Why No Penalty Try?

Why didn't England get a penalty try?

Priestlands foul play stopped Corbs scoring a certain try.

Walsh bottled it.

Thoughts on this please.

The referee had no stock left. He omitted to replenish his bag of tricks.

Can I have some of what you are smoking please

Priestland was yellow carded for foul play 2m out and stopped a certain try.

Why no penalty try?

Because it did not fit the criteria

HERSH wrote:Priestland was yellow carded for foul play 2m out and stopped a certain try.

Why no penalty try?

It wasn't a certain try. a certain try is when the referee has no doubt that there weren't anyhitng that would prevent a try from being scored.

Wasn't a certain try as Corbs dropped the ball under little pressure from Priestland.

If you want to question the referee then ask why North wasn't carded for tapping the ball into touch deliberatley stopping Strettle gathering and why there was no English penalty awarded after the try wasn't given despite advantage being played.

The Halfpenny knock on in his own 22 which he actually stopped for and Walsh still didn't give was pretty bad as well.

Prop vs fly half 2m out nobody else around that is a certain try in my book.

formerly known as Sam wrote: why there was no English penalty awarded after the try wasn't given despite advantage being played.

.

As with the England Scotland game crossing the line and having an opportunity to ground the ball is considered advantage.

Hersh the fact that Priestland was there means that there was a defender in place. He was offiside that is why England got the penalty.

If Priestaldn came running in from the england side of the pitch to tackle from an offisde position then it could be construed as a penalty try.

At least against Italy Wales might win a game fair and square.

I think the fact it wasnt charlie hodgson chatrging down a kick made the ref assume England wouldve found a way to screw up the score ( maybe a fumbled swan dive?)
They are the new scotland

If you want to question the referee then ask why North wasn't carded for
tapping the ball into touch deliberatley stopping Strettle gathering
and why there was no English penalty awarded after the try wasn't given
despite advantage being played.

Yes, that was a terrible decision.

No penalty try, certainly not a certain try to be scored as there was a defender in place.

I'm genuinely hoping that all this try or no try / Priestsland and North foil play stuff fizzles out by tomorrow, it's beginning to wear thin...

It's happened a lot before (to a lot of teams) and I'm pretty sure that contentious decisions will happen again...

Time to move on...

Eustace H Plimsoll wrote:

If you want to question the referee then ask why North wasn't carded for
tapping the ball into touch deliberatley stopping Strettle gathering
and why there was no English penalty awarded after the try wasn't given
despite advantage being played.

Yes, that was a terrible decision.

Are you not allowed to put the ball out of play to stop the opposition taking advantage of their position?

Noble-Surfer wrote:

Eustace H Plimsoll wrote:

If you want to question the referee then ask why North wasn't carded for
tapping the ball into touch deliberatley stopping Strettle gathering
and why there was no English penalty awarded after the try wasn't given
despite advantage being played.

Yes, that was a terrible decision.

Are you not allowed to put the ball out of play to stop the opposition taking advantage of their position?

There are deemed legal ways to do it You may run it into touch. you may kick it into touch. If your hands are open with palmside at the top it can be deemed that you tried to catch it and it was knocked on.

HERSH you are going mental today!

Scott Williams is the bringing of nightmares!

I'm not questioning Wales win as such as I already knew they would win just like the apologetic IRB.

Its the standard of refereeing of late by the so called top Refs, we need to sort this out as its turning people away from our game judging by the people I've met today and they're Welsh.

Jesus, I'm already bored of people banging on about individual decisions. I was watching the game on Saturday with my brother who's a footballer and self-confessed know-nothing when it comes to the rules of rugby. At one point where the ref overturned a decision based on the linesman's call and then the commentators were arguing over whether the decision was correct, he turned to me and said: "There are a lot of marginal calls in rugby aren't there? In football the ref either gets it right or he gets it wrong, but in rugby there are plenty of subjective decisions where it could go either way."

I said: "Yeah, that is the nature of the game. That's why in rugby we just accept that the referee's decision is final and that the calls one way or another will balance out over the course of a match or a tournament."

Personally I felt that Wales got the slight rub of the green here (but then as an Englishman I would - I've heard Welshmen say the direct opposite!), but I don't begrudge them it as we'll certainly find the boot on the other foot in the not too distant future...

Blame the weather when Ireland beat England.

The "hand of North" incident was also deserving of a penalty try under the letter of the law.

I can understand one of the two obvious penalty tries being missed, but for the officials to miss two clear penalty tries and then disallow a third legitimate try ... as the saying goes: one is an accident, two is a conincidence, three is a conspiracy.

Why not call these threads ' it was the ref's fault'?
For goodness sake, when England win it's claimed every other nation are whinging about the ref. I'm sure England's fans have the monopoly by now on the whining after the game ' it's the refs fault........should have been a penalty.....why wasn't a penalty try awarded'......etc etc. Even before the games now, whoever the ref is theres a comment or thread claiming hes going to be unfair to England.
Just accept you lost to the better team and move on.

Should have been a penalty try just for Wales fielding north as it is so unfair.

But I don't think we did on Saturday, a draw would have been a fair result.

Thne only thing turning people away from the game is the name HERSH!!!

RE the penalty try;

Preistland was offside by half a yard, but in place, there was another defender outside him, the penalty and yellow was givan as a deliberate act to stop quick ball, which it was, if Corbs ever had control of the ball it would be one thing, but as he was losing it anyway the odds of a try were more like 10% than 90% and even if it were 90% is enough for the ref not to give a pen try.

RE North;

He slaps the ball into touch, penalty, but from a refs point of view the ball was played opposite side of the body to where Strettle was, and North hands were both there in an attempt to play the ball, plus Strettles body is blocking the refs view of who touches it last, I think the linesman called it off North.

RE not coming back for the pen;

As an exact replica of the Scotland game, a crossing of the line, an attempt to score the try and a resultant TMO decision means advantage is over.

I am in no way justifying what may have been poor decisions, but from a refs perspective they were correct decisions, as were the one not to award Wales a penalty try when the English scrum dissapeared 3 metres out, or the numerous occasions of hands on the ball.

From my POV Walsh was ok, but he was safe, and I'll take safe over a Wayne Barnes style look at me at all costs attitude any day of the week!

thebluesmancometh wrote:Thne only thing turning people away from the game is the name HERSH!!!

RE the penalty try;

Preistland was offside by half a yard, but in place, there was another defender outside him, the penalty and yellow was givan as a deliberate act to stop quick ball, which it was, if Corbs ever had control of the ball it would be one thing, but as he was losing it anyway the odds of a try were more like 10% than 90% and even if it were 90% is enough for the ref not to give a pen try.

RE North;

He slaps the ball into touch, penalty, but from a refs point of view the ball was played opposite side of the body to where Strettle was, and North hands were both there in an attempt to play the ball, plus Strettles body is blocking the refs view of who touches it last, I think the linesman called it off North.

RE not coming back for the pen;

As an exact replica of the Scotland game, a crossing of the line, an attempt to score the try and a resultant TMO decision means advantage is over.

I am in no way justifying what may have been poor decisions, but from a refs perspective they were correct decisions, as were the one not to award Wales a penalty try when the English scrum dissapeared 3 metres out, or the numerous occasions of hands on the ball.

From my POV Walsh was ok, but he was safe, and I'll take safe over a Wayne Barnes style look at me at all costs attitude any day of the week!

Top post.

"Thne only thing turning people away from the game is the name HERSH!!!
"

Someone has to ask the difficult questions

I agree with BMC,

No probability that a try would have been scored - therefore no penalty try should be awarded.

North should have been penalised - IF the officials had actually seen the incident as clearly as the cameras later showed it. They have just one look and from a much lower angle. Normally you would then say that penalty is sufficient - but being at such a critical time and a deliberate offence some refs may have carded it - but not many.

England had gained clear advantage following the offence in the left corner, and to be honest (even though I believe it was grounded over the line) england buitchered a fairly routine scoring chance. No reason to go back for the penalty.

Lot of rubbish being spoken about on this thread (as per usual when people start talking about refereeing despite not knowing anything about the Laws of the game - see myths about "got to let him up", "downward pressure", "can't take a second quick one" etc.).

Priestland was rightly yellow-carded for a cynical offence in the red zone after warnings. To suggest a PT is a bit silly though as Wales had a few defenders around. Sure, England might have scored a try, but no ref would give PT in that situation.

Having said that the North slap into touch was a clear PT and YC, and should have been seen by the touch judge (Walsh was a way away and had IMO no way of telling how the ball had gotten into touch).

Overall walsh had a pretty good game and was consistent.

biltongbek wrote:

Noble-Surfer wrote:

Eustace H Plimsoll wrote:

If you want to question the referee then ask why North wasn't carded for
tapping the ball into touch deliberatley stopping Strettle gathering
and why there was no English penalty awarded after the try wasn't given
despite advantage being played.

Yes, that was a terrible decision.

Are you not allowed to put the ball out of play to stop the opposition taking advantage of their position?

There are deemed legal ways to do it You may run it into touch. you may kick it into touch. If your hands are open with palmside at the top it can be deemed that you tried to catch it and it was knocked on.

From what I remember, I thought North hit/ punched/ palmed the ball out, but I also thought he was running back towards his own try line when he knocked the ball out of play. So, although although he would have knocked the ball forwards from his own direction of play, it would have gone backwards from Wales' direction of play, i.e. towards their own try line. Was it not a 'knock- back' rather than a 'knock- on'?

HERSH wrote:"Thne only thing turning people away from the game is the name HERSH!!!
"

Someone has to ask the difficult questions

Haha Wales beat England.

Code:

The "hand of North" incident was also deserving of a penalty try under the letter of the law.

I can understand one of the two obvious penalty tries being missed, but for the officials to miss two clear penalty tries and then disallow a third legitimate try ... as the saying goes: one is an accident, two is a conincidence, three is a conspiracy..

No it's a yellow card. You are not allowed to throw the ball into touch. If would not have been a penalty try as there is no certainty that Strettle would have otherwise scored.

formerly known as Sam wrote: You are not allowed to throw the ball into touch.

I wish someone had told that to Mike Tindall when he kept chucking passes over the wingers heads at the world cup

very good peter

Idris - England 1 RWC - Wales 4th place

The prop didn't even have control of the ball and knocked on before preistland even touched him so how can you say a try would have been scored. Plus there were defenders in place.

It's funny if this was reversed and some welsh posters had commented on this it would be deemed as usual whining from the welsh. I've read posts stating if we lose how we are going to blame everything but ourselves, and then come on the boards and see these outbursts.

Part of the problem is that too many refs are now awarding penalty tries for repeat scrum offences rather than a deliberate offence when being marched backwards.

Too many spectators seem to believe that denying a try scoring opportunity is a PT. It isn't.

"A penalty try is awarded if a try would probably have been scored but for foul play by the defending team."

"Plus there were defenders in place."

No there wasn't

Guys I'm not sure who you think was running the line but North and Strettle were both at full tilt and had been for 20 yards, because the linesman couldn't get beside them in time to see whos fingertips pushed the ball out is not his fault, as I said Strettles body blocks the refs view, Norths the Linesmans view who was 10 metres behind trying to keep up (poor bugger)

Plus the ball was about 5mm from Strettles fingers, I had to watch it twice to see who pushed it out... in slow motion, the ref and Linesamn had one chance to see it from 10 meters away plus with obstructed views against 2 of the quickest players on the feild, ne ref in the world could've seen and confidently called that a yellow and PT!!!

London Tiger

I agree with you totally, England played their play, ok they only gained 10 metres or so, but had a clear try scoring opportunity and by the letter of the law played the adavntage as it went to the TMO.

(I also agree the ball was grounded, despite the ball being held from underneath) But then I also beleive the Scots grounded the ball too to win the game so come on guys swings AND roundabouts, you can't whinge so hard this week when last week Scotland really should've won too.

"Plus there were defenders in place."

No there wasn'

Are you serious? I suggest you watch the highlights because you will see about 4 welsh players are back in the defensive line. Anyway the prop had knocked on so it's irrelevant.

Nice to see some posters gracious in defeat. Wonder what other Excuses England didn't win you can conjure up?

No there wasn't re-watch it.

Impossible Standards wrote:

"Plus there were defenders in place."

No there wasn'

Are you serious? I suggest you watch the highlights because you will see about 4 welsh players are back in the defensive line. Anyway the prop had knocked on so it's irrelevant.

Nice to see some posters gracious in defeat. Wonder what other reasons England didn't win you can conjure up?

Priestland was there and I am pretty sure he was a defender.

It is really a very simple law, no need for this confusion.

IF Priestland was the only defender nearby AND he came running back from the halfway line towards the ruck AND interfered with the ball carrier FROM that offside situation, ONLY then is the possibility of a penalty try an option.

If Priestland WAS ALREADY THERE, but in an offside position then he would be penalised for OFFSIDE ONLY.

Simples.

ok Halfpenny is there, so is falateu, AWJ is also running back and take the line.

I think HERSH should take this to the high court.

News International phone hacking move over!

Theres an idea Ibis!

I'm not convinced George North knocked the ball deliberately into touch. He tapped it down to stop Strettle getting his hands on it. Yes, it then went into touch, but I don't think that was the intention.

Well I was going to come on the board and congratulate the England fans on their teams much improved performance but then I see this thread and just think why bother. People seem to want to focus on this instead.

As Bilton says, Priestland was defending, not a penalty try

North handing the ball into touch, well Strettle wasnt anywhere near it, North could have gathered the ball really as he was the only one that touched it but took a gamble.

You need to get over this and finish the 6nations off in style, stop acting like you were robbed when at best you could have gotten a draw.

Noble-Surfer wrote:

biltongbek wrote:

Noble-Surfer wrote:

Eustace H Plimsoll wrote:

If you want to question the referee then ask why North wasn't carded for
tapping the ball into touch deliberatley stopping Strettle gathering
and why there was no English penalty awarded after the try wasn't given
despite advantage being played.

Yes, that was a terrible decision.

Are you not allowed to put the ball out of play to stop the opposition taking advantage of their position?

There are deemed legal ways to do it You may run it into touch. you may kick it into touch. If your hands are open with palmside at the top it can be deemed that you tried to catch it and it was knocked on.

From what I remember, I thought North hit/ punched/ palmed the ball out, but I also thought he was running back towards his own try line when he knocked the ball out of play. So, although although he would have knocked the ball forwards from his own direction of play, it would have gone backwards from Wales' direction of play, i.e. towards their own try line. Was it not a 'knock- back' rather than a 'knock- on'?

The direction of the knock doesn't matter. You are not allowed to throw the ball/punch the ball/knock the ball out of play. You can only kick it out.

North handing the ball into touch, well Strettle wasnt anywhere near it, North could have gathered the ball really as he was the only one that touched it but took a gamble.

Suggest you look at it again. Strettle was right there. So close in fact that Walsh had to question the TJ to ask who had put it into touch. He then pauses and asks again "Wales knocked it into touch?" then another pause "he knocked it into touch?" clearly he was considering a penalty/penalty try and decided not to for some reason.

North cheated and the Ref bought it, that happens in games.

Iron Mike