Marshall Law

Well, did he or didn’t he? Peter Marshall that is. Did he crook the Sharks by awarding a penalty try or was he merely applying the law?

There are few occurrences in rugby as contentious as the awarding of a penalty try and when Marshall moved towards the posts to give the Crusaders a penalty try he was trotting right into the teeth of a force 10 controversy.

There were few in the Absa Stadium crowd who did not believe that the referee, who would easily win a Sharks’ hate parade, had defrauded their team.

But, for those staying up late in Christchurch, New Zealand, it would have been a case of justice prevailing, and they would have ordered another jug of DB Bitter to toast Marshall… notwithstanding the fact that, from their perspective, he is one of those despicable, underhand Australians.

So what about the question posed at the outset of this column? Was Marshall right or was he wrong?

A reading of the law plus help from learned council seems to suggest that Marshall got it right. In fact, all things considered AJ Venter, the man who caused a compelling Crusaders maul to collapse, thus committing the infringement that led to the penalty try, may have been lucky to escape a yellow card for an intentional foul.

The relevant law states: “Penalty try. A penalty try is awarded if a try would probably have been scored but for foul play by the defending team. A penalty try is awarded if a try would probably have been scored in a better position but for foul play by the defending team.

“A penalty try is awarded between the goal posts. The defending team may charge the conversion kick after a penalty try.”

Would the Crusaders probably have scored? Peter Marshall certainly thought so and he has the support of one of the IRB’s authorities on the laws.

Former first-grade referee Derek Robinson has written a number of treatises on the laws, especially works to make them simpler and easier to understand, and in his book “RUGBY - A player’s guide to the laws,” he provides this explanation of the penalty try.

“If a defender does something unfair or illegal which, in the referee’s opinion, prevents a “probable” try, then he will award a penalty try.

” “The interesting word here is “probably”. The referee doesn’t have to be absolutely convinced that a try would inevitably have been scored; he just has to feel sure that the attacking side had a healthy odds-on chance. With that in mind, he can award a penalty try for an offence in mid-field just as much as for one inside the defenders’ 22.”

Note that neither the Law nor Derek Robinson’s explanation make mention of a team having to be warned before a penalty try is awarded.

So did the Crusaders have a “healthy odds-on chance” of scoring a try as they rumbled towards the Sharks line and were they stymied by Venter’s actions? I think the answer is “yes” on both counts which means that Marshall’s application of the law was right… it was a penalty try.

PS: While we’re on the subject of the Sharks and the laws. I searched the book itself and a number of other reference books but nowhere is it recorded that a team can declare after the first half! It is now as it always has been… a match consists of two periods of 40 minutes.