Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

"Can I badly miss the kick" (Sorta spoiler for Ire v Ita)

  • 03-02-2008 12:57am
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,657 ✭✭✭


    Just wondering when O'Gara asked this to the ref, Ryle Nugent said that someone (Kearney I think) was unmarked on the wing...

    But since the ball stays in play after a missed penalty, what is there in the rules to stop O'Gara from kicking to the corner from the goal kick and having it picked up by a quick-thinking winger?


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,852 ✭✭✭Hugh_C


    komodosp wrote: »
    what is there in the rules to stop O'Gara from kicking to the corner from the goal kick and having it picked up by a quick-thinking winger?

    Catholic guilt


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,879 ✭✭✭heggie


    you have to make an honest effort at hitting the target


  • Site Banned Posts: 5,676 ✭✭✭jayteecork


    Seemed very strange that question.
    so once you elect to take a shot at goal you have to aim for the sticks?
    What about like against Namibia when O'Gara kicked across to Trimble to collect?
    I assume they never nominated the shot at goal?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,488 ✭✭✭dc69


    jayteecork wrote: »
    Seemed very strange that question.
    so once you elect to take a shot at goal you have to aim for the sticks?
    What about like against Namibia when O'Gara kicked across to Trimble to collect?
    I assume they never nominated the shot at goal?

    wasnt that a penalty where he just kicked out of hand,surely you cant place the ball on the ground as if to go for posts and then grubber it to your mate unmarked on the wing lol


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,380 ✭✭✭remus808


    No, I think once they have indicated a shot at goal that the option to kick out of hand is gone. (Excluding picking it up for a drop goal)

    What did the referee reply? I was at the match but my friend text me about it and I couldn't stop laughing, ROG- whatta legend!


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 198 ✭✭lamaq


    I once played in a match where we won a penalty in close to the posts. Our kicker put the ball down and asked for a tee, then told our players to retreat, composed himself as though he was geeting ready for the kick, then tapped the ball to himself and went for the line.

    He didn't make it and we all had a good laugh at him after the match :) Inventive though!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭Sandwich


    You must clearly state to the ref that you are having a shot at goal. If the ref decides that you did not do so (kicking for a winger to touch down, tap and go yourself, etc) then he can give a penalty against you.

    There was a controversial 5 nations case many years ago where a penalty was awarded (to Wales I think) in an easily kickable position. The player with the ball in his hand put the ball down, turned and called up their kicker. The lines men went towards the posts and the opposition retreated. The player then tapped the ball to himself and caught the opposition off guard and scored the try. Back in the amatuer era it was considered at best gamesmanship and to many cheating, even though there was no question of him having broken a rule. The O'Gara try against SA a few years ago was simililar but less obviously staged.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,174 ✭✭✭✭phog


    Once you indicate to the ref that your taking a shot at goal there is no reversal.

    Yesteday, BOD has indicated he would take the shot at goal so the Italians needed have worried about the unmarked winger.

    If ROG had sliced it and the ref thought he meant to then he would have awarded a penalty to Italy.

    In a ML or HEC match Ulter got a penalty and Humps places the ball on the ground removes the scrum-cap and then spots a winger on his own and takes a quick tap to him and a try is scored and awarded as the captain/kicker hadn't confirmed their intention to the ref and the opposing team assumed he was kicking for goal because of his preperation.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 429 ✭✭jph100


    karmabass wrote: »
    What did the referee reply? I was at the match but my friend text me about it and I couldn't stop laughing, ROG- whatta legend!

    the ref wasnt sure what rog was on about at first but he then simply said 'No!'

    yeah humphreys try was great thinking.

    kearney was only unmarked because the italians went into a huddle because the kick at goal was already declared


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,686 ✭✭✭EdgarAllenPoo


    That did seem odd but I can see the logic behind it, ie. if the goes goes all over the shop or well wide one of the wings can chase it.

    Just my opinion but it's also a handy deception tactic during ordinary play.

    If the kicker has a good aim get him to go for a drop goal close to the post so when there's a deflection ( I've seen Jonny Wilkinson practice aiming for the posts) some of his faster players can go after it and ground it for a try.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,249 ✭✭✭Stev_o


    I remember it happening in a Welsh tour many years ago for my team. They had huddled up under the post and our kicker "cocked" up the kick that land on a unmarked wing with our winger coming in to tap it down. But yeah it is illeagal you have to make a attempt to score at goal otherwise its a penalty awarded against you. Would have been easier if he kicked it to the wing and fell over while doing it then he would have had a excuse :p


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 873 ✭✭✭Four-Percent


    It would have been plausible enough to kick to kearney from where that kick was anyway.
    The angle was quite tight and a missto the right would have landed right in a winger's path.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,249 ✭✭✭Stev_o


    It would have been plausible enough to kick to kearney from where that kick was anyway.
    The angle was quite tight and a missto the right would have landed right in a winger's path.

    It was in front of the posts pretty much..........


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,987 ✭✭✭✭zAbbo


    Was it David Humphries last year who grabbed the ball and looked like he was gonna set for a kick at goal, but tapped and went over the line instead, was about the 10mtr line.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 873 ✭✭✭Four-Percent


    Stev_o wrote: »
    It was in front of the posts pretty much..........

    my bad , i thought it was to one side.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,123 ✭✭✭Imhof Tank


    It would have been plausible enough to kick to kearney from where that kick was anyway.
    The angle was quite tight and a missto the right would have landed right in a winger's path.

    Is there not a black and white rule though - that after the kicker indicates a kick at goal, that no player from the kicking team can play the ball after the kick until either:-

    a. an opposing player plays the ball first

    b. the ball hits the posts or crossbar

    c. after the 22 if the ball goes dead

    d. after the re-start if the kick is successful

    If the rule is black and white, then it doesnt matter whether a kick is "missed badly" or whether its a "plausible attempt" - none of that counts.



    Surely there is at least one referee out there who can confirm?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,025 ✭✭✭Tim Robbins


    Sandwich wrote: »
    You must clearly state to the ref that you are having a shot at goal. If the ref decides that you did not do so (kicking for a winger to touch down, tap and go yourself, etc) then he can give a penalty against you.
    It's a scrum against you.
    There was a controversial 5 nations case many years ago where a penalty was awarded (to Wales I think) in an easily kickable position. The player with the ball in his hand put the ball down, turned and called up their kicker. The lines men went towards the posts and the opposition retreated. The player then tapped the ball to himself and caught the opposition off guard and scored the try. Back in the amatuer era it was considered at best gamesmanship and to many cheating, even though there was no question of him having broken a rule. The O'Gara try against SA a few years ago was simililar but less obviously staged.

    The ref has a big call here. He could easily penalise the team for delaying play and award a free kick against them or he could just say fine, you never told me your were kicking for goal. Also, if a ref doesn't like a quick penalty he can always say, not from the mark and make them take it again or award a scrum against them.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,025 ✭✭✭Tim Robbins


    Imhof Tank wrote: »
    Is there not a black and white rule though - that after the kicker indicates a kick at goal, that no player from the kicking team can play the ball after the kick until either:-

    a. an opposing player plays the ball first

    b. the ball hits the posts or crossbar

    c. after the 22 if the ball goes dead

    d. after the re-start if the kick is successful

    If the rule is black and white, then it doesnt matter whether a kick is "missed badly" or whether its a "plausible attempt" - none of that counts.



    Surely there is at least one referee out there who can confirm?
    No black and white rule, an attempt must be made for goal. It's up to ref to decide that. If a reasonable attempt has not been made it's ascrum to the other team. If the team elect to kick for goal by saying posts, the have a minute once the kicking tee comes onto the pitch.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,301 ✭✭✭Snickers Man


    It's always the bloody Welsh isn't it?

    I seem to remember they pulled a similar stunt in 1969, in a match when Ireland were going for the Grand Slam in Cardiff. Except nobody was bothered with Grand Slams back then, it was only the Triple Crown.

    First they knocked out the Irish hooker and both Irish flankers. Then they ran a penalty when everybody was expecting a shot at goal and scored a try from it.

    There are some old men in this country who STILL haven't forgiven them for that one.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,025 ✭✭✭Tim Robbins


    It's always the bloody Welsh isn't it?

    I seem to remember they pulled a similar stunt in 1969, in a match when Ireland were going for the Grand Slam in Cardiff. Except nobody was bothered with Grand Slams back then, it was only the Triple Crown.

    First they knocked out the Irish hooker and both Irish flankers. Then they ran a penalty when everybody was expecting a shot at goal and scored a try from it.

    There are some old men in this country who STILL haven't forgiven them for that one.
    If you can get away with it you do it. That's rugby. Twisting, not binding in the scrum, being offside at rucks, not rolling away etc you can guarentee all rugby teams cheat when they can. It's part of the game.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,123 ✭✭✭Imhof Tank


    If you can get away with it you do it. That's rugby. Twisting, not binding in the scrum, being offside at rucks, not rolling away etc you can guarentee all rugby teams cheat when they can. It's part of the game.

    Well, all of those examples are clear rule breaches, whereas a quick cross field kick before indicating a kick at goal doesnt breach any rule and clearly isnt cheating.

    I dont agree that its gamesmanship or against the spirit of the game either - in fact if the defending team are so asleep as to fall for this, they deserve it.

    I dont remember the 1969 Wales game, but I do seem to remember a try scored by Brendan Boone for the 1984 Wallabies at Murrayfield in this way (quick crossfield kick by Ella while Scots all waited under the posts like a pack of sheep). That try was regarded as the ultimate in quick thinking.


Advertisement