We value your privacy

We and our partners store and/or access information on a device, such as cookies and process personal data, such as unique identifiers and standard information sent by a device for personalised ads and content, ad and content measurement, and audience insights, as well as to develop and improve products.

With your permission we and our partners may use precise geolocation. You may click to consent to our and our partners’ processing as described above. Please note that some processing of your personal data may not require your consent, but you have a right to object to such processing.

More Options

Wed 23 Jan 2013 | 04:11
Chris Ashton scores sneaky try from pinpoint Owen Farrell cross kick

16
Comments

Winger Chris Ashton scored twice as Saracens beat Edinburgh 40-7 to earn themselves a home Heineken Cup quarter-final. As with some other fixtures over the weekend, the falling snow didn't affect the try scoring too much, as the home side crossed five times.

Ashton picked up his first in the 27th minute when a well placed chip through from Richard Wigglesworth sat up nicely for the England winger to dot down. His second was all the more impressive though, and came about through some deception, quick thinking, and fantastic skill.

As Edinburgh waited for the penalty kick at goal to be lined up, Ashton collected Owen Farrell's well placed kick and dived over in the corner.

"It was a difficult day for wingers but two touches, two tries – I'd take that every time," he said.

Sarcens director of rugby Mark McCall said it was great to see Ashton score in such conditions.

"The second try was fantastic.. Ashy and Owen just saw each other and they pulled it off. We can appreciate just how difficult it was out there and we said after the game that the conditions were as bad as it gets, with the ball like a bar of soap," McCall said.

There was a hint of controversy in it though as while Saracens hadn't indicated that they were going for goal, the kicking tee had come on to the field, causing the Edinburgh players to relax.

"For their second try, the tee was on the pitch and if the tee's on the pitch they have to kick at goal," said Edinburgh head coach Michael Bradley.

"The only reasons the guy next to Farrell can be on the pitch are if there's an injury or he's bringing the tee out and I suspect that that shouldn't have been a try. It would have made our lives a bit easier as well because momentum is a big thing in rugby matches.

"In fairness, it would have been hard to deny Saracens either way because they were by far the better side and they deserved to get the bonus point. So you can argue the toss about their second try but they still scored five tries so they deserved their luck on the day," he added.

Do you think the try should have been disallowed, or were Edinburgh simply caught napping?

Posted By: Grant Constable

16 Comments

  • browner
    3:41 PM 31/01/2013

    Referee signalled that the Clock was back on, and the clock restarted so there is no issue there.

    The problem was he had stopped the clock, to call the captain and issue a general warning about repeated offences & a 'Yellow card next' threat.

    In this instance it is reasonable to allow the captain time enough to communicate this to his players [which Capt was in the process of doing] BEFORE recommencing play.

    So, Yes it is IMO a referee error, but he probably makes less errors [in more pressured situations] than any of the players on the pitch ......so cut him some slack everyone !

  • colombes
    12:01 PM 27/01/2013

    don't really know what the exact rules, but as the ref noticed that the tee was "in", i guess the penalty must be kicked as soon as the skipper indicated his choice? but, as the time was off and physios were on the pitch, farrell couldn't played it. so, bad call

    on a side note, quite amused by the sky commentators finding this try "extraordinary" as dozens of tries are scored like that, each season. yachvili (in biarritz) use with success this technique 5 or 6 times by year ;)

  • katman
    3:48 PM 24/01/2013

    This looks totally legit to me. If you want "sneaky", look no further than Ronan O'Gara's score against the Springboks a few years back, when Paul Honiss told John Smit to go and talk to his men, and then let O'Gara tap and score as the Boks were huddled.

  • lucius
    10:59 AM 24/01/2013

    Time off, no play

  • 1:08 AM 24/01/2013

    Im fairly certain that the tee's not supposed to be on the pitch untill the kick is signalled but once its on that shouldn't be a try

  • 12:54 AM 24/01/2013

    Agreed on the tee. Farrell doesn't have the tee. Neither does Borthwick, and neither does the referee. for that matter. For all we know the water boy may have come on for water but brought the tee along just in case Saracens opted to kick. No one had even "made the mark on the ground" by which I take to mean kneeling down to push in the grass and make a good anchor for the tee, for example. The fact someone/anyone is in possession of the tee while on the pitch seems a somewhat arbitrary definition.

  • 12:48 AM 24/01/2013

    The ref calls time off before talking to Laidlaw (I think that's Laidlaw) but he doesn't blow his whistle to signal time back on. He does just about everything else though (raises his arm, gives the mark, etc.), so I'd debunk the idea that the ref hadn't indicated time back on.

    As for the tee, it may be about when the tee "arrives" but as with most things, it could be up to interpretation. I say the tee wasn't on the grass or in Farrell's hand so I'd also debunk that. I think whether or not the captain has indicated goal is more important. Like most rules in Rugby, it comes down to the ref's interpretation, so the most prudent thing to do in this case was play to the ref.

    It's embarrassing to get caught napping like that and Edinburgh might have an argument, but I personally think the try should stand.

  • willwillrob
    12:07 AM 24/01/2013

    As captain for my youth team I am always told its your penalty to do what you wish in your own time. and they say don't wait for me.

    Also a penalty means to me reset the defensive line pronto, turn and face and watch what the player is preparing to do

    If you don't do this thats what happens. like stephan Jones against italy a few years ago he noticed that the italians had retreated and turned to face there posts without a shot at goal signalled. he quick tapped and was in at the corner.

    just play to the whistle.

  • brawnybalboa
    11:42 PM 23/01/2013

    IRB Law 21.4 Penalty and Free Kick Options

    b) No delay.
    If a kicker indicates to the referee the intention to kick a penalty kick at goal, the kick must be taken within one minute from the time the player indicates the intention to kick at goal. The intention to kick is signalled by the arrival of the kicking tee or sand, or when the player makes a mark on the ground. The player must complete the kick within one minute even if the ball rolls over and has to be placed again.

    I think the important part of this rule here is in regards to the kicking tee. By arrival of the kicking tee does it mean to the pitch in general? Or to the player? The tee was in the waterboys possession, but he did not appear to attempt to give it to a player (had it behind his back).

    Regardless, the referee did not see the tee, and seeing as Saracens had not indicated they were going to kick for goal, Edinburgh should have been wise to the quick penalty. Playing the whistle.

  • cheyanqui
    11:25 PM 23/01/2013

    I think what happened is that you had the water bearers onto the pitch for the prior play -- players hurt, referee talking to.

    Players on the field (ie. opponent) are not clear whether that man is on the field for the purposes of water, injury mgmt, or a tee.

    Therefore, the referee should manage the situation and not allow the quick tap (kick). If Sarries have issue with it, I think a referee could easily say "You still have your water man standing right next to me. We'll wait until he comes off"

  • stanners
    10:42 PM 23/01/2013

    so it is, I was looking at the conversion section... briefly forgot it was a penalty.

  • stanners
    10:41 PM 23/01/2013

    HAF, I would consider the water carrier entering the pitch the arrival of the tee (which has been the case in some recent games I have seen), even then though, said water carrier is next to the mark, so again I wouls say the tee has arrived.

    Admittedly, on second viewing the tee is obscured from the referee's view, thus he would let play on... In that situation, the ball is live and the water carrier should not be on the pitch. I would be wondering why he was present in such a situation. However, on second viewing, although the TV feed game clock resumes upon Garces raising his arm at the mark, the clock should start upon the whistle, in the same way that it had been stopped with a whistle. I would in that situation still consider the clock to be off.

    In reality, the question in hand of try or no try would vary depending on the referee, and I, like you, can only offer an opinion. Given the clip (which is the first I have seen of the game), I would say the evidence I had seen would point to the try being disallowed. I think it is still down to poor game management between the match officials, and Saracens being their normal ingenuitive selves and pushing the boat out when it comes to interpretation, but I stand by my original instinct.

  • pedro
    9:21 PM 23/01/2013

    Thanks for posting refs! Great insight. Does make you wonder who hold the power then. Waterboy wired up to the coach in the stands gets the call and runs on to the pitch- decision made. Sure the players will cotton on to this now too and be telling the ref if the water/tee-boy is on the pitch...

  • reality
    9:12 PM 23/01/2013

    Eh, if the referee calls time off, does he not have to call time on before the game can restart? And if, with time still seemingly off, he starts talking to the opposition captain, then it's not very fair on the opposition defence if they get caught off guard.

  • cheyanqui
    8:48 PM 23/01/2013

    Terrible game management from the referee IMHO.

    The referee stops the game to chat with the opposing captain, and then awards the mark (by digging his heel into the pitch), and then asks the Sarries captain what he would like to do. If he's committed to asking the question, he should have committed to waiting the response.

    In addition, the water bearer (tee carrier too) is on the field. I've seen some referees do the opposite -- FORCE the captain to kick for posts if the tee comes onto the pitch.

    He should have either kept his mouth shut, or not made the mark until he got an answer from the captain.

    That aside, good play by Sarries.

    Jeppy -- you're right about awarding posts or not, in terms of the letter of the law. My point is that the referee mis-managed the situation.

  • jeppy89
    8:37 PM 23/01/2013

    Nice take, if they dont call posts and the referee doesnt indicate posts, pretty sure thats fair game.

    tee is misleading granted, but i was taught play the whistle. chin up.

Related Articles