Already watched it for you :biggrin:

#136 hindle xiii

hindle xiii
  • Coach
  • 20,984 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 10:56 AM

obviously you dobt have the power.
Already watched it for you :D

Caught him a beauty didn't he... :ph34r:

2826856.jpg?type=articleLandscape

 

On Odsal Top baht 'at.


#137 giwildgo

giwildgo
  • Coach
  • 4,048 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 11:38 AM

I certainly wouldn't have complained with an either / or scenario of penalty try or a sin bin for preventing a try scoring opportunity. Don't see how you could reasonably apply both punishments together though without it being disproportionate. Either the referee is content that Saints would've scored a try but for Smith and awards a penalty try resulting in no disadvantage to Saints, or the referee thinks there is reasonable doubt that a try would have been scored and therefore sin bins Smith for unfairly denying the opportunity. The only thing for certain is that the referee got it wrong in not applying either punishment, but I can understand why given he initially awarded a drop out due to incorrectly assuming that Smith was in the dead ball area where you cannot be offside.

#138 Old Frightful

Old Frightful
  • Coach
  • 12,663 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 12:10 PM

I certainly wouldn't have complained with an either / or scenario of penalty try or a sin bin for preventing a try scoring opportunity. Don't see how you could reasonably apply both punishments together though without it being disproportionate. Either the referee is content that Saints would've scored a try but for Smith and awards a penalty try resulting in no disadvantage to Saints, or the referee thinks there is reasonable doubt that a try would have been scored and therefore sin bins Smith for unfairly denying the opportunity. The only thing for certain is that the referee got it wrong in not applying either punishment, but I can understand why given he initially awarded a drop out due to incorrectly assuming that Smith was in the dead ball area where you cannot be offside.

Surely the two go hand in hand?

A professional foul takes place because, without it, Saints score, thereofre a penalty try can be the only decision. The perpetrator who commits said professional foul surely has to spend time in the bin.

Or have I misunderstood you?

          NO BUTS IT'S GOT TO BE BUTTER......                                 Z1N2MybzplQR6XBrwB9egniMH8xqYQ5s.jpg                                                                                                                     


#139 giwildgo

giwildgo
  • Coach
  • 4,048 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 01:14 PM

Surely the two go hand in hand?

A professional foul takes place because, without it, Saints score, thereofre a penalty try can be the only decision. The perpetrator who commits said professional foul surely has to spend time in the bin.

Or have I misunderstood you?

By that interpretation, every penalty try would be a sin bin which clearly isn't the case. I personally thought it was a professional foul and would've sin binned him, but wouldn't have given a penalty try. As it stands I personally think that where Saints didn't have possession during that play then there is too much subjectivity for a penalty try to be awarded. However if the referee had decided Saints would have scored and awarded a penalty try in my opinion there is no necessity to sin bin the player as well given the attacking side has lost no advantage from the unfair play. Such a course of action would have been at the refs discretion and a double punishment is not something I favour.

#140 bobbruce

bobbruce
  • Coach
  • 5,979 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 04:18 PM

Is being deliberately offside a sin-binning offence?


No but stopping a scoring opportunity by doing it is. In the same way that holding down isn't a sin binning but holding down after a break when a quick PTB would give a scoring chance is.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users