• Please bear with us. We have moved to a new provider, and some images and icons are not working correctly. We are working hard to fix this

End of Game - Did I get it Right?

G

Gracie


Referees in Scotland
Always happy to admit I may have got it wrong nad therby learn and this weekend I had just such an occasion. All insights appreciated to the following scenario:

Last play of the game and I award a penalty to red who kick for touch and take the have a line out in blue 22
Red knock on in the line out, ball still alive, advantage to blue
Blue spin the ball down the line and are advancing (well moving sideway) when blue captain alerts me to one of their players who is down injurd, allegedly for a late hit, but unseen by me and no ARs
Hame stopped and player safety checked; after a few minutes he is off the pitch
At this stage I called time, my rationale was that the ball was dead, but was I correct (I had not called 'advantage over')?

Many thanks
G
 
I think you are technically correct. It's unlucky for blue to suffer the injury, but ...

In some scenarios perhaps you could restart anyway - did the players know time had elapsed ? Was a it league game or friendly ? would both teams have actually been happy to continue ? how bad was the injury? Would re-starting merely be the opportunity for revenge ?
 
As above, technically the game was over (it would be a scrum restart), however only you know the time, I wouldn’t argue if you choose to restart, I wouldn’t necessarily advertise the fact time was over though
 
Why did you stop play? Was the injury serious? Was there risk to the injured player or medical staff in continuing to play? Why did Blue, with possession of the ball want play to be stopped?

I am not a fan of keeping the time a secret, then making up laws to suit your sense of justice.
 
All players knew we were into final play and the game, (league) was a draw as a result, as you can probably imagine it was tense and Red were happy for the game to end! I saw no option but to stop for the injury, having been made aware of it, as the player was flat out on the ground and no medical staff were attending to him. I suspect Blue might have been hoping for a penalty, but since I did not see the incident, all I could do was check he was OK.

I ran the decision through in my head before making it, accepting that it would draw some complaints. Your feedback is much appreciated

Many thanks
g
 
There was a thread on this a while back. I was in the minority when I said that play should have restarted.

This happened in a Super Rugby game in the last 2-3 years. On that occasion the ref (Gardner?) Said that he would not end the game with a scrum which he blew because an injured player was in the way. He said that would be unfair. He played the scrum, even though time had expired. He was unapologetic.

Personally I agree with this. No one has infringed and it seems wholly unfair to end the game when play was stopped on the discretion of the referee, and not due to an infringement.

I am happy to be criticised.
 
I remember that .

I think where the Laws are clear we have to ref to the Laws

If the Law is unfair it's up to WR to change it . Not stopping on an injury would be a good change
 
I personally agree with damo, but the laws don’t allow us, and if it’s known that time is over then you have to stick to the book (hence my comment above about time - if they don’t know, then you could restart if it felt right - however the higher level the game / more importance riding on it i’d probably be less inclined to do so) - I think you did right here
 
Both safety and enjoyment are improved when the referee follows the law.

If you make up law the disadvantaged team will not enjoy it
 
I remember hearing one of the southern hemisphere refs saying a few days ago, that you can't end on a squint throw at a LO. He proceeded with a scrum. (Might've been a Wales match, but I might be wrong). Then the ball was kicked out after that.

I'll try and find the match.

But there's def nothing I can see to support this (LO was from a Pen that was kicked to touch after time expired), but I guess technically the ball hasn't been returned to open play.

*Edit - Yes, Wales V Uruguay. Pen Blue kicked to touch, throw was squint.
 
Last edited:
Law 5.7

[LAWS].A half ends when the ball becomes dead after time has expired unless:
A scrum, lineout or restart kick following a try or touchdown, awarded before time expired, has not been completed and the ball has not returned to open play. This includes when the scrum, lineout or restart kick is taken incorrectly [/LAWS]
 
So, I read that as a scrum or LO awarded (before time has expired) must be completed then the next time the ball goes in-touch/knocked on then the half can end. So in this this case, the pen was kicked to touch. When it leaves the foot of the kicker, it's in open play and can be played? (Correct me if I'm wrong) so the ball is in play till it goes in-touch. The resultant LO to is taken, so does this mean that you can't end time from any offense from a LO?
 
Yes it means exactly that, you can't end time with an incorrect line out (or scrum or kick restart)

So not straight or not 5m = options

Of course a knock on at a line out would end time (unless advantage is played and gained !)
 
Arabcheif said:
So, I read that as a scrum or LO awarded (before time has expired) must be completed then the next time the ball goes in-touch/knocked on then the half can end. So in this this case, the pen was kicked to touch. When it leaves the foot of the kicker, it's in open play and can be played? (Correct me if I'm wrong) so the ball is in play till it goes in-touch. The resultant LO to is taken, so does this mean that you can't end time from any offense from a LO?
Click to expand...

Yes. Lineout not completed correctly. Depending on who knocks on? I would think this would be the intention of the laws. A side that wants the game to end could ‘accidentally’ knock-on just as they could throw incorrectly.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top