• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

Question about a referee

Ragey Erasmus

Hall of Fame
TRF Legend
Joined
Sep 20, 2011
Messages
11,299
Country Flag
England
Club or Nation
Bath
I have been wondering about this and maybe someone who knows the full powers of the ref can answer it. In the England game Launchbury was slowing the ball down and got a warning. He complied with the warning from Owens and was told he was ok. Next phase Care intercepts the pass and Owens brings it back for a penalty.

Does the referee have the power to call a penalty from previous phases of play and punish after the incident without external prompting (assistant ref or TMO). So they issue a warning but no advantage and change their mind later and make it a penalty. I was under the impression the referee had to call it there and then and couldn't arbitrarily decide to change his mind later.
 
Ref has decided Launchberry actions had a direct impact and clear and obvious as care intercepted so penalised.
Had there been no intercept then would have allowed play to continue.
Happens in every game you here the call of hands away nowt contentious.
 
Rule 6(8) of the World Rugby law book cover the Whistle and when the referee can blow it to start/stop the game.
Subsection B states he/she can blow it "To stop play. The referee has the power to stop play at any time." and Subsection G states he/she can blow it "When a penalty, free-kick or scrum is awarded."

Whatever about the decision being correct or not, I believe it was correct even if it was reached somewhat ungracefully, he was completely within his rights to make the call when he did.
 
Rule 6(8) of the World Rugby law book cover the Whistle and when the referee can blow it to start/stop the game.
Subsection B states he/she can blow it "To stop play. The referee has the power to stop play at any time." and Subsection G states he/she can blow it "When a penalty, free-kick or scrum is awarded."

Whatever about the decision being correct or not, I believe it was correct even if it was reached somewhat ungracefully, he was completely within his rights to make the call when he did.

So theoretically a ref can penalise a player as many phases after the incident as they want without calling advantage?
 
So theoretically a ref can penalise a player as many phases after the incident as they want without calling advantage?
Yeah! A ref can stop the game to have a beer on the sidelines but that would be poor performance of his duties as well! Bad performance from the ref is only dealt with after the fact though, a ref can't be penalised within the time of play so technically can do no wrong.
 
So theoretically a ref can penalise a player as many phases after the incident as they want without calling advantage?

Advantage is always available. They just signal it to tell the team and the spectators that the infraction was seen and they are free to take a chance.

Materiality is really just signal-less advantage. If a team can still get relatively quick ball that is their advantage.
 
As I will always say in this instance Launchburry should of rightly be pinged but its not like similar infractions were let go Owens on the day.

In this instance I'm more peeved by the fact it was an after the fact decision Owens saw the infraction and said it was okay. Then because of the result of infraction England scored a try he changed his mind.

Now in my book a referee has the right to call an infraction at any point if he has already not made a decision. On this case he had verbally agreed to tell Launchbury to stop which he did and Owens said he was good.

At this point Owens should not be allowed to revisit his decision as call mockery to refereeing. The whole point to a ref waving stuff off if he tells a player to stop is to make sure the game isn't perpetually stopped by penalties every time a ref waves something off in this manner he is basically 'its a penalty but I'll let it slide in the interest of the game despite the fact it will have directly impacted the team the infringment was against'.
Just because the impact was an intercept and a try doesn't mean Owens should be allowed to go back and revisit he's already allowed the player to commit the infringment. the problem also is why would a player then stop if he's told to by the ref if he knows he's going to get pinged for it anyway?


If Owens had said nothing I'd be on his side for the right to go back to the penalty but as he okayed it sorry I struggle to side with him.



I think the real question here is not whether Owens has the right to stop for penalty but whether he has the right to change his mind after verbally okaying it.
 

Latest posts

Top