Penalties, tries and penalty tries

[Bloke in North Dorset]

There was two incidences of something I've been wondering about for some time over the weekend.

On Friday a French player kicked through and was tackled off the ball, he managed to stumble just enough to ground the ball. The ref asked for TV replay to check the grounding and said if it wasn't grounded it was going to be a penalty try and  yellow card. The grounding was good but it was in the corner and the kick was missed.  If he hadn't grounded the ball the French would have been 2 points better off. Although it didn't affect the final score it might have affected the way Scotland approached closing the points deficit.

In our game the opposite happened. The ref gave a try but on checking it wasn't one, so penalty try and yellow card. Again it was in the corner and the kick may have been missed if the try had been awarded and that probably would have affected the final score.

My thoughts are that if a penalty is awarded in the act of scoring that would have led to a penalty try if they hadn't scored, should the attacking team be awarded the conversion, no matter where the try was scored?


Is this this is an area that needs addressing is there a better solution? I think it is, but I'm interested in what others who think more deeply about the game think because changes like this have unintended consequences

[NellyWellyWaspy]

It is, yes.

But, a penalty try can only be awarded if an offence prevented a try from being scored.

The issues around try scoring are many.

If a try is cored, pretty much any offence, no matter how heinous, seems to be overlooked or ignored. It may be that the rules dictate this is so. A modern day referee would have to confirm.

Let us take a not unlikely scenario. A winger gets the ball 5 out, near touch. Despite a head removing and dangerous high tackle, the winger gets it down before being blatted in to touch.

Worse, as he hits the ground, another defender piles in with their knees to his head.

From what I have seen over the last few years, no action would be taken on the pitch. The two defenders might get cited, or they might not.

My view is that if an offence is committed whilst attempting to prevent a try, or at the point of a try being committed, or even afterwards, the try would still be awarded to the scorer, but changed to a penalty try, and the perpeptrator(s) given at least a yellow, if not a red.

Similarly, when considering if an offence prevented a try within the 22m, and whether a penalty try should be awarded, the presumption should be that the try would have been scored, unless the situation was that it clearly would NOT have been.

Finally, with regard to consecutive penalties in the 5m 'red zone', two consecutive penalties should result in a penalty try and yellow. There needs to be an examination of whether the majority of scrum penalties should instead be a free klick, with no option to revert to a scrum.

And, during the match. Twice a Sale player ran or moved towards, well within the 10m, to try and charge down a kick. Surely that cannot be right? One was at Dan's quick tap over under the posts, the other at Jimmy somewhere near the bench as he kicked to touch. Both were less than 5m away when the penalty itself was taken.

[MarleyWasp]

Whilst debating with some friends whether Barnes should have awarded the penalty try instead of the try, I checked what the law actually says.

A penalty try is awarded between the goal posts if foul play by the opposing team prevents a probable try from being scored, or scored in a more advantageous position. A player guilty of this must be cautioned and temporarily suspended or sent off. No conversion is attempted

.

I wasn't aware of the bit in bold, but it could be argued that Penaud could have made it round underneath the posts. The likelihood of that happening though was slim.

One decision I really disagreed with was Ridley not awarding us a penalty try for Byron McGuigan. We had Josh lurking on the wing, and I think on the balance of probability we would have scored a try had McGuigan not knocked it on.

[Trevs Big Tackle]

I would say any try scored under a penalty advantage should have the conversion moved 15m closer to the posts.

Quite often you see a number of penalties conceded when defending rucks less than 5 meters out. The attack could be just centimeters away from the line close to the posts and defenders illegally slowing the ball or rushing up offside blocking a possible pass for an easy run in. Eventually a few phases later the attacking team manage to get the ball out to the winger who slides over in the corner. Those penalties conceded by the defence (but never actually awarded) effectively save the defending team two points.

[Chunky24]

The penalty try scenario is discussed here by Paul Smith.

https://amp.rugbypass.com/news/ref-watch-wayne-barnes-off-day-and-the-law-loophole-that-penauds-try-exposed/?__twitter_impression=true

[Bloke in North Dorset]

Interesting read, thanks.

[Chunky24]

I wonder if we will reach a stage where a team might decide conceding a 5 point try in the corner, enforcing a tricky touchline conversion and keeping 15 players is a better option than risking a guaranteed 7 pointer and going down to 14 with the yellow card.

Defending team put a couple of jumpers up but as soon as its lost and maul set then give it up!

[MarleyWasp]

I wonder if we will reach a stage where a team might decide conceding a 5 point try in the corner, enforcing a tricky touchline conversion and keeping 15 players is a better option than risking a guaranteed 7 pointer and going down to 14 with the yellow card.

Defending team put a couple of jumpers up but as soon as its lost and maul set then give it up!

I think we're already there. Think back to Bath away last season. Bath had a lineout in our 22 and drove to the line. Jack offended, but as soon as Barnes called advantage pulled out of the maul to allow the try. Bath had a touchline conversion, which they got but crucially we kept 15 men on the pitch.

A few minutes later we had a lineout and drove for the line. Underhill offended and didn't stop interfering, preventing a try, so we ended up with a penalty try and Bath had to finish the game a man down.

[hookender]

Think it should be treated as a if it were a penalty try . Time has already been used reviewing it ,so to help game speed up just award conversion. Notice in MLR  this season a try scored between the posts is treated as being an automatic 7 pts and kicker has only 60 seconds to take a penalty or conversion from elsewhere.

[DGP Wasp]

How about extend the use of the penalty restart?  Already available for foul play during or immediately after the act of scoring.  If a try is scored under penalty advantage then the attacking team restart the game with a penalty on half way.

[Nigel Med]

This is indeed a tricky one. Not the only loophole in rugby's complex laws.

There are a couple of possible solutions, either make a penalty try a try only with the conversion taken from in line with where the referee judges the try would most likely have been scored (which could easily be a difficult judgement) or in instances like Friday's match, if there is foul play that would have resulted in a penalty try, make the score 7 points with no need for a conversion.

I'm also concerned about the failure to properly punish foul play if a try is scored. Take a close look at Youngs try in the Wales-England match. The Welsh 15 attempts a high "seat belt" tackle which had it prevented Youngs scoring would unquestionably have resulted in a yellow card and penalty try. As Youngs scored (and Farrell converted) the full back went completely unpunished, that makes no sense.

I also agree that foul play in the act of scoring or more commonly just after should properly be sanctioned with the restart being a penalty to the try scoring team. I awarded a couple of those in my refereeing career and one player was close to being binned after a late challenge to a try scorer. It's particularly cowardly, the try scorer is not expecting it as the whistle has gone.