Loffreda and the penalty try
After the match in Cardiff between Argentina and Wales, which Wales won 27-20, Marcelo Loffreda joined the band of coaches cross with the referee. In particular he was angry that the referee had not awarded a penalty try to the Pumas.
He is reported as accusing referees of general bias against the Pumas, in particular claiming that the referee should have awarded Argentina a penalty try after Wales were penalised three times while defending their own line in the dying moments of the game.
Loffreda is reported as saying: When we played against Ireland in Santa Fe two months ago the referee awarded a penalty try to Ireland when we collapsed the maul once, only once.
“Today there were clearly three times when Wales collapsed the maul. That’s a penalty try.”
Loffreda has got it wrong.
No number of infringements equates to a penalty try. There is only one single reason for awarding a penalty try – preventing a probable try by foul means. Foul means includes deliberately infringing the laws of the game.
Law 10 A penalty try must be awarded if the offence prevents a try that would probably otherwise have been scored.
Probably, not possibly. It is possible to score a try from your own line but a penalty try is not on for an infringement on your own line. Probably, not certainly. If Certainly is 10 out of 10, possibly anything from 1 to 10 out of 10, then probably is about 9 out of 10.
Ann accumulation of offences does not equal a penalty try. There are other ways of dealing with that, like sending a player off – as happened in the Test in question for Matthew Rees was sent to the sin bin because his team had infringed repeatedly in a short time frame and when Argentina were on the attack.
Let’s look at those last five minutes.
Tom Shanklin kicked, Federico Serra kicked and James Hook kicked. Then the Pumas countered going left. Mario Ledesma chipped by Dafydd James saved and a tackle/ruck developed. Santiago Gonzalez Bonorino goes off-side but retreats and his action has no effect on the game. The referee ignores him. Dwayne Peel goes blind and Rees kicks out on the full.
This produces a line-out to the Pumas about 35 metres from the Welsh line. Patricio Albacete wins the line-out and, peeling off, Rodrigo Roncero charges, setting up a tackle/ruck. Gonzalo Longo goes left and sets up another tackle/ruck. Albacete goes right and sets up another tackle/ruck. The Pumas did not make much headway against the Welsh defenders. The referee tells Wales to release and almost immediately penalises them for hands.
Federico Todeschini kicks out for the Pumas to make a five-metre line-out. Again the Pumas move but their maul has little impetus before falling . They go to the right where Felipe Contepomi charges and Albacete knocks on about four metres from the Welsh line.
The referee goes back to the penalty for the collapse and says to Wales: “No more.”
Again Todeschini kicks out for a five-metre line-out. Again the Pumas maul and Roncero pushes against Martin Durand and Juan Fernandez Lobbe who have their backs to the Welsh.
The maul falls down. Alun-Wyn Jones may have tried to collapse it but it seems just to have fallen.
The ball comes back to the Pumas where Pichot darts by two Welshmen bring him down about four metres from the line. Then Rees goes off-side and the referee plays advantage. The Welsh keep the Pumas out legally and the referee then penalises Rees and sends him to the sin bin.
That is the third penalty which Loffreda refers to. But it was not for collapsing the maul. Of the three penalties, only the middle one is for collapsing a maul.
At the first one there is no probability of a try at all. At the second one the Pumas did not have the sort of impetus which makes a try probable. For the third one Rees’s off-side was really pretty harmless and did not stop the scoring of a probable try.
The only questionable act in all this was Alun-Wyn Jones at the maul before Rees went off-side.
The illegal actions which the referee saw were dealt with. None of them stopped a probable try. The second one may have stopped a possible try. Possible is not enough for a penalty try.
Loffreda also said of the referee: “He said, maybe 45 or 50 times ‘Red hands away’. He was coaching, not refereeing. He insisted many times to open the gap to Wales and he never gave us a free-kick.”
The referee also told Blue to let go of the ball and that sport of thing.
Loffreda also said: “But I am worried about what will happen in the World Cup. If there is one rule for one team and another for the other team in the same game, we will have problems, we will have a lot of trouble.
“Many things were awarded to them which were not awarded to us.
“This guy, Chris White, he only saw one team. He only penalised one team.”
The referee penalised Argentina 9 times. He penalised Wales 10 times. If the penalty count is a barometer of bias, it would suggest that the referee was not biased.
At the third five-metre line-out the Pumas formed a maul which Wales, one man short, drove back. The Pumas regrouped and charged again. Eventually they surged over the line, Durand in possession of the ball.
The referee asks the conformation of the television match official, saying: “Is there any reason why I cannot award a try. We believe a try has been scored. Is there any reason why I cannot award the try.?’
Loffreda said of this: “And then, you know what he said to the TMO? He said: ‘Give me a reason why I cannot award the try’. He saw a try so why is he asking the TMO?”
As the whole world knows there is a difference between seeing and believing. The referee’s question to the TMO was a fair one. He was certainly justified by the outcome in refereeing it because Durand did not score. He lost the ball.
Loffreda also trots out the aggrieved coach’s cliche: “I’m not arguing about the result of this game. Wales deserved to win, no problem about that.”
He is actually arguing about the result.
