Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Dexter, post: 2438403, member: 1978"] Scott didn't stop expecting a penalty, he stopped in anticipation of Hannant receiving the ball, this cost him forward momentum and at least 3 mtrs sideways. Below are the refs guidelines which were used for the interpretation of the try. IMO the advantage gained by Qld was the fact that Scott had to stop then try to catch up to where he would have been had Hannant not been there which brings section (b) into play. It shouldn't get to section (d) IMO, but when you read all the guidelines you can see why the refs get confused. a) It is the responsibility of the decoy runner/s not to interfere with the defending team. b) The ball runner cannot run behind his own team and gain an advantage. c) A sweep player may receive the ball on the inside of a block runner as long as there is depth on the pass to him. It there is no depth he needs to receive the ball on the outside of the block runner. d) Defensive decisions that commit defenders to decoy runners will not be considered obstruction. e) Attacking players who loiter next to the play the ball can be interpreted as obstructing the defending team. f) In the process of scoring a try an attacking player dives through or into the legs of the player who has played the ball a penalty will be awarded to the defending team. This action will be interpreted as obstruction. g) If in the opinion of the referee/video referee the play had no effect on the scoring of the try the try will be awarded. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Active Now

No members online now.

Total: 45 (members: 0, guests: 45)

Reply to thread

Log in

Active Now