The tries given yesterday were entirely correct as per the rules of the game. At no point do the rules state that the player has to have control but they do state downward pressure. The replays clearly show that for the first try at no point did the player lose contact with the ball. For a knock-on to have been given the ball has to leave contact with the player and hit either another player and/or the ground. As for the second try the ball was stripped 2 on 1 and as per the rules as of last year a penalty try could not be awarded but as the Cats player grounded the ball after the strip then the greater advantage was to award the try rather than the penalty. Correct as per the rules of the game.

As for the penalty awarded for taking the player into touch, it wasn't for the dragging into touch but because as per the interpretations this year where an upright tackle occurs, if the player in possesion has a leg lifted off the ground then the referee calls held which in this case he clearly did twice hence the penalty.

Nothing has changed with regards attacking players lending weight but laying a hand on is not enough they have ato lend weight and make a difference.

Quote: ladyref "The tries given yesterday were entirely correct as per the rules of the game. At no point do the rules state that the player has to have control but they do state downward pressure. The replays clearly show that for the first try at no point did the player lose contact with the ball. For a knock-on to have been given the ball has to leave contact with the player and hit either another player and/or the ground. As for the second try the ball was stripped 2 on 1 and as per the rules as of last year a penalty try could not be awarded but as the Cats player grounded the ball after the strip then the greater advantage was to award the try rather than the penalty. Correct as per the rules of the game. As for the penalty awarded for taking the player into touch, it wasn't for the dragging into touch but because as per the interpretations this year where an upright tackle occurs, if the player in possesion has a leg lifted off the ground then the referee calls held which in this case he clearly did twice hence the penalty. Nothing has changed with regards attacking players lending weight but laying a hand on is not enough they have ato lend weight and make a difference.'" Thanks for clearing that up however I wasn't really angeling that the trys were given against the rules of the game, simply that the rules are too lax with regards to grounding the ball. 'Downward pressure' is vague and there is too much of a grey area. Can you tell me why the try was given in the Cas v Hull KR game? (Not having a go, am genuinely interested) - see www.superleague.co.uk/video/player.php?id=545 (10:20) Re interpretation and upright tackle.. did the catalan players either stop the momentum, or lift the Leeds player? I didn't see that if that's the case. I think the refs are confused also, because I haven't seen any consistency with regards to this. All I know is it is frustrating to watch, and must be even more frustrating to play with - which is really what I was getting at.

Quote: ladyref "The tries given yesterday were entirely correct as per the rules of the game. At no point do the rules state that the player has to have control but they do state downward pressure. The replays clearly show that for the first try at no point did the player lose contact with the ball. For a knock-on to have been given the ball has to leave contact with the player and hit either another player and/or the ground. As for the second try the ball was stripped 2 on 1 and as per the rules as of last year a penalty try could not be awarded but as the Cats player grounded the ball after the strip then the greater advantage was to award the try rather than the penalty. Correct as per the rules of the game. As for the penalty awarded for taking the player into touch, it wasn't for the dragging into touch but because as per the interpretations this year where an upright tackle occurs, if the player in possesion has a leg lifted off the ground then the referee calls held which in this case he clearly did twice hence the penalty. Nothing has changed with regards attacking players lending weight but laying a hand on is not enough they have ato lend weight and make a difference.'" Thanks for clearing that up however I wasn't really angeling that the trys were given against the rules of the game, simply that the rules are too lax with regards to grounding the ball. 'Downward pressure' is vague and there is too much of a grey area. Can you tell me why the try was given in the Cas v Hull KR game? (Not having a go, am genuinely interested) - see www.superleague.co.uk/video/player.php?id=545 (10:20) Re interpretation and upright tackle.. did the catalan players either stop the momentum, or lift the Leeds player? I didn't see that if that's the case. I think the refs are confused also, because I haven't seen any consistency with regards to this. All I know is it is frustrating to watch, and must be even more frustrating to play with - which is really what I was getting at.

Would it not be better if instead of a penalty for pushing a player in to touch after the referee shouts held, instead the attacking player simply played the ball from where he was when the referee shouted held?
At the moment referees are calling held when the defence is in full motion pushing the player and cannot stop instantly meaning a penalty is unavoidable, particularly as they probably can't hear the referee calling given their proximity to the touchline and the crowd. A penalty in these circumstances is harsh and unwarranted.

I think a lot o fplayers would be confused if they had to play the ball at the spot held was called, they usually like to walk forward/sideways a few steps first
but a similar thing happened yesterday where the catalan player was called held and proceeded to drive over the line and out the ball down, play was yaken back to the place where held was called, should it have been penalty defence?

OK, so what happens if the ball is lying in the in-goal area? Are you suggesting the player has to pick it up before grounding it again? The ball is nevr in the control of the player in this case. Yes, some of the tries given are arguable either way but changing a fundamental law of the game ain't going to solve that one.

The rules state for a try to be scored downward pressure has to be applied by the hand arm or torso and have been so for at least the last 20 years

If the ball is lying in the in-goal area it should be 'properly' grounded with control . Palm of the hand on the ball (control and downward pressure)is sufficient in my opinion , no need to pick it up first .
One example could be Sinfield yesterday .
If he had touched it with one fingertip it would be classed as downward pressure, but with no control whatsoever .
The Catalans player had considerably more downward pressure and control over the ball .
I'd award that try even if Sinfield had brushed his fingers on the top of the ball first .
Did it go to VR to see if Sinfield actually grounded it ?

Seen a few VR decisions for tries where the attacking player has been stopped just short of the line and stretched out an arm in an attempt to get the ball over . Player loses control of the ball , but has fingertips on it (sometimes on the side of the ball) as it touches the floor . Try given . Not in my book .

Maybe not in your book but certainly in the rule book which is the thing we all go by.

Yea, if it hits the floor before he catches It again.

Well, yes, if this is the correct definition of a knock-onKNOCK-ON means to knock the ball towards the opponents’ dead ball line with hand or arm, while playing at the ball.'"

In my view it's the laws on tries that need to be changed. I agree with LadyRef, that these tries are mostly being given correctly in line with the current laws, but I also agree with the view that the law needs to be changed to having full control of the ball (ie, having hold of the thing) or 'downward pressure with the palm of the hand' if the ball is loose. Let's get rid of tries that are given if someone brushes the ball with a fingertip or rolls their forearm over a loose ball. They might be in the laws of the game, but I don't think that enough skill is involved for them to be in the spirit of the game.

That should also make it easier for refs who don't have access to a VR.