I have lost track of the rules for the awarding of a penalty try. Today, at the Sheffield-Fev game, Featherstone were awarded a penalty try under the sticks when it was judged that a Sheffield player ripped the ball when the Featherstone player was involved in a gang tackle when over the line and close to scoring near to the corner. Now I have seen instances in SL of this happening all the time, yet only a penalty has been awarded - but I recall something 1/2 seasons ago stating that you can no longer give a penalty try for this rule (something I'm not sure I agree with anyway, but that is besides the point).

The thing that annoyed me most about this was during the first set of the game, Sheffield were attacking the Featherstone line, after a fumble (backwards), and a kick through, the ball ended up being chased by a Sheffield player who was nailed on to score. As in he was 2 yards away, could have picked the ball up unchallenged, and would have put the ball down over the try line. But a Featherstone player tackled the Sheffield man, around the legs, even though he was never in possession. Leahy awards a penalty, but no penalty try. How does this make any sense?

Leahy had a shocking game today for both sides. Some very odd decisions.

I remember the rule coming out saying a penalty try could not be given if the ball was stolen over the line.

Correct. From the interpretation given, it sounds like the referee made a cock up of it.

This wasn't some biased, alcohol affected interpretation either - I am 99% sure he was over the line.

What about the other decision, what do you make of that? Difficult to make a guess without seeing exactly what happened I guess. I've never seen anything as blatant - no penalty try, no sin bin, only a penalty, for a clear professional foul.

Did he sin-bin the offending player?

Seems strange to give a penalty try for that - as my interpretation of the rule was that it prevents a 'clear try scoring oppurtunity and amounts to a proffesional foul'. If it amounts to a professional foul surely a yellow card would follow suit?

Nobody was sin binned all game.

Dave,

Was literally 2m away from the incident as I was busy snapping away. The Featherstone Player - Ian Hardman was tackled over the try line with 4 Sheffield players trying to hold him up. A Sheffield player ripped the ball out, in which the Ref gave a penalty try.

Bizarre!

You've sort of answered your question here...



The referee has to be absolutely 100% sure that the attacking team would have scored had they not been illegally infringed. Again, I'm basing this on your interpretation because I was in Hull today, but if thats the case I do not believe it should have been a penalty try.

The ball was practically on the line. For arguments sake, the ball is over the line, and all a player has to do is touch it down. Would that be good enough?

To be fair there is a difference in the above examples. If the ball is over the line, all the player needs to do is drop on the ball, in which case you'd probably find that the ref would go for the penalty try. If the ball is short, it means that the player would need to either kick it on, or bend and pick it up, meaning there is more chance of then knocking on or getting caught.

I would be surprised to see a penalty try if the ball wasn't over the line.

Lets suppose the ball is short of the line. Professional foul? Sin Bin?

I would say so, and would certainly expect a yellow card. I do think that refs have slackened off in terms of binning for professional fouls nowadays.

It was my understanding a penalty try cant be given for stripping.
However, personally I think defenders should be allowed to challenge to any extent in a try scoring opportunity over the line.

Yes I thought they brought the rule in to say that the defending team had a right to stop the ball being grounded. So therefore if this was done by foul means the worst it could be was a penalty.

1971, Challenge Cup Final, Leeds vs Leigh, Tony Wainwright (Leeds....and Michael's (Cas Winger) dad) scores the first penalty try at Wembley.....it's awarded when he's only just in Leigh's half for blatant obstruction after he's kicked ahead. The rules haven't changed since then.....just the level of fear within the reffing community.

Yes but the game was already won/lost by then so maybe Billy Thompson just felt sorry for Leeds

Reference to the rule changes from Sky website: www.webcitation.org/5nM02ZZKb These show that stealing the ball over the line isn't a penalty try.

Reference to the rule changes from Sky website: www.webcitation.org/5nM02ZZKb These show that stealing the ball over the line isn't a penalty try.

As said above, ref has to be 100% convinced the player would have scored without the offence occuring

i recall hull v leeds at headingly few year ago, prescott went through, stepped the leeds player (gary connolly?) and would have scored but he got a shot to his head and he dropped the ball due to it

Ref did not give Pen try, just a pen due to this (was 99.9999999999%) sure of scoring too

www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AVxswS8fD 4 minutes 30 in.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AVxswS8fD 4 minutes 30 in.

Even with my special glasses on it was 'clearly' a penalty try.
In that incident, the argument that he could/might/possibly drop the ball was balls, IMO.
I still laughed, mind

Thought the ref had to be 'absolutely' sure a try would have been scored without the offence being committed.

Is it just me the link doesn't work for?

The fact that the video in question has obviously been removed is the only reason the address in Listy's post hasn't been replaced by a big red reminder about what the AUP says on unauthorised copyrighted footage.