[
PLEASE LOGIN TO POST TO THE FORUM
]
|
|
|
NBHmark3
|
Tue, 26 February 08 18:55 GMT
|
To confirm PaulDG's comments, when the "not 10" ruling was brought upto date the advice given to Refs was to move the offending team back, show then the classic signal, both hands, open palms and reiterate "not 10" and WALK to the new mark, giving some time for readjustment and to defuse flashpoints - if NEEDED.
It is only advice and you can move as fast as you like to the new mark and the kick can be taken as soon as you have given the mark. If one team is astute enough they will be asking to go as soon as they can (ie when you have given the mark.)
The non offending team have been given an advanced penalty and if they want to play the ball rather than kick for goal or touch to deny them the chance to go quickly is to doubly penalise them.
|
|
|
pauldg
|
Mon, 25 February 08 12:24 GMT
|
>Their coach came to me later and said that I should not have allowed the quick 2nd penalty. I said it wasn't a second penalty and that I would have allowed a second one anyway if it had been.
>Was I right?
Yes.
There's no Law against a quick second penalty - players are free to kick as soon as you have made the mark.
But delaying making that mark is a management technique that is often used be referees to cool flash points down. Many players and coaches see it often so think it's a Law.
|
-------------------------
--
PaulDG |
|
|
joe@thurrock
|
Mon, 25 February 08 12:09 GMT
|
While refereeing a match last week I awarded a penalty to Blue around the 22m line. Red team had been verbal throughout the match for which they had been warned and disagreed with my decision, I marched them on 10m. Blue took the penalty quickly against the arguing Reds and scored a try.
Their coach came to me later and said that I should not have allowed the quick 2nd penalty. I said it wasn't a second penalty and that I would have allowed a second one anyway if it had been.
Was I right?
|
-------------------------
Joe |
|
|
|
|
|
