Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Ref Watch: Faf's yellow, De Allende's blocking and why no penalty try came

Faf de Klerk /Getty

Warren Gatland’s post-match comments were delivered in a typically understated manner, but nonetheless no-one was left in any doubt about his views on the yellow-carding of Faf De Klerk.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Lions boss – who it should be pointed out was responding to a direct question rather than initiating the comment – stated that the Sale scrum half made head contact on Wyn Jones when charging into a defensive maul.

Following a TMO review, referee Jaco Peyper had reached a different conclusion before showing De Klerk a yellow card for the less dangerous offence of failing to make any attempt to bind to the maul.

Video Spacer

What does Marcus Smith joining the Lions mean for England rugby & Finn Russell

Video Player is loading.
Current Time 0:00
Duration 0:00
Loaded: 0%
Stream Type LIVE
Remaining Time 0:00
 
1x
    • Chapters
    • descriptions off, selected
    • captions off, selected
      Video Spacer

      What does Marcus Smith joining the Lions mean for England rugby & Finn Russell

      With South Africa’s key play-maker about to play a pivotal part in the test series, Gatland’s comments will doubtless at least in part have aimed to put pressure on De Klerk, the home camp and also the match officials who will take charge of the series.

      De Klerk Yellow Card – But did Peyper make the correct call?
      What we must remember is that the head contact protocol requires the officials to consider whether there was contact with the head, how much force was present and whether any mitigating factors exist. A full range of sanctions is then available – from play on to a red card and penalty (or penalty try).

      Taking these one at a time…
      Having viewed several replays I concur with Gatland’s view that De Klerk made some contact with Jones’ head. However, it was not direct – it seems to me his initial point of contact was around the upper chest level.

      As a result, the level of force involved was reduced.

      Further mitigation existed since the maul moved and Jones’s head shifted slightly in the split second before De Klerk entered.

      ADVERTISEMENT

      I would therefore agree with Peyper and TMO Marius Jonker’s decision to award a yellow card – albeit for different reasons.

      Penalty Try?
      Several Lions fans have questioned why a penalty try was not awarded during this phase of play.

      As the table below shows, South Africa A conceded eight penalties in the second quarter including five in eight minutes while under pressure in their 22 immediately prior to half-time.

      Quarter 1Quarter 2Quarter 3Quarter 4
      Pens against SA A3831
      Pens against BIL4125

       

      De Klerk’s foul play penalty was the fourth of these, and when flanker Marco van Staden was then pinged for a ruck offence he followed his scrum half to the sin bin.

      ADVERTISEMENT

      In times past, the referee had an option to award a penalty try when a team in deep defence conceded multiple penalties.

      However as yellow cards became established – it seems amazing now to think the sinbin only arrived in European rugby from the Southern Hemisphere in the late 90’s – the law-makers tidied up the confusion that existed.

      Repeat offenders, especially in their own defensive ‘red zone’ are therefore shown a yellow card with penalty try awards being reserved for occasions when an offence has prevented a ‘probable’ try.

      A transgressor may also get a yellow for foul play (as de Klerk did) or for a one-off offence which prevents a ‘possible’ rather than ‘probable’ try-scoring opportunity. An example of this would be a deliberate knock-on which occurs close to the line where other defenders are deemed to have been in a position to make try-saving tackles.

      It is also worth pointing out that De Klerk’s yellow card for foul play would not usually be counted in the totting-up process going on in the ref’s head, since it was a one-off incident rather than part of a string of repeat infringements aimed at illegally slowing the attacking side’s momentum.

      Nkosi Try
      During the Sky commentary, Nigel Owens was asked to clarify the law regarding Damian De Allende’s involvement in South Africa A’s opening try.

      He duly explained that a defender is only allowed to take a line which blocks a defender if he does so behind the ball carrier and without changing his angle of running.

      The former World Cup final ref went on to suggest Owen Farrell – who was shepherded away from Sbu Nkosi by De Allende – could have made more of the episode.

      I was amazed that no-one on the field suggested the officials look at this.

      After passing the ball to his winger, De Allende ran fully 50 metres without ever being behind the ball carrier. Throughout this he prevented Farrell getting across to make the tackle that would have redeemed his kick being charged down to initiate the move.

      De Allende never altered his running line, but was also in effect in an offside position and interfering with play throughout. Penalty to the Lions and no try for me.

      Rees-Zammit No Try
      The award of a penalty against the Gloucester winger for not releasing was a pivotal moment late in the second half of a match which was eventually determined by one score.

      Having been initially held short of the try line, the Lions winger is required in law to pass, release or place the ball and must do so immediately.

      This looked really odd because LRZ had already made an attempt to place the ball during the initial contact, so was therefore placing it for a second time (but a first post-tackle) when the TMO adjudged no concrete evidence existed to prove the ball touched the whitewash.

      This was all therefore legal until the Lions winger tried to retain possession by moving the ball for a third time and was correctly penalised.

      Last Scrum
      Nigel Owens provided a really good insight to how top officials think when he said it would be very difficult for the Lions to get a penalty in the dying seconds.

      This statement was based on the logic that the officials would rather that the players determine the outcome of the game than the award of a marginal penalty.

      However, surely clear infringements have to be blown – and when Peyper looks again at the match’s final scrum I wonder if he will see this as such a case?

      De Klerk quick lineout
      The quick-thinking South African No.9 sprinted up the touchline on the half-hour mark before hurling a quick throw-in directly at Kyle Sinckler, who was stood inside the five-metre area, and looking questioningly at Peyper.

      Clearly De Klerk was seeking to ‘buy’ a penalty and possibly even eke out a yellow card for the Lions prop.

      However, his hopes were foiled because a lineout (which in law requires only two players from each side to be present at the line of touch) had already formed which immediately removes the option of a quickly taken throw-in away from the mark.

      ADVERTISEMENT

      South Africa vs New Zealand | The Rugby Championship U20's | Full Match Replay

      Argentina vs Australia | The Rugby Championship U20's | Full Match Replay

      Saitama Wildknights vs Tokyo Sungoliath | Japan Rugby League 2024/25 | Full Match Replay

      The Game that Made Jonah Lomu

      The gruelling reality behind one of the fastest sports in the world | The Report

      Boks Office | Episode 40 | The Steven Kitshoff Special

      Perry Baker in the house | HSBC Life on Tour | Los Angeles

      Confidence knocks and finding your people | Flo Williams | Rugby Rising Locker Room

      Trending on RugbyPass

      Comments

      0 Comments
      Be the first to comment...

      Join free and tell us what you really think!

      Sign up for free
      ADVERTISEMENT

      Latest Features

      Comments on RugbyPass

      S
      Solenn Bonnet 4 days ago
      Leinster cleanse palette with record URC scoreline against Zebre

      My name is Solenn Bonnet, and I am a single mother navigating the challenges of raising my two-year-old child while trying to make ends meet. I came across a trading platform that promised astonishing daily profits of 18%. The allure of such a high return on investment was too tempting to resist, and I found myself drawn into cryptocurrency trading. Excited by the prospect of financial freedom, I invested a significant amount of my savings, totaling over 5.7 BTC. However, what started as a hopeful venture quickly turned into a nightmare. The platform was a scam, and I lost everything I had invested. The emotional toll of this loss was immense; I felt devastated and helpless, struggling to provide for my child and keep up with my bills. In my desperate attempt to recover my funds, I sought help from various recovery experts. Unfortunately, I encountered numerous fraudulent individuals who claimed they could help me retrieve my lost money. Each time I reached out, I was met with disappointment and further scams, which only deepened my despair. Last year was one of the most challenging periods of my life, filled with anxiety and uncertainty about my financial future. Feeling overwhelmed and at a loss, I confided in a close friend from church about my situation. She listened compassionately and shared her own experiences with financial difficulties. Understanding my plight, she introduced me to Tech Cyber Force Recovery, a group of skilled hackers known for their expertise in recovering lost funds. Skeptical yet hopeful, I decided to reach out to them as a last resort. Their services came at a higher cost, but my friend generously offered to help me with a partial payment. I was amazed by how quickly they responded and began the recovery process. Their team was professional, efficient, and incredibly supportive throughout the entire ordeal. To my relief, they successfully recovered more than I had lost to those heartless scammers. This was truly transformative, and I felt a sense of relief and gratitude that I hadn’t felt in a long time. I strongly encourage anyone who has faced similar challenges or fallen victim to scams to reach out to Tech Cyber Force Recovery. If you’ve invested in a fraudulent platform like I did, they are highly capable of helping you reclaim your hard-earned money. Don’t lose hope; there is a way to recover what you’ve lost.

      CONSULT TECH CYBER FORCE RECOVERY

      EMAIL.. support@techyforcecyberretrieval.com

      WhatsApp.. +15617263697

      website.. https://techyforcecyberretrieval.com

      Telegram.. +15617263697

      0 Go to comments
      LONG READ
      LONG READ Retiring Care and Youngs leave worthy legacy to emerging England scrum-halves Retiring Care and Youngs leave worthy legacy to emerging England scrum-halves
      Search