Law Discussion: The Aplon decision
The Aplon decision when the Stormers played the Chiefs had a big impact on the outcome of this Super Rugby match in Hamilton on Saturday.
It happens just after the start of the second half with the Stormers leading 20-3 and on the attack. Near his own 22, Brendon Leonard of the Chiefs kicks a small kick over the Stormers and Richard Kahui of the Chiefs gathers the kick and races down the middle of the field. As two Stormers close in on him Kahui grubbers the ball ahead. Kahui leads the chase after the ball as Gio Aplon races back. Kahui foots the ball ahead into the in-goal area. Kahui is leading the chase and dives for the ball. He does not ground the ball but knocks it over the dead-ball line.
The referee talks to his assistant and then refers the matter to the television match official.
The referee says: “Try not try? Just be mindful of the White player chasing through if he’s interfered with the Black player going for the ball. We are in in-goal.”
He makes the point about being in in-goal as it’s only in in-goal that the referee is allowed to refer foul play to the TMO.
The IRB’s protocol describing the TMO’s sphere of activity says:
The TMO could therefore be requested to assist the referee in making the following decisions:
Try
No try and scrum awarded 5 metres
Touch down by a defender
In touch – line-out
Touch-in-goal
Ball dead on or over the dead ball line
Penalty tries after acts of foul play in in-goal
All kicks at goal including dropped goals.
Penalty tries after acts of foul play in in-goal
The TMO gives his advice: “The Black player has lost it forward but previous to him losing it forward he was grabbed and his jersey pulled by the White player.”
Referee: “Has he prevented a probable try?”
TMO: “Yes, he has.”
Referee: “Which is the White player’s number?”
TMO: “The White player’s number is 14.’
Referee: “For that I’m saying penalty try. Correct.”
TMO: “Correct.”
Referee: “White 14 to the bin.”
The referee sends Aplon to the sin bin and awards a penalty try.
The Stormers’ coach, afterwards, was less sure about it all, saying: “It was touch and go. I don’t know if the yellow card was the right decision to go with the penalty try. It didn’t look like there was malice in the whole thing when he touched Kahui. He did touch him, yes, but I don’t know if the touch was hard enough to prevent him from scoring.”
Touch. Aplon had his right hand on Kahui’s back and his left hand on Kahui’s upper arm. It looked much more than a touch, just as a New Zealand breeze is sometimes really a wind. The two are connected this way for some seven or eight metres. Certainly it seems that Kahui does not get his left arm as far to the ball as his right arm and the ball is closer to his left arm.
As the commentator says, the two players were not running shoulder to shoulder. If that had been the case Aplon could have bumped Kahui out of the way – if he was strong enough – or Kahui could have bumped Aplon out of the way.
Law 10.1 OBSTRUCTION
(a) Charging or pushing. When a player and an opponent are running for the ball, either player must not charge or push the other except shoulder-to-shoulder.
Sanction: Penalty kick
The TMO viewed the incident repeatedly and advised the referee that foul play (playing the man without the ball) had occurred in in-goal and that but for the foul play a try would probably have been scored.
Law 10.2 A penalty try must be awarded if the offence prevents a try that would probably otherwise have been scored. A player who prevents a try being scored through foul play must either be cautioned and temporarily suspended or sent off.
cautioned and temporarily suspended.
That is what the referee did here. He did what the law said he had to do. By law the yellow card must ‘go with’ the penalty try. The Law made the decision, not the referee. Malice has nothing to do with it. The referee is not there to judge malice nor does malice determine whether or not a penalty try should be awarded. What Aplon did was contrary to the Laws of the Game and the Laws of the Game require in such a case a penalty try and a sin-binning. It would have been much better if Aplon had kept his hands off Kahui.
By the way, ‘running your line’ does not entitle you to play an opponent who does not have the ball.
