Ben Young's try v Italy

by GunsGerms Tue 17 Feb 2015, 8:04 pm

With the score 18-10 to England and 26 minutes left on the clock Youngs took a quick tap and scored under the posts. For me this was the nail in Italy's coffin but should it have been allowed?

Not sure of the rule but when he tapped there were 4 England players ahead of him all blocking the Italians to his right. He also ran into his own man on the way to scoring the try. Accidental offside?

Thoughts?

Ben Young's try v Italy 14242010

I think Italy were a little hard done by with the Vunapola try previously too.

It was however a schoolboy error for the Italian to give Youngs the ball and then turn his back.

by WELL-PAST-IT Tue 17 Feb 2015, 8:10 pm

Taking a quick tap with players ahead of him, no problem

The Italians cannot tackle him until he has gone 10m, or they are behind the line, or they were behind the line and can approach forwards.

So no problem.

by Heaf Tue 17 Feb 2015, 8:16 pm

None of the Italians even knew what was happening until it was too late so to disallow it for any imaginary obstruction would have been more than harsh ... not sure of your point re Vunapola's try either - it was perfectly legal so why were they hard done by?

by GunsGerms Tue 17 Feb 2015, 8:17 pm

What about running into your own man?

Fair point on the 10 meters.

by Heaf Tue 17 Feb 2015, 8:20 pm

Most refs nowadays won't call an accidental obstruction if it doesn't have a material effect - as there was no Italian player remotely looking like making a tackle it was not called.

by Cyril Tue 17 Feb 2015, 8:20 pm

I'd try and argue that some of Ireland's tries looked a bit dodgy, but I'm struggling to find any this championship.

Guns, this is a very ghost

-like thread. Careful now Smile

by Steve_rugby Tue 17 Feb 2015, 8:23 pm

Nothing wrong with Youngs try, if any of the players in shot (apart from the one with his foot on the line had tackled Youngs, then it would have been a penalty try and a yellow card. He only brushed the arm of the his own player, so not exactly "running into his own player". Next.

by GunsGerms Tue 17 Feb 2015, 8:24 pm

Cyril wrote:I'd try and argue that some of Ireland's tries looked a bit dodgy, but I'm struggling to find any this championship.

Guns, this is a very -like thread. Careful now

Yes I am grey ghosts Irish cousin. Just throwing the question out there.

Tommy O'Donnell got a nice one v Italy.

by No 7&1/2 Tue 17 Feb 2015, 8:28 pm

What advantage did he gain from brushing Kruis? The Italians were no where near him at that point.

by WELL-PAST-IT Tue 17 Feb 2015, 8:29 pm

GG is suffering from nerves about 01/03/15, got to try and keep up Celtic confidence.

I work with a lot of Irish guys, they are sh1tt1ng themselves at the moment at the thought of what England MIGHT do to them ahead of a RWC. Confidence is everything to the Irish.

Well, they are heading to the toilet a lot after discussing the game, but that just might be the food.

Hug

by WELL-PAST-IT Tue 17 Feb 2015, 8:29 pm

GG cousin to GG.......................................

No, one has too much common sense.

by GunsGerms Tue 17 Feb 2015, 8:32 pm

I might be nervous during the game but just looking forward to it now. My favorite fixture in rugby. Losing to England wont have much bearing on the WC IMO.

We just beat our two group rivals France and Italy. We cant meet England until the semis in any scenario so it doesnt matter that much.

by WELL-PAST-IT Tue 17 Feb 2015, 8:40 pm

GG, working with so many Irish lads, I have decided to shift my allegiance to Ireland for non England games, I always used to support France, purely because of the style of rugby they played. Not now, worse than England when they had a 10 man game. Ireland are not so much better at the moment, lacking attacking flair, but the guys I work with are so good natured about the game in general and such good craic I can't support anyone else.

by GunsGerms Tue 17 Feb 2015, 8:42 pm

Why not Wales?

Just kidding. England is one of my favorite teams too.

by WELL-PAST-IT Tue 17 Feb 2015, 8:53 pm

GG, apart from Gatball which is an abomination, effective, but still an abomination to rugby in general it's a long and old story.

Many years ago, I got engaged to a Welsh girl, (born in Sussex but with a Welsh father, so Welsh). She took me to meet her grandparents in Cwmbran, they spoke perfectly good English, but Welsh was their home tongue. As soon as they found out that I was a thoroughbred Englishman, without an ounce of Welsh blood , they reverted to Welsh all weekend and didn't speak to me.

Not a good weekend, destroyed the relationship and I have never liked the Welsh as a race since. Had some decent Welsh mates but as a race I have been disillusioned. Good thing it happened though as I have been married to my Mrs. for thirty five years now and would never have met her if I had married my ex of that time.

by Heaf Tue 17 Feb 2015, 9:30 pm

Oh dear, somewhere in Saint's world an alarm has just gone off ...

by Gooseberry Tue 17 Feb 2015, 9:42 pm

Try going back 3 phases then you can probably find something to rule it out Rolling Eyes

by WELL-PAST-IT Tue 17 Feb 2015, 9:42 pm

Heaf,

Please don't mix up Saint's world and Northampton Saints world. One is top of the AP ( although not playing well) the other is somewhere to the north of cloud cuckoo land.

by stub Tue 17 Feb 2015, 9:50 pm

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:GG, apart from Gatball which is an abomination, effective, but still an abomination to rugby in general it's a long and old story.

Many years ago, I got engaged to a Welsh girl, (born in Sussex but with a Welsh father, so Welsh). She took me to meet her grandparents in Cwmbran, they spoke perfectly good English, but Welsh was their home tongue. As soon as they found out that I was a thoroughbred Englishman, without an ounce of Welsh blood , they reverted to Welsh all weekend and didn't speak to me.

Not a good weekend, destroyed the relationship and I have never liked the Welsh as a race since. Had some decent Welsh mates but as a race I have been disillusioned. Good thing it happened though as I have been married to my Mrs. for thirty five years now and would never have met her if I had married my ex of that time.

Sounds like you were very unlucky with your potential Welsh in laws there W-P-I - I suppose every nation has its racists... For my part I have found the Welsh to be good folk and my (Welsh) in laws made me feel welcome from day one. That said, come the Six Nations (or any rugby), there is a transformation in the country and there is more of an edge to their feelings towards the English!!

by Heaf Tue 17 Feb 2015, 9:52 pm

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:Heaf,

Please don't mix up Saint's world and Northampton Saints world. One is top of the AP ( although not playing well) the other is somewhere to the north of cloud cuckoo land.

by WELL-PAST-IT Tue 17 Feb 2015, 9:54 pm

Stub,

As I said, probably good fortune, met my current (and only wife) not long after and had 35 years of absolute bliss........................... well 34 years 350 days.

by lostinwales Tue 17 Feb 2015, 9:56 pm

Heaf wrote:Oh dear, somewhere in Saint's world an alarm has just gone off ...

Thankyou. Despite everything there is some good stuff on here (especially in the scottish threads) But this line laughing

by stub Tue 17 Feb 2015, 9:59 pm

Well when you put it like that W-P-I it sounds like it definitely was the best turn of events Very Happy

I was just saying that it's probably rare to find prospective Welsh in-laws who would go out of their way to make an Englishman quite so unwelcome!!

Anyway here's to the next 35 years of bliss to you both! Bubbly

by WELL-PAST-IT Tue 17 Feb 2015, 10:01 pm

Cheers Stub, that's what we said 16 days ago on our anniversary.

by Heaf Tue 17 Feb 2015, 10:52 pm

lostinwales wrote:
Heaf wrote:Oh dear, somewhere in Saint's world an alarm has just gone off ...

Thankyou. Despite everything there is some good stuff on here (especially in the scottish threads) But this line

You're welcome - I do try Very Happy

by **Biltong** Tue 17 Feb 2015, 10:56 pm

GunsGerms wrote:With the score 18-10 to England and 26 minutes left on the clock Youngs took a quick tap and scored under the posts. For me this was the nail in Italy's coffin but should it have been allowed?

Not sure of the rule but when he tapped there were 4 England players ahead of him all blocking the Italians to his right. He also ran into his own man on the way to scoring the try. Accidental offside?

Thoughts?

I think Italy were a little hard done by with the Vunapola try previously too.

It was however a schoolboy error for the Italian to give Youngs the ball and then turn his back.

Ronan O'Gara did the exact same thing after Honiss gave Ireland a penalty in 2004, only difference was Honiss instructed John Smit to go have a talk to his players, and yet allowed the quick tap try. Wink

by **Rugby Fan** Wed 18 Feb 2015, 12:17 am

I'm a glass half-empty rugby supporter, so I did wonder whether the try might be called back for obstruction when I saw it live, because it did look like he had been shielded.

On replay, though, it was fine. He didn't run into his own man, and no-one was blocked from making a tackle. Youngs tapped on the mark right next to the referee, so the official had a perfect view of the play.

by majesticimperialman Wed 18 Feb 2015, 3:12 am

Heaf wrote:None of the Italians even knew what was happening until it was too late so to disallow it for any imaginary obstruction would have been more than harsh ... not sure of your point re Vunapola's try either - it was perfectly legal so why were they hard done by?

To be honest i don't think any of the England team knew what was happening either.

by **George Carlin** Wed 18 Feb 2015, 5:41 am

stub wrote:
WELL-PAST-IT wrote:GG, apart from Gatball which is an abomination, effective, but still an abomination to rugby in general it's a long and old story.

Many years ago, I got engaged to a Welsh girl, (born in Sussex but with a Welsh father, so Welsh). She took me to meet her grandparents in Cwmbran, they spoke perfectly good English, but Welsh was their home tongue. As soon as they found out that I was a thoroughbred Englishman, without an ounce of Welsh blood , they reverted to Welsh all weekend and didn't speak to me.

Not a good weekend, destroyed the relationship and I have never liked the Welsh as a race since. Had some decent Welsh mates but as a race I have been disillusioned. Good thing it happened though as I have been married to my Mrs. for thirty five years now and would never have met her if I had married my ex of that time.

Sounds like you were very unlucky with your potential Welsh in laws there W-P-I - I suppose every nation has its racists... For my part I have found the Welsh to be good folk and my (Welsh) in laws made me feel welcome from day one. That said, come the Six Nations (or any rugby), there is a transformation in the country and there is more of an edge to their feelings towards the English!!

by GunsGerms Wed 18 Feb 2015, 9:44 am

Biltong wrote:

Ronan O'Gara did the exact same thing after Honiss gave Ireland a penalty in 2004, only difference was Honiss instructed John Smit to go have a talk to his players, and yet allowed the quick tap try.

I know I was there. it was bliss. ROG didnt run into his own man though.

by GunsGerms Wed 18 Feb 2015, 9:45 am

Rugby Fan wrote:I'm a glass half-empty rugby supporter, so I did wonder whether the try might be called back for obstruction when I saw it live, because it did look like he had been shielded.

On replay, though, it was fine. He didn't run into his own man, and no-one was blocked from making a tackle. Youngs tapped on the mark right next to the referee, so the official had a perfect view of the play.

Thanks for this post.

by doctor_grey Wed 18 Feb 2015, 10:06 am

I think that quick tap is something Youngs does very well. He scored a try off one against Ireland a couple of years ago. A good piece of his game.

I am not sure the law interpretation is this case: If an England player shields off an opposing player who has not retreated the 10 yards (or to the line), is that obstruction since the player is not allowed to tackle Youngs? And since this happened down on the Italy line, if an Italian player who has not retreated goes to tackles Youngs, is that a penalty try?

by MichaelT Wed 18 Feb 2015, 10:16 am

I would have thought Youngs was half expecting he would be called back too. If you watch the footage of Care doing the same thing to Wales last year on his try, to me it looks like he looks back to the ref slightly before starting to celebrate.

by Poorfour Wed 18 Feb 2015, 10:37 am

doctor_grey wrote:I think that quick tap is something Youngs does very well. He scored a try off one against Ireland a couple of years ago. A good piece of his game.

I am not sure the law interpretation is this case: If an England player shields off an opposing player who has not retreated the 10 yards (or to the line), is that obstruction since the player is not allowed to tackle Youngs? And since this happened down on the Italy line, if an Italian player who has not retreated goes to tackles Youngs, is that a penalty try?

Refs are taught to think about the sequence of events and about materiality.

In this situation, once the ref has allowed the quick tap, the immediate relevant question is: have the Italian defenders retreated behind their tryline? From what I can see, they hadn't, meaning that none of them are in play. Given that, it would be very pedantic to give an accidental offside for the contact with Kruis, because there's no defender who's in a position to be affected by the contact.

For what it's worth, I was initially a little surprised that he allowed the quick tap given there was some time between the whistle and Youngs taking the tap. But technically it's the non-offending team's choice how they use the penalty (anyone else remember the days when they'd just line up a couple of big ball carriers and take a tap rather than go for the scrum or lineout?), and the important point is that it's taken on the mark, which Youngs clearly did.

by Gooseberry Wed 18 Feb 2015, 10:49 am

Poorfour wrote:
For what it's worth, I was initially a little surprised that he allowed the quick tap given there was some time between the whistle and Youngs taking the tap. But technically it's the non-offending team's choice how they use the penalty (anyone else remember the days when they'd just line up a couple of big ball carriers and take a tap rather than go for the scrum or lineout?), and the important point is that it's taken on the mark, which Youngs clearly did.

No one had indicated they were going to take a kick at goal, till then the "quick" tap is still an option.

by yappysnap Wed 18 Feb 2015, 11:03 am

I'm pleased the ref let the quick tap go. Too often now we see play brought back because it wasn't taken within a few inches of the exact spot the offence occured (as decided by the ref).

This infuriates me as the players are trying to speed things up and the ref is pedantically slowing things down, doubley annoying as it seems now when you kick for touch you can wander 2 or 3 steps to make your kick easier and likewise with kicks at goal. The sinical side of me thinks the ref calls it back just because he's knackered and doesn't want to chase play.

World Rugby should go with Austin Healy's idea that a quick tap can be taken anywhere behind an imaginery line where the offence occured, that'd speed games up, stop so many teams going for repetitive scrums or lineouts to con penalties and give teams who aren't overly strong at the set piece a chance to attack and get points.

by yappysnap Wed 18 Feb 2015, 11:03 am

Went off on a slight tangent there

by Gooseberry Wed 18 Feb 2015, 11:07 am

The ref also has to see the tap, thats the usual reason why its called back.

by No 7&1/2 Wed 18 Feb 2015, 11:20 am

Is that in the laws?

by Jimpy Wed 18 Feb 2015, 11:21 am

Gooseberry wrote:
Poorfour wrote:
For what it's worth, I was initially a little surprised that he allowed the quick tap given there was some time between the whistle and Youngs taking the tap. But technically it's the non-offending team's choice how they use the penalty (anyone else remember the days when they'd just line up a couple of big ball carriers and take a tap rather than go for the scrum or lineout?), and the important point is that it's taken on the mark, which Youngs clearly did.

No one had indicated they were going to take a kick at goal, till then the "quick" tap is still an option.

Geordan Murphy did it once for Tigers - it was a while ago and I don't recall who the opposition were. But, Tigers got a penalty in a kickable position on the left hand side of the pitch. Murphy at no time indicated to the Ref, who was stood next to him what his intentions were. Everyone just assumed he was going to kick and so the oppostion had retreated underneath their own posts. As soon as Murphy saw that they were nicely out of the way, he picked up the ball, tapped and went. Ran 22 yards unapposed and scored in the corner.

Loved it.

by **LondonTiger** Wed 18 Feb 2015, 11:30 am

No 7&1/2 wrote:Is that in the laws?

21.4 Penalty and free kick options and requirements
(d) A clear kick. The kicker must kick the ball a visible distance. If the kicker is holding it, it must clearly leave the hands. If it is on the ground, it must clearly leave the mark.

Does not explicitly state the ref must see it, but that is the only way it could be "clear"

by No 7&1/2 Wed 18 Feb 2015, 11:36 am

LondonTiger wrote:
No 7&1/2 wrote:Is that in the laws?

21.4 Penalty and free kick options and requirements
(d) A clear kick. The kicker must kick the ball a visible distance. If the kicker is holding it, it must clearly leave the hands. If it is on the ground, it must clearly leave the mark.

Does not explicitly state the ref must see it, but that is the only way it could be "clear"

I suppose it could be seen by the assistant ref or checked by the TMO if he doubted that though.

by Sponsored content