John S
Chilla Wilson (44)
Yeah, I gathered that. Interesting that the Super clubs aren't trialling it yet.
Refereeing decisions
- Thread starter boyo
- Start date
Strewthcobber
Andrew Slack (58)
One interpretation I would love to see changed, when defender's offside line is the try line refs all of sudden take an incredibly strict view of the offside.
It's just about impossible to legally have hands and feet behind the line, and also defend those close-in charges. When goal line stands are successful, it's usually because the ref isn't as strict as he could be on that.
I'd be happy if the interpretation was you are onside if you have a foot on the onside line (try line) same as touch. Would even things up a bit
It's just about impossible to legally have hands and feet behind the line, and also defend those close-in charges. When goal line stands are successful, it's usually because the ref isn't as strict as he could be on that.
I'd be happy if the interpretation was you are onside if you have a foot on the onside line (try line) same as touch. Would even things up a bit
Last edited:
liquor box
Peter Sullivan (51)
Can someone explain when advantage should end?
I was going to ask this last week when the Reds lost but thought I would look like a sore loser, the Reds won last night so I will now be a sore winner.
My understanding of the advantage law is that the advantage ends when the non offending team gets an advantage. Three times last week against the Blues and once this week against the Crusaders the reds held up an opponent after they crossed the try line in possession of the ball and the referee went back to the penalty.
I cant understand how getting over the try line is not an advantage, you cannot get any closer to scoring points.
I believe the advantage should end and not go back to the penalty.
I was going to ask this last week when the Reds lost but thought I would look like a sore loser, the Reds won last night so I will now be a sore winner.
My understanding of the advantage law is that the advantage ends when the non offending team gets an advantage. Three times last week against the Blues and once this week against the Crusaders the reds held up an opponent after they crossed the try line in possession of the ball and the referee went back to the penalty.
I cant understand how getting over the try line is not an advantage, you cannot get any closer to scoring points.
I believe the advantage should end and not go back to the penalty.
drewprint
Nicholas Shehadie (39)
I’m pretty sure I heard on the ref comms on one of this weekends games chat of whether Team X had progressed 30 metres thus ending advantage.
LeCheese
Peter Johnson (47)
I just hate how inconsistent it is - between games/refs mostly, but even within the same games.
I understand that there's probably a level of flexibility and common sense to how it's applied, but a rule of thumb relating to metres gained over a number of phases or maximum time could be useful. E.g., something like teams have three phases or 60sec to make 20m - if successful then advantage over, if not it's called back
I understand that there's probably a level of flexibility and common sense to how it's applied, but a rule of thumb relating to metres gained over a number of phases or maximum time could be useful. E.g., something like teams have three phases or 60sec to make 20m - if successful then advantage over, if not it's called back
waiopehu oldboy
Stirling Mortlock (74)
The one that pisses me off is where a team playing under an advantage makes an unforced error & the ref goes back. You shouldn't be rewarded for e.g. dropping the ball cold or putting it out on the full.
Eyes and Ears
Bob Davidson (42)
I would answer it this way. At a relevant point in time, the referee would need to ask the question what would the non-offending team want ie to go back to the penalty with the high probability of 3 points OR to have advantage over and play on. My view is the only point in time that the non-offending team would not want to go back is when they have scored a try.
I think it would be appropriate to say that the interpretation of advantage in these situations is that advantage can only be over when a try is scored.
Another issue with the interpretation that you have offered is you disincentivise the non offending team from trying to score a try when they have advantage as there is a risk that they lose their 3 point opportunity.
Wilson
Michael Lynagh (62)
There's a variation advantage that has been trialed in the Reds Challenger series recently that I'd love to see go broader:
To be clear, that doesn't mean it's immediately advantage over after 3 phases, just that the ref has to call either advantage over or go back to the original infringement after 3 phases. Prevents big swathes of "dead rugby" and incentivizes teams to roll the dice and try something while they can.
Strewthcobber
Andrew Slack (58)
The laws define it as
Advantage ends when:
The referee deems that the non-offending team has gained an advantage......The referee allows play to continue.
So refs have to ask themselves whether the non-offending team has gained an advantage. Would they rather have the previous penalty awarded, or take the drop-out.
Once a penalty advantage is awarded in close, the laws make it very hard for it to end in anything except restarting with the penalty, or a try.
mst
Peter Johnson (47)
Advantage is where the referee is playing the game on behalf of a team, and decides, on behalf of a team, what they think is or isn't an advantage, regardless of what a team thinks, wants or is actually happening.
Generally there are two types of advantage.
The first and quite rare and is as a result of a referee identifying an infringement instantly and notifying a player (generally only the #9 is notified).
The other more prevalent advantage, is the retrospective identification of an infringement, that is delayed generally due to having to be go through the refereeing committee process, then via head of that committee to communicate to players. The TV match official who is part of the committee, (but generally referees more of the game than the other officials with access to technology, however the quality of decisions are still on par with the other 3 officials despite the access to technology), may also identify an infringement. The TV match official must provide supporting evidence, that can be put to the refereeing committee for consideration, resulting in in a delayed advantage due to the slow process of evidence gathering.
The advantage call facilitates a team the opportunity to take a time waiting speculative option which generally they would not use and in most cases fails. As a result, the play goes back to where infringement was identified and play restarts after some game time loss and a rest break for the professional athletes. If the speculative play succeeds, it relieves the Referee of any obligation of enforcing a penalty for the offence that was committed so the offence will be overlooked unless it is foul play.
Advantage also automatically provided immunity to the offending team to commit a second repeated offence, deliberately and cynically without the receiving the same consequence for such an act at other times of the games. This immunity only applies when a advantage situation is inforce.
This is due to the traditional approach to the application of Laws in games which is intended to avoid the enforcement of the Laws in preference of referees coaching and actively encouraging professional players to play within the laws. It is unilaterally accepted that the application of the Laws in games is inconvenient and disruptive to the game. This does tend to result in the games laws being the most subjective in application and interpretation compared to all other sports.
As such, the referee's decision in relation to advantage can be game defining for a team or teams as they will select the level of advantage or penalty to a team without the need for the teams to compete equally during game play. The consequence of advantage on supporters is that we can't work out if we are sore winner or losers the uncomfortable reality that the referee is overly influential and prevalent at times when it should have been about two teams competing equally.
The above also provides an explanation why the majority of referees are ex-players. The need to be able to play the game on behalf of a team during the advantage period to ensure a result, as well a be able to coach professional players on the Laws during a game.
Last edited:
waiopehu oldboy
Stirling Mortlock (74)
Three phases probably isn't long enough in the pro game but it's a step in the right direction.
Wilson
Michael Lynagh (62)
I wouldn't want to go much longer than 3. Maybe 3 phases for knock on advantage and 5 for penalty advantage.
waiopehu oldboy
Stirling Mortlock (74)
^ with the proviso that an unforced error means advantage is over I could live with that.
Wilson
Michael Lynagh (62)
Absolutely, the biggest issue I have with the inconsistent application right no is how long it can run for, anything that shortens that is an improvement in my book.
That length of advantage sis where o much of the inconsistency comes from at the moment. That, and forcing a team to defend 10+ phases on their tryline only to go back to the original infringement feels like getting the advantage twice in a lot of cases.
zer0
Jim Lenehan (48)
Surely an unforced error (i.e., knock-on or forward pass) ending advantage and causing a turnover will just lead to fewer decisions to run the ball (for risk of a knock-on or forward pass) and more decisions to kick it away for the territorial advantage? At the least you'd surely see far fewer speculative offload attempts without the advantage safety net.
SouthernX
Jim Lenehan (48)
I think once in the 22. Penalty advantage should be continuous til you either score or you hear a whistle. Inside the 22 is really a scoring/pressure opportunity and it instills discipline on the defending team to not continually F up
Between the 22s or inside your own 22. I think it should be 10m for a penalty advantage and 3 phases for knock on advantage.
Between the 22s or inside your own 22. I think it should be 10m for a penalty advantage and 3 phases for knock on advantage.
liquor box
Peter Sullivan (51)
I also hate that it is lost time, the clock should revert to the time that the infringement occurred
Highlander35
Andrew Slack (58)
What are people's opinions on the on field yellow given to the South African Loosehead in the U20s game?
I thought that was a clear as day red from a single viewing, and TMO seemed to agree. Does the TMO have the capacity to give an on field red rather than an upgraded one?
I thought that was a clear as day red from a single viewing, and TMO seemed to agree. Does the TMO have the capacity to give an on field red rather than an upgraded one?
Derpus
George Gregan (70)
Got a vid?