Gareth Davies try was correct decision

First topic message reminder :

Hi just something thats been annoying me a little since the game yesterday was how many people thought davies was offside, they have either not taken the time look at the replay close enough or dont understand the offside law


If you go to bbc iplayer and watch the 6 nations forum, fast forward to 12.50 and you can see initially davies is in an offside position but then when roberts plays the ball back, roberts then moves forward and davies moves slightly back into an onside position as roberts is infront of him before he plays the ball

alive555 wrote:it wasnt a try.
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/gareth-davies-wonder-try-wales-10889858

yet another game changing descision going against scotland.

I know! That and Finn Russell deciding not to look for a pass in two weeks!

alive555 wrote:it wasnt a try.
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/gareth-davies-wonder-try-wales-10889858

yet another game changing descision going against scotland.

Yet another year of blaming the ref. How many years in a row is the ref at fault now?

mikey_dragon wrote:

alive555 wrote:it wasnt a try.
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/gareth-davies-wonder-try-wales-10889858

yet another game changing descision going against scotland.

Yet another year of blaming the ref. How many years in a row is the ref at fault now?

stop whinging will you. youre wrong, it wasnt a try. end of story .

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

Griff wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:No idea why this is still being discussed, there is no fuzziness over what should have been the correct decision, the referee and his TMO got it very very wrong.

Very wrong?!  Doesn't make sense!

Makes perfect sense, if the ref hadn't gone to the TMO I don't think anyone has an issue with the decision but the moment he did and they still got it wrong makes it a terrible decision.

I was picking up on the 'very wrong' bit. Wrong is an absolute statement! You can't be very wrong or a little wrong or partially wrong; it's either wrong or right, so 'very' isn't correct!

Sorry, I was being a little childish perhaps.

He was onside, jamie roberts who came from an onside position was infront of him before he played the ball, regardless of whether he was initially in an offside position, he was played back onside

Also if the last person to touch the ball was a scottish player he would have then too been played back onside

11.2 Being put onside by the action of a team-mate
(c) Action by the kicker or other onside player. When the kicker, or team-mate who was level with or behind the kicker when (or after) the ball was kicked, runs in front of the offside player, the player is put onside. When running forward, the team-mate may be in touch or touch-in-goal, but that team-mate must return to the playing area to put the player onside.

11.3 Being put onside by opponents
(c) Intentionally touches ball. When an opponent intentionally touches the ball but does not catch it, the offside player is put onside.

So whether it came off a welsh player or scottish player he had been played back onside regardless of initially being in an offside position as he was played back onside

Otherwise everytime a kick is made behind a ruck/maul/scrum etc. Penalties are going to be given away every time as players wait until they are run back onside

I suppose all these refs coming out and saying it's a poor decision are wrong because of your distorted view of what the laws actually say.

c)

Offside and moving forward. When a team-mate of an offside player has kicked ahead, the offside player must not move towards opponents who are waiting to play the ball, or move towards the place where the ball lands, until the player has been put onside.

I gave up caring when no less than five Scotsmen managed not to stop George North on his way to the clinching score.

PotNoodleMiner wrote:He was onside, jamie roberts who came from an onside position was infront of him before he played the ball, regardless of whether he was initially in an offside position, he was played back onside

Also if the last person to touch the ball was a scottish player he would have then too been played back onside

11.2 Being put onside by the action of a team-mate
(c) Action by the kicker or other onside player. When the kicker, or team-mate who was level with or behind the kicker when (or after) the ball was kicked, runs in front of the offside player, the player is put onside. When running forward, the team-mate may be in touch or touch-in-goal, but that team-mate must return to the playing area to put the player onside.

11.3 Being put onside by opponents
(c) Intentionally touches ball. When an opponent intentionally touches the ball but does not catch it, the offside player is put onside.

So whether it came off a welsh player or scottish player he had been played back onside regardless of initially being in an offside position as he was played back onside

Otherwise everytime a kick is made behind a ruck/maul/scrum etc. Penalties are going to be given away every time as players wait until they are run back onside

That is all counteracted by Davies initially running towards the ball rather than retreating, not to mention being in front of Roberts when he knocks it on.

Apart from those three issues there was nothing wrong with it.

OK, watched the video, and it was a wrong decision by the referee.

No dispute Davies was in an offside position when the kick was made. Difficult to see what happened in the competition for the ball, but this is irrelevant as the penalisable offence occurs before the kick lands.

Law 11.1A (in part)

A player who is in an offside position is liable to sanction only if the player does one of three things:

•Interferes with play or,
•Moves forward, towards the ball or
•Fails to comply with the 10-Metre Law (Law 11.4).

Now, you can make an argument that Davies did not directly interfere with play in the immediate passage of play after the kick (in that Roberts contested the kick and GD did not position himself to impede anyone going for the ball)
However, there is no argument regarding the second bullet - he definitely moves forward towards the ball.
He also falls foul of the third bullet, in being within 10m of where the ball lands from an offside starting position.

Second bullet is covered by Law 11.1C:
Offside and moving forward. When a team-mate of an offside player has kicked ahead, the offside player must not move towards opponents who are waiting to play the ball, or move towards the place where the ball lands, until the player has been put onside.

Davies is not put on side at any point in the kick chase, as even when the ball lands he is marginally in front of Roberts (and pretty much level with JD2), and anyway he is not allowed to move forwards until played on side. He clearly does move forwards, from a point about 5m inside his own half to just over the half way line before being played on side.

Third bullet covered by Law 11.4

(a) When a team-mate of an offside player has kicked ahead, the offside player is considered to be taking part in the game if the player is in front of an imaginary line across the field which is 10 metres from the opponent waiting to play the ball, or from where the ball lands or may land. The offside player must immediately move behind the imaginary 10-metre line or the kicker if this is closer than 10 metres. While moving away, the player must not obstruct an opponent or interfere with play.

Sanction: Penalty kick

(b) While moving away, the offside player cannot be put onside by any action of the opposing team. However, before the player has moved the full 10 metres, the player can be put onside by any onside team-mate who runs in front of the player.

(c) Not applicable


(d) When a player who is offside under the 10-metre Law plays the ball which has been misfielded by an opponent, the offside player is penalised.

Further parts not applicable

So Davies falls under the scope of both sections A and arguably D of the law, and is not played on side under the scope of part B (again, moot because he does not attempt to retreat to more than 10m from where the ball lands).

So Davies should have been penalised for offside both under Law 11.1C and 11.4 as soon as he moved forward towards the area the ball landed.

I kind of see why the ref didn't see this in the first instance, as his focus would be on the ball and the direct kick chasers, but it should have been flagged up on TMO review. I do wonder though how often this type of move by a scrum half goes unpenalised, as they will so often be starting to move from an offside position.

This case though the pass back went an unusually long way to the kicker, so the ball was landing not much further forward than the previous breakdown (hence coming under the scope of Law 11.4 as well as 11.1), and also meant that the kick chasers had to come a long way forwards before Davies (and most of the forwards) were played on side.

Oh, and the argument up thread that Roberts knocked the ball back but it travelled forwards wouldn't hold to the Laws either (not that I'm saying he did, as it is not clear who the ball came off). While the Law on passing (i.e. throw forward) states that the ball is not to be thrown towards the opposition dead ball line, and so the momentum / direction of hands interpretation is allowed, the rule for a knock on specifically says that the ball must not travel towards the opposing dead ball line, so momentum is irrelevant.

Great comment by Mike Blair :

Mike Blair wrote:Mr Clancy, the referee, might have been a touch more helpful too. His rulings on the Scottish mauls were baffling, twice allowing Alun Wyn Jones to collapse it - once after landing on top of the maul and allowing the turnover.

Also, at a crucial line-out, he penalised Richie Gray for 'closing the gap' after winning the opposition ball. It's an offence very rarely penalised despite happening often - in the same category as squint scrum feeds.

If a technicality like that is being penalised then it might have paid to have had another look at the Gareth Davies try. Davies clearly advanced forward from his position in front of Dan Biggar, the kicker, which put him in an improved position to regather the ball and finish superbly. That's a penalty offence.

My point isn't that Scotland were hard done by, but more that, to get over the nine-game Six Nations losing streak, it would be nice to get a little helping hand - be it from lady luck or a helpful refereeing decision.

The players can't afford to think like that though. They need to keep improving, keep working, never feel sorry for themselves and learn from their experiences because you only get a certain amount of chances before someone else is given the opportunity.

More Scottish whinging, it follows this fixture every year. And apparently pointing out something this blatantly obvious is the welsh being bitter!

mikey_dragon wrote:More Scottish whinging, it follows this fixture every year. And apparently pointing out something this blatantly obvious is the welsh being bitter!

I'll reiterate for the perpetually baffled. I'm not whinging, and Wales did more than enough to win the game. However, the simple fact is Scotland are on a bit of a losing streak, and in games where the margins are tight we must be due some luck at some point?

That's 2 high profile games in our last 3 that Scotland have been on the bad side of some dodgy refereeing decisions that have been the difference between the sides. Scotland for the most part are their own worst enemies. However a little help from referees simply applying the laws of their profession would go a long way to making sure we aren't the plucky losers all the time.

Not you Radge, but certainly Mike Blair, alive555 and fa. Now you might think Blair is trying to give an honest opinion, which to an extent I guess he is. However that first bit just comes across as more whinging (like Laidlaw before him). I expect it from posters on here but not professional rugby players. The trend for me as that this happens each year, in particular with this fixture where-as it happens elsewhere to a lesser extent.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:That's 2 high profile games in our last 3 that Scotland have been on the bad side of some dodgy refereeing decisions that have been the difference between the sides.

So you are whinging about the refs then. 

But that's OK, you are not Welsh, when you are not Welsh it does not count as being bitter and blaming refs, it's something different.

Let me just add, the ref was not the difference on Saturday, the difference was Biggar kicking all his kicks, Jamie Roberts, AWJ, Charteris and George North, our big name players came to the fore, Scotland do not have any big name players to call on, that was the difference, oh and the benches of both teams, but not the ref.

mikey_dragon wrote:Not you Radge, but certainly Mike Blair, alive555 and fa. Now you might think Blair is trying to give an honest opinion, which to an extent I guess he is. However that first bit just comes across as more whinging (like Laidlaw before him). I expect it from posters on here but not professional rugby players. The trend for me as that this happens each year, in particular with this fixture where-as it happens elsewhere to a lesser extent.

Its a whinge to say that it was a close game, that Wales edged it and deserved to do so?

Is it wrong to question a referee who asks for a TMO and yet ignores an obvious error (and one people could identify in real time, not just after multiple views. I think its rather poor to say that any comment on the fact is simply a whinge because Scotland lost.  

Are you unable to hold a valid viewpoint whenever Wales lose regardless of the merits of the point being made?

RR

Well known sporting fact - when you are in a rut all the marginal decisions seem to go against you.

Other occasions, the offside position of the scrum half would be of little consequence, as the ball wouldn't fall so nicely, and so he'd just be linking to another phase of play, but this time it broke perfectly and he had a very good run in.

LordDowlais wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:That's 2 high profile games in our last 3 that Scotland have been on the bad side of some dodgy refereeing decisions that have been the difference between the sides.

So you are whinging about the refs then. 

But that's OK, you are not Welsh, when you are not Welsh it does not count as being bitter and blaming refs, it's something different.

Let me just add, the ref was not the difference on Saturday, the difference was Biggar kicking all his kicks, Jamie Roberts, AWJ, Charteris and George North, our big name players came to the fore, Scotland do not have any big name players to call on, that was the difference, oh and the benches of both teams, but not the ref.

Well if Charteris is a "big name player" then yes, we do.

fa0019 wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:Not you Radge, but certainly Mike Blair, alive555 and fa. Now you might think Blair is trying to give an honest opinion, which to an extent I guess he is. However that first bit just comes across as more whinging (like Laidlaw before him). I expect it from posters on here but not professional rugby players. The trend for me as that this happens each year, in particular with this fixture where-as it happens elsewhere to a lesser extent.

Its a whinge to say that it was a close game, that Wales edged it and deserved to do so?

Is it wrong to question a referee who asks for a TMO and yet ignores an obvious error (and one people could identify in real time, not just after multiple views. I think its rather poor to say that any comment on the fact is simply a whinge because Scotland lost.  

Are you unable to hold a valid viewpoint whenever Wales lose regardless of the merits of the point being made?

Not really, but it's a subjective viewpoint and you seem to think that yours is above everyone else's. I don't think Wales edged it even though the score line might suggest so.

It's a whinge to complain about the scrums and lineouts when there wasn't much wrong there? But like I said I read this every year, it follows this fixture like a bad smell. Besides that you haven't actually listed Scotland's supposed offences in your 'great analysis' have you?

I'm not sure what the question is here? What I do know is if a welsh person writes some of this then all of a sudden the welsh are always blaming the ref for losing.

LordDowlais wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:That's 2 high profile games in our last 3 that Scotland have been on the bad side of some dodgy refereeing decisions that have been the difference between the sides.

So you are whinging about the refs then. 

But that's OK, you are not Welsh, when you are not Welsh it does not count as being bitter and blaming refs, it's something different.

Let me just add, the ref was not the difference on Saturday, the difference was Biggar kicking all his kicks, Jamie Roberts, AWJ, Charteris and George North, our big name players came to the fore, Scotland do not have any big name players to call on, that was the difference, oh and the benches of both teams, but not the ref.

I can't say it any more clearly Wales deserved to win. North and Roberts were imperious. In addition Scotland made lots of errors that allowed AWJ and Charteris make a right mess of our lineout.

WALES DESERVED TO WIN!!!

Look, I even coloured it in red and put a Welsh dragon beside it so you know what I'm saying!

That does not change the fact that Clancy got this isolated call wrong. It also doesn't change the fact that when AWJ was effectively crowd surfing on out rolling maul that Clancy again wrongly awarded Wales a defending scrum.

once again in case you missed it :

WALES DESERVED TO WIN!!!

Also in the RWC Australia deserved to win against us too. Despite Joubert getting a critical decison wrong. Craig Joubert didn't make us throw to the tail of the lineout in the pouring rain on a windy day with 2 minutes on the clock whilst we were winning the game. That was all our fault! But he still made the wrong decision when he awarded Australia a penalty!

I am scared to comment, in case I am anti something, but sod it here goes

While the try was most likely wrong, through offside - the main reason it is a talking point is it was refereed to to the TMO - which means it should be checked and a right decision made

If it was not sent to the TMO, then we all could see that it is easy to miss and you accept that

It was not the reason we lost - as we had enough time, and enough opportunity to score points- which due to good defence by Wales and some of our usual issues - we did not

There were enough times, both Scotland and Wales infringed that get missed, and that is a fact of the game (Unfortunately), but for me when it goes to a TMO - you have to hope the right decision will be made

Finally, well done to Wales team - deserved the win - soaked up a lot of pressure - and took their tries well - and showed what taking chances can do to a scoreline :-)

On his website, and quoted in the times, Jonathan Kaplan has really slated Graham Hughes the TMO for getting the decision wrong re Davies try.

Still not comfortable with a recent ref like him piling into officials every week.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:I can't say it any more clearly Wales deserved to win. North and Roberts were imperious. In addition Scotland made lots of errors that allowed AWJ and Charteris make a right mess of our lineout.

WALES DESERVED TO WIN!!!

Look, I even coloured it in red and put a Welsh dragon beside it so you know what I'm saying!

That does not change the fact that Clancy got this isolated call wrong. It also doesn't change the fact that when AWJ was effectively crowd surfing on out rolling maul that Clancy again wrongly awarded Wales a defending scrum.

once again in case you missed it :

WALES DESERVED TO WIN!!!

Also in the RWC Australia deserved to win against us too. Despite Joubert getting a critical decison wrong. Craig Joubert didn't make us throw to the tail of the lineout in the pouring rain on a windy day with 2 minutes on the clock whilst we were winning the game. That was all our fault! But he still made the wrong decision when he awarded Australia a penalty!

Stop whinging and pretending that Scotland deserved to win.

LondonTiger wrote:On his website, and quoted in the times, Jonathan Kaplan has really slated Graham Hughes the TMO for getting the decision wrong re Davies try.

Still not comfortable with a recent ref like him piling into officials every week.

Who the feck is Kaplan to get on his high horse when it comes to refereeing, he was one of the worst refs of his era. He would have been out of his depth in the Pro12.

LondonTiger wrote:On his website, and quoted in the times, Jonathan Kaplan has really slated Graham Hughes the TMO for getting the decision wrong re Davies try.

Still not comfortable with a recent ref like him piling into officials every week.

he has a point though. What's the point in referring it to the TMO and the official in question still getting it wrong?

Not going to the TMO is one thing, but going to the TMO and the wrong decision being made is inexcusable.

Scottrf wrote:

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:I can't say it any more clearly Wales deserved to win. North and Roberts were imperious. In addition Scotland made lots of errors that allowed AWJ and Charteris make a right mess of our lineout.

WALES DESERVED TO WIN!!!

Look, I even coloured it in red and put a Welsh dragon beside it so you know what I'm saying!

That does not change the fact that Clancy got this isolated call wrong. It also doesn't change the fact that when AWJ was effectively crowd surfing on out rolling maul that Clancy again wrongly awarded Wales a defending scrum.

once again in case you missed it :

WALES DESERVED TO WIN!!!

Also in the RWC Australia deserved to win against us too. Despite Joubert getting a critical decison wrong. Craig Joubert didn't make us throw to the tail of the lineout in the pouring rain on a windy day with 2 minutes on the clock whilst we were winning the game. That was all our fault! But he still made the wrong decision when he awarded Australia a penalty!

Stop whinging and pretending that Scotland deserved to win.

PotNoodleMiner wrote:He was onside, jamie roberts who came from an onside position was infront of him before he played the ball, regardless of whether he was initially in an offside position, he was played back onside

Also if the last person to touch the ball was a scottish player he would have then too been played back onside

11.2 Being put onside by the action of a team-mate
(c) Action by the kicker or other onside player. When the kicker, or team-mate who was level with or behind the kicker when (or after) the ball was kicked, runs in front of the offside player, the player is put onside. When running forward, the team-mate may be in touch or touch-in-goal, but that team-mate must return to the playing area to put the player onside.

11.3 Being put onside by opponents
(c) Intentionally touches ball. When an opponent intentionally touches the ball but does not catch it, the offside player is put onside.

So whether it came off a welsh player or scottish player he had been played back onside regardless of initially being in an offside position as he was played back onside

Otherwise everytime a kick is made behind a ruck/maul/scrum etc. Penalties are going to be given away every time as players wait until they are run back onside

For someone who boldly started a thread claiming that the people who disagree with you "don't understand the offside law" you are remarkably wrong about something that really is quite simple to understand. Ignoring the fact that Davies had already committed an offence by moving toward the ball, it's debatable whether he was ever put onside later on.

For starters, it doesn't matter whether or not it was touched by a Scottish player. When you quoted the ways inwhich a player can be put onside by the opponents you conveniently forgot to leave out the sentence before which says "These three ways do not apply to a player who is offside under the 10-Metre Law." because as you must know... "the player cannot be put onside by any action of the opposing team."

Also to be put onside by your own team mate running beyond you the laws are clear that it must happen while the player is in the act of retreating beyond the 10m line, something which Davies never attempted to do. "While retiring, the player can be put onside before moving behind the imaginary 10-metre line by any of the three actions of the player’s team listed above in 11.2." He does takes a few steps back at the end, but that's only because he's ran so far forward while offside that he's ended up ahead of where the ball lands. The act of retiring must be immediate, and not 30cm back after going 5m forward. Considering you understand the laws while no one else does I can only believe you're being deliberately disingenuous by quoting the wrong sections of the rules.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:On his website, and quoted in the times, Jonathan Kaplan has really slated Graham Hughes the TMO for getting the decision wrong re Davies try.

Still not comfortable with a recent ref like him piling into officials every week.

he has a point though. What's the point in referring it to the TMO and the official in question still getting it wrong?

Not going to the TMO is one thing, but going to the TMO and the wrong decision being made is inexcusable.

Oh Kaplan is correct - just his whole attitude grates with me now that he is an ex-ref.

mikey_dragon wrote:Not you Radge, but certainly Mike Blair, alive555 and fa. Now you might think Blair is trying to give an honest opinion, which to an extent I guess he is. However that first bit just comes across as more whinging (like Laidlaw before him). I expect it from posters on here but not professional rugby players. The trend for me as that this happens each year, in particular with this fixture where-as it happens elsewhere to a lesser extent.

Puff the whinging dragon - the original post is about whether the referee got this decision right, and he as it happened he didnt, he got it wrong.

Are you claiming to know more about the game than British Lion Mike Blair, youre very OWN welsh press, and the informed poster above who has laid out in great detail what the laws are. By the laws of the game it wasnt a try. The points have been very well made and no your still whinging about it, either cause your blindsided or just plain ignorant.

Suggest you read the poster aboves posters explanation of the applicable laws and educate yourself on how they should be applied in the game of rugby union.

if you disagree then refer to the those relevant laws, otherwise keep quiet you sound like an ignoramus

alive555 wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:Not you Radge, but certainly Mike Blair, alive555 and fa. Now you might think Blair is trying to give an honest opinion, which to an extent I guess he is. However that first bit just comes across as more whinging (like Laidlaw before him). I expect it from posters on here but not professional rugby players. The trend for me as that this happens each year, in particular with this fixture where-as it happens elsewhere to a lesser extent.

Puff the whinging dragon  - the original post is about whether the referee got this decision right, and he as it happened he didnt, he got it wrong.

Are you claiming to know more about the game than British Lion Mike Blair, youre very OWN welsh press, and the informed poster above who has laid out in great detail what the laws are.  By the laws of the game it wasnt a try. The points have been very well made and no your still whinging about it, either cause your blindsided or just plain ignorant.

Suggest you read the poster aboves posters explanation of the applicable laws and educate yourself on how they should be applied in the game of rugby union.

if you disagree then refer to the those relevant laws, otherwise keep quiet you sound like an ignoramus

What a stupid post. I'm merely pointing out the bitter whinging from Blair and Laidlaw. Do I need to be an expert to see something this smack-bang obvious? I've said my piece on the try enough times, and it was a good try . What I've also pointed out is whinging from posters, like you, which takes place after this match each year. If the welsh were doing it there would be murder. And one more thing:

STOP THE WHINGING ALIVE555 YOU SORE LOSER.

Basically you're clueless and blind to reality.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Basically you're clueless and blind to reality.

Yeah and so are you.

Ha, I know you are but what am I?