Crusaders v Rebels
-
@Damo said in Crusaders v Rebels:
But I do not appreciate people telling me what the rules say without even bothering to quote them or provide a law reference.
especially TV commentators, who do this for a damn job. Justin Marshall, I"m looking at you fella. And Phil Kearns, for that matter.
-
@Crucial said in Crusaders v Rebels:
@Damo said in Crusaders v Rebels:
@Damo said in Crusaders v Rebels:
@Chester-Draws said in Crusaders v Rebels:
@Damo said in Crusaders v Rebels:
@Damo said in Crusaders v Rebels:
That is an example when advantage should be over in my book. Rebels might have gone 80m if that pass had stuck. They had a clear advantage.
Instead we go back for a scrum 10 metres back from where the lineout would have been. Especially since it was only a scrum advantage. PK advantage would be different.
And again. Scrum advantage should be over once a team gets clean ball and are free to use it as they wish.
Except that's not what the rules say.
And I prefer referees who play to the actual rules, not dodgy commentators on chat groups.
Oh yeah. What does the law say? Enlighten me.
Fudge it. Can't resist:
Law 7(1):
Advantage:
a. May be tactical. The non-offending team is free to play the ball as they wish.
b. May be territorial. Play has moved towards the offending team’s dead-ball line.
c. May be a combination of tactical and territorial.
d. Must be clear and real. A mere opportunity to gain an advantage is not sufficient.I think that d. is the bit that annoys most viewers. This is exactly the previously described scenario where a player in the clear is passed to but drops the ball. Laws say that opportunity is not sufficient but to the viewer it looks like the team has already experienced an advantage to the point where they could have done well.
The other annoying one doesn't happen that often but can be awful. That is when a team is on attack in the 'red zone' and they keep making small inroads breaking down the defence. It can go on for ever giving them every chance to score a try before a handling error dictates going back.
There is a school of thought that if a team gets a PK advantage in the opposing teams 22m line, then the referee should never call 'advantage over'. Either the attacking team scores a try, or the attacking team comes back for a PK. I don't know if I quite subscribe to it, but I can see the logic for a PK advantage.
