Held up/goal line drop out "gray area".

[shebeen]

Final play becomes a huge call.
Unfortunately it will never be c&o, especially with players now diving in over the ball area after the whistle becoming a habit to make it even harder.


Can't fault the officials either way, but feel the laws put a lot of pressure on the officials with very little evidence to make the decision. It seemed a lot more equitable outcome to have the 5m scrum attacking ball.

 

[crossref]

Time was up, so whether held up should be a GLDO or (as it used to be ) a 5m scrum makes no difference.. either way time is up so end of the game

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Final play becomes a huge call.
Unfortunately it will never be c&o, especially with players now diving in over the ball area after the whistle becoming a habit to make it even harder.


Can't fault the officials either way, but feel the laws put a lot of pressure on the officials with very little evidence to make the decision. It seemed a lot more equitable outcome to have the 5m scrum attacking ball.

Why so?

 

[shebeen]

Why so?

(Ignoring the time clock issue.)

A bit similar to umpire's call in cricket. But here if the try was given then there wasn't enough evidence to overturn it.

It puts a lot of guesswork into it.

For the record, for what it's worth, Ardie Savea was adamant he had scored.

 

[crossref]

I am not sure what your point is @shebeen ?

Is it that refs should give benefit of the doubt to the attacker ?

Or that TMOs should ?

Or both?

Or is it about GLDO v 5m scrum ?

 

[Marc Wakeham]

(Ignoring the time clock issue.)

A bit similar to umpire's call in cricket. But here if the try was given then there wasn't enough evidence to overturn it.

It puts a lot of guesswork into it.

For the record, for what it's worth, Ardie Savea was adamant he had scored.

Taking your three points in order:

1: There was not enough evidence to give it either. So, I do not consider that relevant.
2: It is guess work both ways. So, I do not consider that relevant.
3: Totally irrelevant.

 

[Dickie E]

It suggests to me that it is a low percentage option to try to score in this way because if there is even a shred of doubt then the try won't be awarded.

In reality, Berry's on field decision wasn't "held up", it was "I haven't got a clue". To which the TMO responds with "I haven't got a clue, either. Let's go with the less contentious decision"

 

[shebeen]

I am not sure what your point is @shebeen ?

Is it that refs should give benefit of the doubt to the attacker ?

Or that TMOs should ?

Or both?

Or is it about GLDO v 5m scrum ?

Main point is the final one. 5m scrum is a much more equitable result for all if it is so inconclusive.

I think there is enough evidence since the GLDO being brought in to support this.

Obviously this is a law issue, but currently it has the officiating teams guessing.

 

[crossref]

I am not sure, is a 5m scrum really giving them a second bite at the cherry?

And so encourages endless pile ups over the line as , go for it, and if it doesn't work .. a scrum .. and just have another go.

A gldo is a reset , attackers still keep possession, but in open play

 

[didds]

Main point is the final one. 5m scrum is a much more equitable result for all if it is so inconclusive.

so no equity for the defence defending well and the attack taking a poor choice?

 

[tim White]

For me, it is either "unplayable" or "doubt about grounding". Both result in a 5m scrum. The ref had no chance of giving a definitive answer over try or no try.

 

[Dickie E]

For me, it is either "unplayable" or "doubt about grounding". Both result in a 5m scrum. The ref had no chance of giving a definitive answer over try or no try.

While I agree with your logic, I have no doubt that, if time remained, it would have been a GLDO

 

[crossref]

For me, it is either "unplayable" or "doubt about grounding". Both result in a 5m scrum. The ref had no chance of giving a definitive answer over try or no try.

I think every player on the pitch would be expecting either a try or a gldo.
If you gave a scrum they'd all be thinking you had made a law error

 

[tim White]

If I gave a try or goal line drop out that would be a guess (I can see your logic but I am not comfortable with it = I am comfortable I could sell "There's no possible way I can tell - Scrum 5")

 

[Volun-selected]

If I gave a try or goal line drop out that would be a guess (I can see your logic but I am not comfortable with it = I am comfortable I could sell "There's no possible way I can tell - Scrum 5")

I see the ball as taken in by yellow who are the attacking team and (assuming no foul play, stripping, etc. and staying with scenario in the video) I then see yellow going to ground with a teammate piling on to help drive.
Either the ball is grounded for the try, or held up. We can’t be sure of the try so it has to considered as held up for a GLDO. (But after time, so end of game)

 

[Dickie E]

I see the ball as taken in by yellow who are the attacking team and (assuming no foul play, stripping, etc. and staying with scenario in the video) I then see yellow going to ground with a teammate piling on to help drive.
Either the ball is grounded for the try, or held up. We can’t be sure of the try so it has to considered as held up for a GLDO. (But after time, so end of game)

But the law doesn't say that. It would be just as logical to say "we can't be sure if it's held up so it has to be considered as a try"

 

[Marc Wakeham]

But the law doesn't say that. It would be just as logical to say "we can't be sure if it's held up so it has to be considered as a try"

True. However, there is a principle (from meetings) that I feel can be used here "it it is a tied vote the casting vote maintains the status quo" appying it here suggests you leave the score unchanged.

 

[Volun-selected]

But the law doesn't say that. It would be just as logical to say "we can't be sure if it's held up so it has to be considered as a try"

Maybe I’m missing something? For me, the 5m s rum is for when I see the ball grounded but I’m not sure who grounded it, not if I’m unsure there was a grounding In the first place.

If I see a ball carrier diving to ground the ball then either they are successful and I see it grounded and deal with that, otherwise I consider it held up. I rarely (maybe one game a year) have an actual ref running touch so it’s all on me and this is how I quickly process this scenario.

Genuine question: Am I wrong in this interpretation of the law?

 

[crossref]

Maybe I’m missing something? For me, the 5m s rum is for when I see the ball grounded but I’m not sure who grounded it, not if I’m unsure there was a grounding In the first place.

If I see a ball carrier diving to ground the ball then either they are successful and I see it grounded and deal with that, otherwise I consider it held up. I rarely (maybe one game a year) have an actual ref running touch so it’s all on me and this is how I quickly process this scenario.

Genuine question: Am I wrong in this interpretation of the law?

Well, i agree with your interpretation. For me it's a choice of try or held-up (so GLDO)

 

[Balones]

Maybe I’m missing something? For me, the 5m s rum is for when I see the ball grounded but I’m not sure who grounded it, not if I’m unsure there was a grounding In the first place.

If I see a ball carrier diving to ground the ball then either they are successful and I see it grounded and deal with that, otherwise I consider it held up. I rarely (maybe one game a year) have an actual ref running touch so it’s all on me and this is how I quickly process this scenario.

Genuine question: Am I wrong in this interpretation of the law?

You are correct.