: Mon Apr 06, 2009 4:45 pm  

rugbyreddog wrote:

It was certainly a strange one. A penalty try is if you fail to score because of an infringement that prevented you from doing so. .

No, it isn't
[quote=The Rule Book"]the Referee may award a penalty try if, in his
opinion, a try would have been scored but for the
unfair play of the defending team. A penalty try is
awarded between the goal posts irrespective of
where the offence occurred.[/quote]

So yes, Halley did touch down not under the posts, and if the VR had decided there was no penalty, that would have been that.

However he decided that a try would have been scored but for the swinging arm. This is not the same "try" as was scored, and it would be wrong to say it should be. The infringement is the unfair play. It saved a possible try under the posts, or nearer the posts. It did not save a try altogether but I don't see why the infringing team should benefit from the fact that they didn't quite decapitate Halley, so that he didn't cross the line, but just twa##ed him around the head enough to still enable him to stagger over the line. If that was the case, now THAT would be a silly and manifestly unfair rule.

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 4:48 pm  

So why didn't we get the try and then a penalty try awarded as well?

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 10:31 pm  

Seemed to hear Ganson asking the video ref to look at the high tackle but saying that he intended to play the advantage. The 'penalty try' seemed a bit of an afterthought.

Correct decision would have been to award the try and then to deal with the foul. Catalan player should have been carded or placed on report.

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 10:34 pm  

When is a 6 point try awarded?

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 10:39 pm  

When the player is fouled in the act of scoring a try. For instance, player A smacks player B as he touches down. Play not affected, but additional penalty awarded.

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 10:46 pm  

Lucky Luke wrote:

When the player is fouled in the act of scoring a try. For instance, player A smacks player B as he touches down. Play not affected, but additional penalty awarded.

Thanks mate.

: Mon Apr 06, 2009 10:47 pm  

The Rule Book wrote:

the Referee may award a penalty try if, in his
opinion, a try would have been scored but for the
unfair play of the defending team. A penalty try is
awarded between the goal posts irrespective of
where the offence occurred.

So how does this translate into unfair play prevented a try from being scored in an advantageous enough position? A try was scored irrespective of the foul play. Not a penalty try.

: Tue Apr 07, 2009 12:00 am  

redballoon99 wrote:

No. If Halley had gone down and stayed down it would not have been a penalty try. He was too far out and there was a defender coming at him.
There is no certainty he would have scored without being fouled.He did the right thing by playing on and scoring.I think I know what Im trying to say as well.

Dont be too sure. The TJ was on and Ganson even said be prepared for a Penalty try. He would have still gone to the screen for the same reason had Halley not got up.

Either way it was the correct decision and as for the OP asking about an 8 point try... that is if foul play is committed after the try is scored.

Re: Penalty try : Tue Apr 07, 2009 5:46 am  

roversmad wrote:

and that warrants a penalty try
I dont think so

Yep, Halley did in fact put the ball down, wothout the act of foul play he would have scored under the posts, can't be any doubt that he would have as he did.

: Tue Apr 07, 2009 9:03 am  

vbfg wrote:

So how does this translate into unfair play prevented a try from being scored in an advantageous enough position? A try was scored irrespective of the foul play. Not a penalty try.

I'm surprised you ask. Your analysis is faulty.

1. There was, undoubtedly, a penalty offence in the lead-up to the 'try'.

2. The referee had 2 choices:
(a) give the Bulls the "advantage" and let Halley's try stand where he touched it down; or
(b) award the penalty.

In this case he also had the choice to refer the incident to the VR but the decision making process is the same, whether by the ref or by the VR.

3. This incident was correctly referred to the VR to consider, as it happened within the last play. I am assuming you agree that the VR can take action on any penalty offence he spots, by either attack or defence?

4. The referee obviously had his doubts as to whether or not he should allow "the advantage", and so passed it on to the VR.

4. The VR could also ignore the penalty, and allow the advantage, or he can award the penalty. He (rightly) chose to award the penalty.

5. It is a correct analysis to say that, but for the unfair play, a try would have been scored. Therefore it is a penalty try.

Your mistake is in assuming that, because Halley went on to touch down at a point after the penalty, this in some way binds the officials, but it doesn't. If they decide to award the penalty, Halley's actual touch-down is no longer relevant. The relevant play stops at the point of the penalised offence.

Think of a game with NO video referee. Ganson would then have to make the call. It would make no difference to the methodology. He could either play the advantage, and award a try where touched down, or NOT play the advantage, and award a penalty for the clothesline. Then, he has to decide what penalty he's going to give - and one, 100% legitimate, option is a penalty try.

Oh and obviously, the fact that the ref, like everyone else, knew Halley would have scored in a far better position but for the foul, undoubtedly and rightly will have convinced him that to ignore the penalty would not be any "advantage" to the Bulls, and would be a possible advantage for the offending team.