When is an 8 point try awarded?

[Steel Dragon]

Those might not be the official rules. The article mentioned something about 1996 and the RFL which I think is a UK organisation. Does anyone have a link to the official rules?

Yeah - i did a bit of a search on the net and couldnt find any NRL official rules.

I have a book at mum and dads from when I used to be a referee, but thats no good to me here and now...

 

[PARRA_FAN]

2003 was definately the last one, however it wasnt actually 8 points cause Witt missed the initial conversion. Same with 1993 with Wes HAll :lol: , I think Craig Makepeace was the goalkicker and missed an easy conversion, but got the penalty goal afterwards.

The last one I remember that had 8 points was probably Norths Vs Roosters 94 at the WACA, I think it was Matt Seers who scored then got belted, Cleary kicked the 2 goals, playing for the Norths that is.

 

[Leagueguy]

Originally Posted by Leagueguy
Ok what about this.

Say Brisbane plays the ball in their own half, it goes to Lockyer and he puts through a kick for one of his wingers. After puting in the kick he's taken out with an elbow by a player running through. However no one sees this and one of the wingers manages to get the ball and runs away to score a try. The video referee is called though to check the onside, which is fine, but he also notices Lockyer get taken out. Is this an 8 point try?

When awarding a penalty try, the referee has to be 100% sure that if the infringement did not occur a try would have been scored.

Which generally means when the kick is put through, the ball has to be stopped in the in goal and all the player has to do is place a hand on the ball to score the try.
This circumstance is generally the only instance where a penalty try should be awarded - although referees give some leeway and allow a circumstance where all the player has to do is fall over to score.
ie the 99 grand final.

Ok but in this instance I'm saying a try has actually been scored, theres no doubt about that. However on a closer inspection the video ref sees another infringement. Can this be an 8 point try?

 

[East Coast Tiger]

An 8 point try occurs when in the opinion of the referee the tryscorer is fouled (although he doesn't actually have to be fouled, he could just be tackled late) after scoring the try. If some other bloke gets taken out off the ball before a try is scored it doesn't mean anything. It's certainly not an 8 point try. The player whotook the kicker out could be spoken to or sent off but it will have no bearing on the try.

The purpose of an 8-point try is to allow for some recompence if a player is fouled after scoring because otherwise any try scorer could be hit late by a frustrated team/player because the ball is technically dead once a try is scored. The team gets a conversion attempt in line with the try and then gets another shot at goal from right in front.

A penalty try is awarded when in the opinion of the referee a certain try is denied as a result of a foul (eg Ainscough). The team gets one conversion as per a normal try but it is taken from in front because as the try wasn't actually scored in the normal way there is no mark by which to take the conversion.

It's pretty simple but for some reason few fans seem to understand the difference.

As for the field goal situation, if a player is fouled after kicking a drop goal that misses clearly that's a penalty, as per any late tackle, and a penalty is awarded. Under most circustances the team is likely to take the penalty goal anyway, after all if they were keen for a one pointer why would they not want a two pointer? The rule that says they get a kick at goal even if the field goal is good, therefore potentially making it a 3-point field goal is an interesting one though. Not one I've heard of and I doubt we'll ever see.

 

[Leagueguy]

If the 8 point try rule wasn't there , is it possible we'd see more players going in for cheap shots after the try was awarded? I wonder if this is why it was invented.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

I'm sure that is exactly why it was invented

 

[***MH***]

Link to the ARL Laws of the Gamehttp://files.arlfoundation.com/laws/internationallaws.pdf

Lets begin with the Synopsis of the "Penalty Try"

Section 6.
Penalty try
(d) the Referee may award a penalty try if, in his
opinion, a try would have been scored but for the
unfair play of the defending team. A penalty try is
awarded between the goal posts irrespective of
where the offence occurred.

When awarding a penalty try, the referee has to be 100% sure that if the infringement did not occur a try would have been scored.

The referee does not have to be 100% sure, the law states, "in his opinion"

Unfair play can be described as tripping to tackling a player without possession of the ball and even high tackles. A few seasons ago, stealing possession of the ball with more than one defender in the tackle could constitute a penalty try but the laws were amended to award stealing possession a penalty only. (When I find a newer link of the 2006 ARL Laws, I'll let you know where the amendments are)

Lets move to the "Eight Point Try" section.


Section 13
Offence against Try scorer
9. If a player fouls an opponent who is touching down
for a try, a penalty kick at goal shall be taken from in
front of the goal posts after the attempt to convert
the try. After his kick has been taken the ball shall be
deemed dead and play shall be restarted from the
halfway line. This law applies to the period during
which the ball is touched down for a try and not to
any subsequent period.

In short, a penalty kick at goal from in front is given after the initial attempt of conversion for the try.

This is the important part of the law...
This law applies to the period during
which the ball is touched down for a try and not to
any subsequent period.

adj. subsequent ref. Wiktionary

1. Following in time; coming or being after something else at any time, indefinitely.
2. Following in order of place; succeeding.

So when a player is touching down to score a try and an opponent knees the try scorer in the back or stomps on his head during the touch down, the Offense against the Try Scorer law comes into act. If for instance after the try scorer has finished grounding the ball and is subsequently fouled, this law does not come into play.

Oh, and one more thing....

I challenge you to find any reference in the rule book where it calls it an '8 point try.'

Section 17. REFEREE'S SIGNALS
Law 3. Eight Point Try. This term is used to indicate that a
penalty kick has been awarded for foul play against a try
scorer. Instruct a Touch Judge to take up position in front
of the posts ten metres from the goal line before retiring
behind the goal posts to judge on the conversion attempt.

 

[jamesgould]

An 8 point try situation should have been given to the Cowboys on Saturday High tackle on Sing by Tupou as the try was scored Went through to the keeper

Yeah, I thought this should have been one too. I was surprised none of the commentators mentioned the possibility.

Also in the first Melbourne vs Newcastle match this year when Anthony Quinn tried to smash Jake Webster's head off after he scored was another one I thought should have been an 8 pointer.

 

[Leagueguy]

So if a player is touching down for a try and another player comes in with a forearm, thats an 8 point try. Yet if that player scored and the second he was on his feet someone ran over and punched him, then that wouldn't be a penalty. Seems weird.

 

[thehattrickrabbit]

Speaking of technicalities, the term is a "Possible 8 point Try". And it is a completely different thing to a Penalty try.

its the same thing, it wasnt guaranteed an 8 point try, in the 99 gf, because craig smith, took the main conversion from the sideline, had he of missed it, it only would of been 6 points, with the conversion from right in front

but penalty try is an 8 point try, whether they get 8 points out of it or not

 

[***MH***]

So if a player is touching down for a try and another player comes in with a forearm, thats an 8 point try. Yet if that player scored and the second he was on his feet someone ran over and punched him, then that wouldn't be a penalty. Seems weird.

Although it wouldn't be an eight point try in that context, you should expect to see the referee deal with the situation by dismissing such players that commit to those actions from the field.

 

[jamesgould]

its the same thing, it wasnt guaranteed an 8 point try, in the 99 gf, because craig smith, took the main conversion from the sideline, had he of missed it, it only would of been 6 points, with the conversion from right in front

but penalty try is an 8 point try, whether they get 8 points out of it or not

Craig Smith was awarded a penalty try, so Melbourne were given the conversion from right in front. As he did not score the try, there was no chance of it being an 8 point try. He did not score the try, but if not for the act of foul play in Ainscough's high tackle, he would of, therefore penalty try, with conversion in front.

If he had got the ball down and been high tackled in the process of scoring, then he would have been awarded an 8 point try, one conversion from where he scored, and one penalty from in front.

They are TOTALLY different things.