@MajorRage unfortunately I didn't see it so I'm going to say you're completely wrong.
Really it's up to the ref and doesn't sound like a big deal at all though - ref deemed there was no advantage gained. Otherwise you then get the team who didn't knock on getting the advantage, which seems the opposite of the point of the advantage "law".
@Bones said in Reds vs Stormers:
@MajorRage unfortunately I didn't see it so I'm going to say you're completely wrong.
Fern logic 101. Well played.
@MajorRage said in Reds vs Stormers:
@NTA said in Reds vs Stormers:
@MajorRage said in Reds vs Stormers:
Ref has different application to advantage to me. Knock on, ball goes wide, loads of open space ... surely advantage over?
If it is in their 22 then they're tactically disadvantaged compared to the scrum where they'd probably clear.
Rugby is about taking advantage. For a knock-on only if you can't adequately take advantage of broken play / unsettled defensives then you don't deserve referee protection of possession.
Shame that's not what the rules say though.
Mere ability to gain an advantage is insufficient.
@Chester-Draws said in Reds vs Stormers:
@MajorRage said in Reds vs Stormers:
@NTA said in Reds vs Stormers:
@MajorRage said in Reds vs Stormers:
Ref has different application to advantage to me. Knock on, ball goes wide, loads of open space ... surely advantage over?
If it is in their 22 then they're tactically disadvantaged compared to the scrum where they'd probably clear.
Rugby is about taking advantage. For a knock-on only if you can't adequately take advantage of broken play / unsettled defensives then you don't deserve referee protection of possession.
Shame that's not what the rules say though.
Mere ability to gain an advantage is
Knock on, turnover, breakdown. Halfback to first five, as he passes it to a man in space ref calls advantage over.
See it every game.
@Chester-Draws some refs dont play it that way.
@Chester-Draws said in Reds vs Stormers:
@MajorRage
But a man in genuine space IS a clear advantage.
Mere possession is not.
Not actually disagreeing with that.
@Chester-Draws said in Reds vs Stormers:
But a man in genuine space IS a clear advantage.
Not if they're a prop.
The ref is the sole judge of Law on the field. If he doesn't see territorial or tactical advantage, blow the whistle and go back.
The "or" is a great out for refs.
Look at one from Jackson - who is shit - last night: crooked throw that was gathered up by the opposition but he blew the whistle straight away and didn't even let the situation develop. Poor refereeing.
@taniwharugby said in Reds vs Stormers:
@Chester-Draws some refs dont play it that way.
Too true.
I find it infuriating when penalty advantages are allowed to go for eight phases, but knock-ons for two passes. The rules make no distinction and refs should not either. Both should be allowed to develop.
@Chester-Draws said in Reds vs Stormers:
@taniwharugby said in Reds vs Stormers:
@Chester-Draws some refs dont play it that way.
Too true.
I find it infuriating when penalty advantages are allowed to go for eight phases, but knock-ons for two passes. The rules make no distinction and refs should not either. Both should be allowed to develop.
I'm an advocate for 2-3 phases of penalty advantage. these days people run 20+ phases without scoring, and THEN the ref goes back for a penalty. It's garbage. Modern defences don't get ripped apart easily - if you know it's 2-3 phases, people will chance their arms or just go back to restart play
