Penalty Kick blocked

The Fat

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/australia
#21
So to summarise so far,
Phil E >>>> Awards a PK but doesn't say where
ddjamo >>>> Awards a PK 10m forward of the original mark
didds >>>> Wants to card the lot but no indication of PK or mark
Dan_A >>>> Is more laid back than didds and cards the toucher but no indication of PK or mark
TheBFG >>>> PK at point where touched and maybe a YC for the toucher
Camquin >>>> Comments but no concrete decision
Dixie >>>> Is getting tougher as he gets older. YCs all round (+ the water boy and old blazers in the club house probably) PK but where?
Womble >>>> No decision but is curious and then later amazed
crossref >>>> Hints at PK in front of sticks
Nigib >>>> Has locked all vision aids in his car but manages to yell at the offenders
crossref >>>> Is now pointing fingers and shaking heads but still to clarify final decision
TheBFG >>>> TheBFG's nurturing side has emerged but the YCs are still cocked and ready to fly for any players with a hint of experience


I was hoping more people would say where they would award the ensuing PK and give a law reference.
 

Phil E

, Referees/Trains Referees in England
#22
I was hoping more people would say where they would award the ensuing PK and give a law reference.
Sorry, I thought it was obvious. My bad.

9.A.2 KICK AT GOAL - SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES
(d) Any player who touches the ball in an attempt to prevent a penalty goal being scored is illegally touching the ball.
Sanction: Penalty kick


Penalty kick: Unless a Law says otherwise (it doesn't), a penalty kick is awarded at the place of infringement.
 

Dave Sherwin

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/cayman.pn
#23
Agreed. PK at place of infringement. I would YC the toucher (since he is the only one actually in breach of a law) at any reasonable level. BUT... I would expect to manage out the offence long before it ever occurred; a lifting pod in front of the posts getting ready to lift would be pretty obvious and would get a very loud and repeated shout!
 

ddjamo

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/canada.pn
#25
the word "any" with regards to an infringement by the non kicking team tells me 10m up. two things:

- if they were shaping to lift - it would more than likely be managed by the referee.

- wouldn't this be a great time for a "penalty goal"? under the posts - award a penalty goal, yc the toucher and get on with the match.

the two issues. if the blocking takes away the goal and then the kicking side gets another shot and misses - the blocking team gained an advantage. conversely - if going with a pk at the place of infringement - that could be a HUGE game changer. now they are poised for a try.

"penalty goal" if not for an act of foul play a goal would have been scored....to me that's the fairest outcome but sadly not in law.
 

crossref

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/england.p
#26
"penalty goal" if not for an act of foul play a goal would have been scored....to me that's the fairest outcome but sadly not in law.
but current Law is sufficient to stop it ever happening ... .so there's not really a problem to be fixed.
 

beckett50

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/england.p
#27
My two penneth.

Award the PK at the point the ball was touched, as this is the place of the offence.
YC to the poor chap who touched it - rather than the whole pod - since he/she is the offender.

Yes, I was aware of the requirements of the defending team at the PK to goal :hap:

The problem with warning the defenders not to lift is that it is likely the move will start to take place either as the kicker is making his approach - and as Dixie said it would be poor form to put the kicker off his preparations and kick - or once the ball has already been kicked and then your warning becomes immaterial as ones mind is already seeking the likely sanction.

I agree that the level is irrelevant as far as penalising, but I would be less likely to card a (say) L8 and below than a L7. As for L6 and L5 it is bolt card all day long.
 

ddjamo

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/canada.pn
#29
I am intrigued by everyone wanting to give a YC -- in this real life game where a player actually attempts to block a kick, most posters didn't even want to PK him.
http://www.rugbyrefs.com/showthread.php?19310-What-s-the-decision
I am not making application to the resident debate club but I will point out that there are approx a dozen different responses to the OP. law is not clear. even with unclear application of law - I did not say it was a problem nor is it a problem in the game. the OP is clearly an anomaly.

if foul play takes away a goal - maybe it would be easy to have a PG just like we have a PT. that is clear...beam up the jumper in the OP and it's a goal.
 

Nigib

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/england.p
#30
Just to clarify my previous post - I don't subscribe to shouting for the obvious - it will likely put off the kicker. But being near to the kicker does have an advantage, in that most of the opposing team are looking that way, and hence I'm in their line of sight. So when they do stray (I've never seen pod-lifting, but I do see them with arms up, moving and so on from time to time) I will use a combination of ref glare, pointing and non-intrusive (to the kicker) hand waving to bring them to order. Never had to have a rekick.
 

The Fat

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/australia
#31
Well the correct answer to the OP is that a PK is awarded where the infringement occurs (illegally touching the ball 1m from the posts). We all know that the new mark will have to come back out to the 5m line.

I was interested to see where others would award the PK as I initially answered the exam question as per ddjamo's first response i.e. 10m forward of the original mark.

I'm not convinced it is worth a YC but that argument would gain strength if the kicker missed the 2nd kick from close range and in front of the posts when his original kick was going over. That is why I think ddjamo's liking of a PG has some merit.

It was a seemingly straight forward law question that again managed to divide opinion from some reasonably experienced refs on this forum so it was a good exercise I feel. Thanks for having a crack at it. Maybe I'll post another one. Got 3 wrong in the exam so I might post them one at a time to allow for some discussion of each before moving to the next one.
Cheers
 

The Fat

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/australia
#32
QUESTION 2 MAUL

Team A takes the ball into a maul. Team B "rips" the ball away from Team A within the maul. The maul then goes to ground legally, and the ball is available to be played at the back of the maul, but does not look likely to be played immediately by Team B. Which of the following statements is wrong?

A) The referee should call for Team B to "Use it!"

B) Team B has 5 seconds to use the ball after being told to use it by the referee.

C) If Team B does not use the ball within 5 seconds after being told to use it, the referee awards a scrum to Team B, because Team B did not take the ball into the maul initially.

D) If Team B does not use the ball within 5 seconds after being told to use it, the referee awards a scrum to Team A, because the ball was not used in time by Team B.


Single letter answer only please. After we get a few answers, we can go back and ask for a law reference to support your initial answer.
Cheers
 

ddjamo

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/canada.pn
#35
Well the correct answer to the OP is that a PK is awarded where the infringement occurs (illegally touching the ball 1m from the posts). We all know that the new mark will have to come back out to the 5m line.

I was interested to see where others would award the PK as I initially answered the exam question as per ddjamo's first response i.e. 10m forward of the original mark.

I'm not convinced it is worth a YC but that argument would gain strength if the kicker missed the 2nd kick from close range and in front of the posts when his original kick was going over. That is why I think ddjamo's liking of a PG has some merit.

It was a seemingly straight forward law question that again managed to divide opinion from some reasonably experienced refs on this forum so it was a good exercise I feel. Thanks for having a crack at it. Maybe I'll post another one. Got 3 wrong in the exam so I might post them one at a time to allow for some discussion of each before moving to the next one.
Cheers
Correct per what law or convention or was it the instructor's opinion?
 

The Fat

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/australia
#37
Correct per what law or convention or was it the instructor's opinion?
The OP is specifically covered by Law 9.A.2 where the sanction is a PK and as Law 21.1 tells us, unless a law states otherwise, the mark for the PK is at the place of the infringement.

The sanction listed at the end of 21.7 is where we see an infringement by the opposing team result in a new PK 10m in front of the original mark however, Law 21.7 does not mention touching the ball to prevent a penalty goal being scored whereas 9.A.2 does.

9.A.2
(d) Any player who touches the ball in an attempt to prevent a penalty goal being scored is illegally touching the ball.
Sanction: Penalty kick


21.1
Unless a Law states otherwise, the mark for a penalty or free kick is at the place of infringement.


21.7 What the opposing team must do at a penalty kick

(a) Must run from the mark.
(b) Must keep running.
(c) Kick taken quickly.
(d) Interference. The opposing team must not do anything to delay the penalty kick or obstruct the kicker. They must not intentionally take, throw or kick the ball out of reach of the kicker or the kicker’s team mates.

Sanction: Any infringement by the opposing team results in a second penalty kick, 10 metres in front of the mark for the first kick. This mark must not be within 5 metres of the goal line. Any player may take the kick. The kicker may change the type of kick and may choose to kick at goal. If the referee awards a second penalty kick, the second penalty kick is not taken before the referee has made the mark indicating the place of the penalty.
 

Camquin

Rugby Club Member
#38
If I were redrafting the laws I would move 9.A.2 into law 21 and 9.B into 22 In goal and leave law 9 as just the points values.
Law 7 and 9 also need forward references to the details in later laws.
In fact I might move the rump of law 9 into law 7.
 

ddjamo

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/canada.pn
#39
The OP is specifically covered by Law 9.A.2 where the sanction is a PK and as Law 21.1 tells us, unless a law states otherwise, the mark for the PK is at the place of the infringement.

The sanction listed at the end of 21.7 is where we see an infringement by the opposing team result in a new PK 10m in front of the original mark however, Law 21.7 does not mention touching the ball to prevent a penalty goal being scored whereas 9.A.2 does.

9.A.2
(d) Any player who touches the ball in an attempt to prevent a penalty goal being scored is illegally touching the ball.
Sanction: Penalty kick


21.1
Unless a Law states otherwise, the mark for a penalty or free kick is at the place of infringement.


21.7 What the opposing team must do at a penalty kick

(a) Must run from the mark.
(b) Must keep running.
(c) Kick taken quickly.
(d) Interference. The opposing team must not do anything to delay the penalty kick or obstruct the kicker. They must not intentionally take, throw or kick the ball out of reach of the kicker or the kicker’s team mates.

Sanction: Any infringement by the opposing team results in a second penalty kick, 10 metres in front of the mark for the first kick. This mark must not be within 5 metres of the goal line. Any player may take the kick. The kicker may change the type of kick and may choose to kick at goal. If the referee awards a second penalty kick, the second penalty kick is not taken before the referee has made the mark indicating the place of the penalty.
thanks for the info, opinion and thought provoking OP.