Louw’s try vs the Frogs WAS a try

Referees and TMOs were once again in the spotlight this past weekend – and none more so than in the France v Springboks Test in Paris.

According to the SA Rugby Referees website, South Africa came close to scoring tries on two occasions, but on each occasion the TMO advised the referee not to award the try.

In the first instance the TMO detected a knock-on when flyhalf Morné Steyn tried to catch a high, floating pass and so centre Jaque Fourie was denied a try.

The second one is of interest in this discussion.

South Africa go right from a tackle/ruck. Fullback Willie le Roux grubbers ahead. Falling back Yoann Huget foots the ball back into the French in-goal. Huget and Francois Louw of South Africa go for the ball, Huget with right arm extended.

If Huget grounds the ball first it will not be a try.
If Louw grounds the ball first, it will be a try.

The TMO’s advice to the referee is that a Blue Player (Huget) had taken the ball back and had grounded the ball. So it would be a five-metre scrum to South Africa.

But did he ground it?

The law in this regard is most specific. There is a difference between the way a player carrying the ball is required to ground the ball and what a player is required to do if he is not carrying the ball.

Law 22.1 GROUNDING THE BALL
There are two ways a player can ground the ball:
(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.
(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.

A player holding the ball is not required to put downward pressure on the ball.
A player not holding the ball is required to put downward pressure on the ball.

Huget is certainly not carrying the ball, and so (b) above tells us what he has to do.

Huget’s hand touched the side of the ball. There is no sign of downward pressure at all. The one who puts downward pressure on the ball is Louw. who puts both hands and his torso on the ball, certainly exerting downward pressure.

The try should have been awarded.

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to MySpace

26 comments for “Louw’s try vs the Frogs WAS a try

  1. avatar
    Boertjie
    November 26, 2013 at 6:11 pm

    Bears me out: it was indeed a try.
    Commentators also had it wrong, saying it
    was only necessary for Huget to TOUCH
    the ball.
    It was clear as daylight.
    FFS one would expect the ref and TMO to at
    least know the laws – especially one with
    such a long standing.

    ReplyReply
    View Comment
  2. avatar
    Duiwel
    November 26, 2013 at 7:11 pm

    Hmmmm.
    Maybe they are so used to our back line
    dropping the ball
    they took it for a golden rule

    ReplyReply
    View Comment
  3. avatar
    Americano
    November 26, 2013 at 7:42 pm

    Another Messerschmitt – Masterpiece
    !

    ReplyReply
    View Comment
  4. avatar
    Boertjie
    November 26, 2013 at 8:39 pm

    What happens after a test?
    Does the IRB have a video session with
    the referees and TMO?
    Is there any form of penalty?
    I mean I’ve seldom seen a disputed try
    being so absolutely clear as the one
    under discussion?

    ReplyReply
    View Comment
  5. avatar
    Duiwel
    November 26, 2013 at 8:53 pm

    Dunno.
    Oudste ,here they showed it from 3 angles,
    I thought at first the frog touched it first
    Knocking it forward.
    It was a hard call

    ReplyReply
    View Comment
  6. avatar
    Duiwel
    November 26, 2013 at 8:54 pm

    I’m glad i didn’t have to make the call.

    ReplyReply
    View Comment
  7. avatar
    Boertjie
    November 26, 2013 at 9:22 pm

    Yes, he did touch first – no argument.
    But there was no pressure, he only scraped the
    ball. No pressure, no controll – he only pushed
    it forward.
    We saw the same replays. As did the SA Referees.

    ReplyReply
    View Comment
  8. avatar
    Duiwel
    November 26, 2013 at 10:53 pm

    He only pushed it forward:)

    ReplyReply
    View Comment
  9. avatar
    Craven
    November 27, 2013 at 7:05 am

    I knew it!

    Pity the commentators also had it wrong.

    ReplyReply
    View Comment
  10. avatar
    November 27, 2013 at 8:28 am

    if he did touch it does that not imply some sort of pressure?

    ReplyReply
    View Comment
  11. avatar
    Bekke
    November 27, 2013 at 9:24 am

    I would at least expect SARU to request an explanation from the IRB Referees – but maybe our friend at SARU is a bit tied up in trying to defend the claims of hand in the till?

    ReplyReply
    View Comment
  12. avatar
    Craven
    November 27, 2013 at 10:02 am

    @JT_BOKBEFOK!:

    He might have, but the keyword here is “downward” I think, there was none of that.

    ReplyReply
    View Comment
  13. avatar
    Duiwel
    November 27, 2013 at 11:26 am

    I’m hardly an expert on the rules
    But if it gets knocked forward/pushed forward,
    With no advantage
    Five meter scrum
    Green ball.
    Simple.
    Or not?

    ReplyReply
    View Comment
  14. avatar
    Ollie
    November 27, 2013 at 11:38 am

    @Duiwel:

    It was forward relative to the player, backward relative to the direction of play for the french

    ReplyReply
    View Comment
  15. avatar
    Craven
    November 27, 2013 at 12:14 pm

    This actually raises quite a serious point with regards to the TMO.We have given them extended powers and it seems they are just making more and more mistakes.

    A few examples include the shockers in the Aus/Eng test, Dagg’s try against Ireland and the one mentioned above (I also believe Morne did not knock on in the other disallowed try). This leads me to hope that the whole TMO situation might be revisited.

    It also glaringly obvious that referees are now too scared to award even the most straight forward try as almost everything is now referred upstairs for a look as to why a try might not be awarded.

    ReplyReply
    View Comment
  16. avatar
    November 27, 2013 at 12:15 pm

    @Ollie:

    but don’t we look at the direction of the hands to judge if it was forward… :soek: :pot: :mrgreen:

    ReplyReply
    View Comment
  17. avatar
    November 27, 2013 at 12:17 pm

    @Craven:

    like you said: “think” not know – it was a tough call IMO and could have gone either way. Home advantage maybe?

    ReplyReply
    View Comment
  18. avatar
    November 27, 2013 at 12:37 pm

    Look at the Ireland game for TMO issues – 1 try given to Ireland was very questionable and 1 try not awarded to NZ was a joke – that equates a 14 point spread!
    If NZ lost that game you would have heard a lot more about those 2 calls.

    ReplyReply
    View Comment
  19. avatar
    Welshbok die Brandwag
    November 27, 2013 at 3:46 pm

    @Craven:

    I’m with you on this dude.

    If the try to the French (cheaply given by Pienaar)was awarded being 50/50 (in touch or not) and the atacking team was given the advantage, then both our disallowed tries should have been awarded.

    If nothing ells, the inconsistancy of Wayne Barnes should be quiried. Whats good for the goose is good for the gander.

    ReplyReply
    View Comment
  20. avatar
    Duiwel
    November 27, 2013 at 6:55 pm

    Dunno.
    We should not critisise too much
    It was a hard call.
    Easy to talk about something in hindsight.
    I think this new tom,looking at tries off the ball incidents,offside ect
    can be but good for the game.

    ReplyReply
    View Comment
  21. avatar
    Duiwel
    November 27, 2013 at 6:57 pm

    What i do find inconsistent is the
    Refereeing of the scrums.
    some refs blow for the collapse
    some let the ball go out regardlessly if it collapsed.
    This must be hard for modern forwards

    ReplyReply
    View Comment
  22. avatar
    Boertjie
    November 27, 2013 at 8:02 pm

    @Duiwel:

    Was clear as daylight, Boet.
    Frog had his hand on the ground, stretched,
    pushed the ball forward with his fingertips.

    ReplyReply
    View Comment
  23. avatar
    Duiwel
    November 27, 2013 at 11:04 pm

    Ja.
    That’s what I thought..
    My first shout was naw then maybe on third view
    But I went back to knock on.
    But I’m not a ref.

    ReplyReply
    View Comment
  24. avatar
    Duiwel
    November 27, 2013 at 11:10 pm

    After the first blank from ruaan pienaar
    Morne se total “ek het hom!”
    Jeans pickup was quick,
    as it should be…
    he drops so many,must be instinctive reflex.
    And JF just sumo over.

    Then this call,
    I was frustrated that they could not settle down and play
    Their nine men game plan.
    You piped it well
    Not only frustrated at their game plan
    But their poor execution of it.

    ReplyReply
    View Comment
  25. avatar
    Boertjie
    November 28, 2013 at 1:50 am

    @Duiwel:

    He did not knock it – it was moved in the
    direction of his own goal line.

    You’re very rough on JdeV. His intercepts comes
    from great handling.
    His handling was superb in his try vs Wales, when
    Bismarck passed him the ball almost a metre
    behind him. There are many more examples, but
    I’ve learned one can’t change your mind.

    ReplyReply
    View Comment
  26. avatar
    Duiwel
    November 28, 2013 at 11:51 am

Leave a Reply