By chris1850
#35303
Yesterday's incident, and listening to Ridleys explanation over ref link got me pondering
1. Ridleys first reaction was that it was a knock on only as the Bath player made a genuine effort to catch/intercept the ball. Therefore scrum to Sale
2. TMO urged him to have a 2nd look which he did. He then decided that it wasn't a genuine attempt to intercept because 'he didn't use both hands'. Hence deliberate knock on- Sale penalty.
3. His rationale for no yc was because it did not deny Sale a try scoring opportunity

I agree that a 'deliberate' knock on should be penalised. But I think we should be more aware of what is a clear, cynical, deliberate attempt to illegally prevent a pass and what is a genuine attempt to intercept the ball. As such, I am not sure that the decision of deliberate knock on is always right. It is all down to perception and yesterday's incident could probably been argued both ways.

I don't agree with Ridleys assertion that it must have been deliberate because he only got one hand on the ball. How many times do we see a good interception where the players initial touch is only with one hand? To be fair to Ridley, he did also say that if the player attempts an intercept, he is taking a risk of being penalised if it goes wrong. Also there have been plenty of occasions where a yc has been shown for a deliberate ko, where the attacking team have not been deprived of a clear try scoring opportunity.

I don't pretend to be as aware of the finer details of the laws as Ridley presumably is, but I did find some of his rationale over ref link at the time to be slightly odd.
By Van Cannonball
#35305
I’m actually fine with the refs interpretation (once he’d seen it again and confirmed it was one handed) and hope this is the way it’s viewed consistently this season.

In prior seasons the disparity between scrum for knock on and yellow for deliberate knock on every time really annoyed me. Especially in circumstances like this one where the ball could have been caught. So having a category of one-handed but could’ve reasonably caught it as pen only is ok for me.

A bat down, fingertips, or denying a clear score could still be a yellow. This one denied an overlap but the play was very deep to the game line so I don’t think it can be considered a clear opportunity.
By stevene
#35306
Ridley is making up the last bit. It was probably cynical and denied Sale an overlap. it was a yellow card every day of the week. the only bit re a try scoring opportunity is around whether to award a penalty try which it clearly wasnt.

I like Ridley generally (in comparison to say Karl Dickson) but I just think, often at key points, his head gets scrambled and his thought process goes awry. sometimes that works for you and sometimes against you.

try and imagine what wayne barnes would have done in that incident. he wouldnt have waited for the TMO. he hand would have been on a yellow card before he even gave the penalty never mind needing a TMO to review it.
By Van Cannonball
#35309
And if that had been a sale player with a genuine attempt at an intercept and likely try I’d have been pissed off with a yellow. Barnes is overly decisive and often wrong for it IMO.
By Carlos
#35316
I can't remember if this was a part of his explanation, but IMO I think there should be a distinction between a 'knock down' as often seen in tight defensive situations, and a 'knock up' such as yesterday, where the player ran the risk, but made a genuine attempt to catch.
User avatar
By poyntonshark
#35319
It was an odd one. I believe Ridley's interpretation was correct, it was a genuine attempt to catch. The problem is that judging intent is very difficult, if not impossible. I complained about several that went against us last year that did end up as yellow because the attempt was made one handed. I think the law needs to be changed to help the ref. If you go for it one handed and don't make it then deliberate knock-on, always. What rationale turns that into a yellow I'm not sure, without just moving the severity of punishment for making the impossible call re - intent.
By ageinghoody
#35323
I agree with yesterday's decision.

There have been times in recent seasons when I half wondered if there was a scheme afoot effectively to outlaw the interception.
By Clutch
#35325
First game of the season so we can’t judge. At the game I thought pen was enough but 18 months ago auto yellow.
Flumpty liked this
User avatar
By Major Bloodnok
#35348
11.3: A player must not intentionally knock the ball forward with hand or arm.
Sanction: Penalty.

11.4: It is not an intentional knock-on if, in the act of trying to catch the ball, the player knocks on provided that there was a reasonable expectation that the player could gain possession

There's no mention in 11.4 of 'genuine attempt', only that there is a reasonable expectation of success. You can be as genuine about the attempt as you want but, if it's a long shot, you run the risk of giving away a penalty.

I can't find anything in the laws specifically about a decision process for temporary suspensions (other than for contact with the head), but I would say that the decision on whether to further sanction a penalty offence with a card is additional to and separate from the decision that the penalty should be awarded.

So, first decision: did the act constitute a deliberate knock-on according to 11.3 and 11.4? Ridley decided that it did, presumably on the 'reasonable expectation' test.

Second decision: given that it did, was it an act that warranted temporary suspension from the field of play? Ridley didn't think it did and, since the referee is the sole arbiter of fact, that's what happened.
By Clutch
#35350
The laws aren’t very helpful cauSe they never explain the interpretation.

Dickson is just bad (relative to the rest).
By StalyShark
#35351
Clutch wrote:
Sun Sep 19, 2021 10:59 pm
The laws aren’t very helpful cauSe they never explain the interpretation.

Dickson is just bad (relative to the rest).
Don’t say that. He’s probably lurking looking for criticism and he’ll like your post.
Clutch liked this
User avatar
By Major Bloodnok
#35359
Actually, comparing the two, Ojomoh made a futile attempt to intercept, the Glos one was just a cynical bat at the ball so, on reflection, probably correct in both cases.
By Clutch
#35363
I think that’s the key. Play was in our half. He has a 20% of catching it and scoring 7 points. It’s not a yellow offence. I don’t mind it being a pen to allow some risk v reward but a yellow isn’t fair. If that’s a reflection on a change away from last 18 months I’m in favour.
User avatar
By Major Bloodnok
#35367
Clutch wrote:
Mon Sep 20, 2021 11:57 am
I think that’s the key. Play was in our half. He has a 20% of catching it and scoring 7 points. It’s not a yellow offence. I don’t mind it being a pen to allow some risk v reward but a yellow isn’t fair. If that’s a reflection on a change away from last 18 months I’m in favour.
I think 20% is a bit generous. He was at full stretch and only just got fingertips to it. No way was that "reasonable expectation". Agreed on the rest, though.
By Penalty Try
#35376
For me the positioning of the hand is the crucial thing to look at.

If the palm is facing skywards, or towards the oncoming ball and is not swinging towards the ball; then the expectation is that the player has a reasonable chance of gaining possession and controlling the ball.

If the palm is facing the ground or moving too quickly (swinging/swiping), then the player has no realistic chance of controlling the ball upon contact. This is defiantly a penalty, and a possible card.

The card is justified if the knock on is deliberate, cynical or prevents the attacking team from from utilising an overlap etc. If the referee believes it to be a penalty offense and it prevents a potential try from being scored, then he must award a penalty try and issue a yellow card to the offending player.
ledzepsfr liked this
By ageinghoody
#35378
Penalty Try wrote:
Mon Sep 20, 2021 3:33 pm
...
If the palm is facing the ground or moving too quickly (swinging/swiping), then the player has no realistic chance of controlling the ball upon contact. This is defiantly a penalty, and a possible card.

The card is justified if the knock on is deliberate, cynical or prevents the attacking team from from utilising an overlap etc. ...
Or as a late friend of mine used to refer to it, a "Campese". :mrgreen: #
User avatar
By Major Bloodnok
#35385
Penalty Try wrote:
Mon Sep 20, 2021 3:33 pm
For me the positioning of the hand is the crucial thing to look at.

If the palm is facing skywards, or towards the oncoming ball and is not swinging towards the ball; then the expectation is that the player has a reasonable chance of gaining possession and controlling the ball.

If the palm is facing the ground or moving too quickly (swinging/swiping), then the player has no realistic chance of controlling the ball upon contact. This is defiantly a penalty, and a possible card.

The card is justified if the knock on is deliberate, cynical or prevents the attacking team from from utilising an overlap etc. If the referee believes it to be a penalty offense and it prevents a potential try from being scored, then he must award a penalty try and issue a yellow card to the offending player.
Also, the distance from the body. The expectation of gaining control of the ball has to be "reasonable", not "fanciful".
By PappjeShark
#35444
Have there been any changes to the laws on this in the off-season? If there haven’t, what cheesed me off royally at the game was that IIRC Ridley binned a couple of our players last season for incidents where deeming them denying a try scoring opportunity would’ve been stretching it. So it comes down to consistency, again.

Granted we were in our own half but the pass had cut out several players already and Ojomoh was granting us a huge hole to exploit by being so far out the line.
User avatar
By poyntonshark
#35451
The basic law hasn't changed for ages, what we never know fully is how refs are asked to interpret it, what emphasis they are given. Too early to tell yet, but perhaps they have been asked to look for mitigating factors before dishing out a yellow.
By ageinghoody
#35454
At risk of going off at a tangent, why isn't slapping (or even ripping) the ball from an opponent's grasp a deliberate knock-on?

Assuming it goes in the right direction of course.
Gloucester (H)

Such an odd season that's sending me to an early g[…]

Other Results in the Prem

Max Malins looks a better player every match Brist[…]

Meringue

15/10/21: Sale 28 Harlequins 22

On balance, I enjoyed that. https://anoldgreydog.[…]