Matt Smiths disallowed try

Forum to discuss everything that is Tigers related

Moderators: Rizzo, Tigerbeat, Tigers Press Office, Tigers Webmaster

johnthegriff
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1039
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 12:37 am

Re: Matt Smiths disallowed try

Post by johnthegriff » Wed Nov 22, 2017 10:59 am

I agree with Grimlish, it was a good move, bad luck the ball deflected off the post making an awkward bounce unfortunately contacting Matt's leg then arm before hitting the ground therefore a knock on.

Roly
Super User
Super User
Posts: 2351
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 4:02 pm

Re: Matt Smiths disallowed try

Post by Roly » Wed Nov 22, 2017 11:03 am

Latecomer wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:49 am
chewbacca wrote:
Tue Nov 21, 2017 4:46 pm
I watched the replays on the big screen and I thought the ball came off his knee/thigh and he then grounded it with downward pressure from his arm so for me a try. Just goes to show how hard it is. No replays/tmo and I'd definitely have given it as a try
Exactly. Perfectly good try to me, but given we had a referee and TMO would couldn't spot a clear forward pass for the Gloucester try which gave them the lead in the Anglo Welsh game at Welford Rd it just goes to show how much use the TMO system is.
The TMO system is a good and equitable system. It isn't perfect and people can make mistakes. However, perhaps you should apply for the job of TMO as you are clearly more qualified than the officials in question to undertake the task in your own mind?
“It is no use saying, ‘We are doing our best.’ You have got to succeed in doing what is necessary.” Sir Winston Churchill.

TigerCam
Super User
Super User
Posts: 3619
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2004 5:41 pm
Location: Cambridge

Re: Matt Smiths disallowed try

Post by TigerCam » Wed Nov 22, 2017 6:41 pm

Latecomer wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:49 am
chewbacca wrote:
Tue Nov 21, 2017 4:46 pm
I watched the replays on the big screen and I thought the ball came off his knee/thigh and he then grounded it with downward pressure from his arm so for me a try. Just goes to show how hard it is. No replays/tmo and I'd definitely have given it as a try
Exactly. Perfectly good try to me, but given we had a referee and TMO would couldn't spot a clear forward pass for the Gloucester try which gave them the lead in the Anglo Welsh game at Welford Rd it just goes to show how much use the TMO system is.
I think it was off his knee so a good score IMO

LE18
Super User
Super User
Posts: 2390
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 12:13 am
Location: Great Glen

Re: Matt Smiths disallowed try

Post by LE18 » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:56 pm

The sequence was, ball kicked, hits post, Smith is following up ball jumps up hits his leg, ball goes forward and hits Smiths forearm, ball goes forward and hits ground, Smith dives and then just gets his fingers on ball!

No knock on off his leg, clear Knock on off his forearm, so no try. :smt045

I think he would have made a better job if he had just tried to drop on ball after it hit the post rather than trying to control it, but no doubt there will be other opinions that disagree with this part.

Grimlish
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 990
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 9:18 am
Location: Over the hill and far away

Re: Matt Smiths disallowed try

Post by Grimlish » Wed Nov 22, 2017 10:10 pm

LE18 wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:56 pm
The sequence was, ball kicked, hits post, Smith is following up ball jumps up hits his leg, ball goes forward and hits Smiths forearm, ball goes forward and hits ground, Smith dives and then just gets his fingers on ball!

No knock on off his leg, clear Knock on off his forearm, so no try. :smt045

I think he would have made a better job if he had just tried to drop on ball after it hit the post rather than trying to control it, but no doubt there will be other opinions that disagree with this part.
Exactly so

ourla
Super User
Super User
Posts: 2988
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 3:03 pm

Re: Matt Smiths disallowed try

Post by ourla » Wed Nov 22, 2017 11:45 pm

LE18 wrote:
Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:56 pm
The sequence was, ball kicked, hits post, Smith is following up ball jumps up hits his leg, ball goes forward and hits Smiths forearm, ball goes forward and hits ground, Smith dives and then just gets his fingers on ball!
Nope.

Check again on the full match videoat 32 minutes in.

He makes contact with the thigh to keep the ball going forward.

The first contact with the arm is his elbow/forearm exerting downward pressure on the ball. That in itself is enough for a try. As it is he maintains contact with the ball, his arm rolls along the ball until he has his hand on it. From when he makes contact with the ball that contact is maintained throughout the grounding. It's actually nicely done by Smith.

The TMO states "he is not in control, that ball has gone forwards". He gives no further information.

A reminder of the grounding rule:

(b) Player presses down on the ball. A player grounds the ball when it is on the ground in the in-goal and the player presses down on it with a hand or hands, arm or arms, or the front of the player’s body from waist to neck inclusive.

No mention of control, just downward pressure with the arm.
You're either in or you're out

G.K
Super User
Super User
Posts: 5679
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 10:19 am
Location: See SatNav

Re: Matt Smiths disallowed try

Post by G.K » Thu Nov 23, 2017 6:56 am

I thought it went forward off his leg, below the knee, he may have touched it with his left arm/hand but to me it wasn't clrear and obvious so in my view a try should have been awarded.
Nowadays referees decide matches, players by how much.

mol2
Super User
Super User
Posts: 3100
Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 5:48 pm
Location: Cosby

Re: Matt Smiths disallowed try

Post by mol2 » Thu Nov 23, 2017 11:06 am

He did knock it on with his forearm onto the grass before finally touching it down.

Clear and obvious is a woolly term when it comes to a knock on but if the 4th official is convinced he saw it come into contact with the players arm, the ball go forward and hit the ground then it has to be a knock on.

Clear and obvious I suspect more refers to the direction of the ball - was it passed or travelled forwards - in this case there was no doubt about the direction.

The only way that could have been given as a try would be if the video didn't clearly show contact with his arm, which unfortunately it did.

Rather different to the England try where far too much time was wasted checking if Young's kick had gone into touch.
None of the angles showed the ball in contact with the touch line. Close but none of the views showed the ball as being out. A fag paper or a foot is irrelevant. The touch judge was perfectly positioned and he was satisfied.

ourla
Super User
Super User
Posts: 2988
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 3:03 pm

Re: Matt Smiths disallowed try

Post by ourla » Thu Nov 23, 2017 11:17 am

mol2 wrote:
Thu Nov 23, 2017 11:06 am
He did knock it on with his forearm onto the grass before finally touching it down.
The question is did he knock it onto the grass or press it. One means contact is lost, the other not.

Sorry if I am being anal about this, I just find it interesting! I don't think the TMO's comments made sense re: control. If the grounding is:

(a) Player touches the ground with the ball. A player grounds the ball by holding the ball and touching the ground with it, in in-goal. ‘Holding’ means holding in the hand or hands, or in the arm or arms. No downward pressure is required.

Then it makes sense to discuss control. Because if you are holding it you have you to continue you to hold it while you ground it. Hence "losing control" would be a legitimate reason not to give it. It's not uncommon for the ball to slip or spill from the hand whilst attempting to ground it.

But in this case Smith never attempts to gather and hold the ball. If the ball is loose or kicked through you don't have to gather/hold you just have to press down - the (b) in the law. I'm sure if it was a hand on the ball rather than the forearm the TMO would have given it. But the rule clearly states the arm is OK.
You're either in or you're out

Grimlish
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 990
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 9:18 am
Location: Over the hill and far away

Re: Matt Smiths disallowed try

Post by Grimlish » Thu Nov 23, 2017 11:56 am

Ourla, I think we should all consult an optician. You think you see the ball in contact with the ground when his arm/elbow make Contact with the ball. Several others don’t see that from the same footage.

If Smith thought he had grounded it at that point why did he then ground it again with his hand?

Knock on, no try, all day long for me.

ourla
Super User
Super User
Posts: 2988
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 3:03 pm

Re: Matt Smiths disallowed try

Post by ourla » Thu Nov 23, 2017 1:49 pm

Grimlish wrote:
Thu Nov 23, 2017 11:56 am
Ourla, I think we should all consult an optician. You think you see the ball in contact with the ground when his arm/elbow make Contact with the ball. Several others don’t see that from the same footage.
So, first things first, whether the ball is on the ground or not seems to be significant because ther law states "A player grounds the ball when it is on the ground in the in-goal and the player presses down on it with a hand or hands, arm or arms, or the front of the player’s body from waist to neck inclusive." Although I am sure I've seen tries scored where the player has slapped down on a bouncing ball - so I'd like to know whether "on the ground" means literally that. Or is memory gone has well as my eye sight... allegedly :smt003

Anyway, I thought the ball was on the ground but admit at the split second of contact it may have been slightly off. Would probably have to go through slowly frame by frame. It wasn't clear and obvious to me it wasn't. As I say I watched it again several times, with all the slo-mo replays.
Grimlish wrote:
Thu Nov 23, 2017 11:56 am
If Smith thought he had grounded it at that point why did he then ground it again with his hand?
His arm effectively rolled over the ball. I think he was instinctively trying to get a mitt on it. You can see he's consciously trying to get his arm down it. Arm because of his body position and the situation/bounce of the ball. The forward momentum of him and ball creates the natural roll down the arm and then he just holds it for a fraction with the hand.

As I said earlier I'm intrigued by the TMO's use of the word "control". Maybe there is a directive or understanding of the rule that makes this significant even though it is not written in the rules.

Googling I found a similar debate not too long ago on another forum
You're either in or you're out

ourla
Super User
Super User
Posts: 2988
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 3:03 pm

Re: Matt Smiths disallowed try

Post by ourla » Thu Nov 23, 2017 1:59 pm

This may explain it
It seems there is a directive that says control is important
And that’s from the mouth of Joël Jutge, the former Test ref and current head of European match officials, who explained away the phantom score to L’Equipe.

Referring to World Rugby’s recent refereeing cabal in South Africa, he said: “We met in Stellenbosch last June and we instructed international referees to take account of the notion of ball control and not just contact between hand and ball

“In the case of Rémi Lamerat, the ball was released, even if there was contact with the little finger.”

This “notion” was news to Loose Pass. We’ve examined every piece of World Rugby correspondence in our inbox and we’ve trawled their entire site, and we still can’t find any mention of this change anywhere, let alone any detail.

But there’s a perfectly reasonable explanation of this, too.

As Jutge explained: “No doubt we have not communicated enough on this subject – this is often a problem of ours – but this directive has been applied since the meeting in Stellenbosch.”

So there you have it! All this from the organisation that has vowed “to make the game as easy to understand as possible for players, coaches, match officials and spectators”.
Personally I think "control" is pretty hard to define but eh ho.
You're either in or you're out

JP14
Super User
Super User
Posts: 3840
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 7:37 am
Location: Neverland

Re: Matt Smiths disallowed try

Post by JP14 » Thu Nov 23, 2017 6:13 pm

I don't really get why there is an argument about this, I don't think it was a try because the ball roll forward with his elbow before he grounded it with his hand. There is no need for this argument, we got the 5 points while Sale only went away with 1 try-scoring bonus point so for me there is no issue about the disallowed try.
"Our Greatest Glory Is Not In Never Failing, But In Rising Every Time We Fall" Confucius

ellis9
Super User
Super User
Posts: 4187
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 6:44 pm
Location: Birmingham

Re: Matt Smiths disallowed try

Post by ellis9 » Thu Nov 23, 2017 8:10 pm

The reason for not giving the try was "he is not in control of the ball, it's a knock on". I have no idea why this was said as that isn't a law. There just has to be downward pressure with the arm or hand. It looks to me like there was downward pressure with his arm, so a try should have been awarded.

ourla
Super User
Super User
Posts: 2988
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 3:03 pm

Re: Matt Smiths disallowed try

Post by ourla » Thu Nov 23, 2017 11:25 pm

JP14 wrote:
Thu Nov 23, 2017 6:13 pm
I don't really get why there is an argument about this,
It's not an argument, it's a debate.
JP14 wrote:
Thu Nov 23, 2017 6:13 pm
I don't think it was a try because the ball roll forward with his elbow before he grounded it with his hand.
The law says you can ground the ball with your arm, which afaik includes your elbow.
JP14 wrote:
Thu Nov 23, 2017 6:13 pm
There is no need for this argument, we got the 5 points while Sale only went away with 1 try-scoring bonus point so for me there is no issue about the disallowed try.
Imagine there was no penalty advantage or that we didn't score from it. Imagine that we had lost the match by less than a score. Would you want to debate it then?
You're either in or you're out

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Jacko27, Noggs and 2 guests