Current Page: 1 of 2
That Hughes penalty
Posted by: Phillywasp (IP Logged)
Date: 17 May, 2018 17:08

I've just seen this alluded to in another thread so I feel I have to ask the question.

At the end of last season, that Hughes penalty in the final...I just have always thought he was legal. But until today I'd never seen so much as a slight suggestion that he might have been. I've always just assumed I'd missed something. But then it was mentioned in the other thread and maybe he was legal?

I can't say it was harsh - he was very clearly told to let go. Then he was given more than enough time do so. I just don't understand why he was told to let go.

Can anyone explain?
TIA

Re: That Hughes penalty
Posted by: Andy1210 (IP Logged)
Date: 17 May, 2018 18:22

I alluded to it in the thread you mention but was too gutted to mention it at the time, especially as it may have come across as sour grapes.

I was in line with it at the match and had a great view - when Nathan got his hands on it he was clearly on his feet supporting his weight, so I was anticipating a pen for holding on when over the ref mic I heard JP shout 'let go Nathan'. I couldn't believe it and every time I've seen it since I don't understand what Doyle had an issue with. I noticed that when the kick was being lined up and after the score, Nathan was having a heated conversation with JP.

And people wonder why we struggle to produce great back rows in the Premiership! Wonder how many times JP will ping Willis when he's perfectly legal on Saturday.

Re: That Hughes penalty
Posted by: Anonymous User (IP Logged)
Date: 17 May, 2018 19:00

Gutting as it was, he was told to let go and didn't. You're coached from 10 years old in any sport to play the ref not the situation. To not adhere to that in the dying seconds of a premiership final inside our own half was monumentally naive

Re: That Hughes penalty
Posted by: wombles222 (IP Logged)
Date: 17 May, 2018 20:12

Hughes was perfectly legal of that there is no question, however once JP said releasethat was exactly what he should of done, nomatter his (or our) feelings of legitimacy. JP clearly saw an offence and his call should of been enough to cause Hughes to release. He did not, the resulting kick went over and the rest is history

Re: That Hughes penalty
Posted by: Bracken&Macken (IP Logged)
Date: 17 May, 2018 20:59

Quote:
Hucks
Gutting as it was, he was told to let go and didn't. You're coached from 10 years old in any sport to play the ref not the situation. To not adhere to that in the dying seconds of a premiership final inside our own half was monumentally naive

Or the official could make the right decision, like heís paid to do. Hughes did his job, J P Doyle didnít.

Re: That Hughes penalty
Posted by: PhilH (IP Logged)
Date: 17 May, 2018 21:01

Quote:
Bracken&Macken
Quote:
Hucks
Gutting as it was, he was told to let go and didn't. You're coached from 10 years old in any sport to play the ref not the situation. To not adhere to that in the dying seconds of a premiership final inside our own half was monumentally naive

Or the official could make the right decision, like heís paid to do. Hughes did his job, J P Doyle didnít.

But can you honestly say you know as much about the game as the referee and were close enough to see what he saw?

Re: That Hughes penalty
Posted by: Anonymous User (IP Logged)
Date: 17 May, 2018 23:49

Pointless response.

The point is not whether the ref got it wrong. I think he was wrong. The point is the ref told Nathan to leave it and he didn't listen. He knew he wokkd get penalised in his own half with one of the most accurate kickers in the league. They weren't near our 22. It wasn't worth the risk to go for it when the ref was giving clear (wrong) instruction.

It was a monumentally naive thing to do

Re: That Hughes penalty
Posted by: Phillywasp (IP Logged)
Date: 18 May, 2018 05:32

I do get and agree that once he was told to let go he should have. Not doing so is clearly his fault - poor discipline.

I just wanted to know if there was a clear reason I'd missed as to why he was told to let go. Going from the above, it would seem there wasn't.

Re: That Hughes penalty
Posted by: Dgwasp (IP Logged)
Date: 18 May, 2018 06:24

I thought that it was harsh that we were not afforded the opportunity to compete in a ruck where it seemed the team in possession were allowed to throw bodies in at all angles, but that was JPs call. We should have let them recycle and tried again.

It is all history now anyway and shows how fine the margins are at the top of the Premiership. Even my misses let's things lie after this length of time smiling smiley

Re: That Hughes penalty
Posted by: WaspieFrank (IP Logged)
Date: 18 May, 2018 06:47

I just hope Mr D has moved on and learnt from his mistakes!

Re: That Hughes penalty
Posted by: matelot22 (IP Logged)
Date: 18 May, 2018 07:11

Like Andy, I was seated at that end of the pitch, but I didn't have ref link. When the whistle blew, I thought Chiefs had been pinged for holding on to the ball also.

Re: That Hughes penalty
Posted by: John Tee (IP Logged)
Date: 18 May, 2018 07:36

I think for such a critical decision, they ref should explain what he saw and why he pinged him.
Just as the player can be criticised then so can the ref if he was wrong.
If the ref says the penalty was for being off his feet, then analysis could determine that. If he was wrong then it should be noted. No one wants to win by poor decisions and refs can't be immune if that is the case.

Re: That Hughes penalty
Posted by: Raggs (IP Logged)
Date: 18 May, 2018 07:59

Quote:
John Tee
I think for such a critical decision, they ref should explain what he saw and why he pinged him.
Just as the player can be criticised then so can the ref if he was wrong.
If the ref says the penalty was for being off his feet, then analysis could determine that. If he was wrong then it should be noted. No one wants to win by poor decisions and refs can't be immune if that is the case.

The ref would have had to explain himself in the referees meeting that follows each week of games.

Re: That Hughes penalty
Posted by: Petergwilson (IP Logged)
Date: 18 May, 2018 08:57

DGWasp. I bet she doesn't. (Sm102)

Re: That Hughes penalty
Posted by: RossM (IP Logged)
Date: 18 May, 2018 09:27

Quote:
Petergwilson
DGWasp. I bet she doesn't. (Sm102)

I was going to add - 12 months is just the blink of an eye where my trouble and strife is concerned. But then she's a Scorpio.

Re: That Hughes penalty
Posted by: WallyWasp (IP Logged)
Date: 18 May, 2018 10:07

Hughes penalty aside, I felt at the time that the clear-out on him was led by the shoulder and in from the side so should have been reversed! Just a view from this armchair

Re: That Hughes penalty
Posted by: John Tee (IP Logged)
Date: 18 May, 2018 10:35

Quote:
Raggs
Quote:
John Tee
I think for such a critical decision, they ref should explain what he saw and why he pinged him.
Just as the player can be criticised then so can the ref if he was wrong.
If the ref says the penalty was for being off his feet, then analysis could determine that. If he was wrong then it should be noted. No one wants to win by poor decisions and refs can't be immune if that is the case.

The ref would have had to explain himself in the referees meeting that follows each week of games.

Not sure that helps as such. No one knows what the verdict was.
If ir was made public the it wouldn't affect the result, but it might lead to a review and improvements.
In other sports, the driver for a lot of changes has been interrogation by tv, which may well have been robustly resisted by federations otherwise.
Goal line technology and goaline officials came from two separate but massively controversial incidents that were missed by the officials.
I don't see anything wrong in using tech that gets the right result. Fans want to see the incident and then say, fair decision.

Review and put in place better systems to improve.
This is why coaches may want a review type system where they can lodge an immediate appeal.
I think it woukd be fair to say any coach woukd have played it in that instance.

Re: That Hughes penalty
Posted by: Nomad_Wasp (IP Logged)
Date: 18 May, 2018 10:50

Sucks and Wombles are spot on. He was legal when he started, but when told by the ref to let go he should've done. Hughes was even looking at the ref, as if to appeal for holding on. That lack of composure cost us the final.

Re: That Hughes penalty
Posted by: StevieWasp (IP Logged)
Date: 18 May, 2018 10:54

I try not to dwell on incidents like this, or results that haven't gone our way, but I've just tried to find the penalty on youtube.

It probably was legal from Hughes...
however, there's 2 things that I saw in the video that might explain why JP thought it wasn't.

Firstly, as a Wasps fan, I think Hughes is supporting his own weight, but he is leaning over at least 1 Exeter player (on the wrong side?) and it may be felt that Hughes was leaning too much on that player and therefore not supporting himself.

Secondly, there's a suspicion that Nathan starts slightly beyond the ball and comes back to it. It's incredibly marginal though and it's the type of thing that you wouldn't expect to see blown up every time. In fact, his hands may not have been beyond the ball, it may have just been his body being moved naturally within the ruck.



So, I do think that Hughes was legal and that we should have had the penalty for either holding on, or maybe a player on the wrong side.
However, if JP felt that Nathan wasn't supporting himself sufficiently, or that he started off beyond the ball, then he was right to tell him to leave it.

The thing with the rugby laws is that some of them are subjective. Supporting your own weight is one of them, and it will be impossible to ever get 100% consistently in those calls no matter what technology is deployed.



I'm still pretty gutted about it... but i did have a few quid on the draw.

Re: That Hughes penalty
Posted by: StevieWasp (IP Logged)
Date: 18 May, 2018 10:56

Quote:
Nomad_Wasp
Sucks and Wombles are spot on. He was legal when he started, but when told by the ref to let go he should've done. Hughes was even looking at the ref, as if to appeal for holding on. That lack of composure cost us the final.

I don't think you can say that the incident cost us the final.
Exeter are an excellent team, and I wouldn't bet the house against them recycling in that position and either drawing another penalty, or scoring.

It was a hugely depressing moment though

Current Page: 1 of 2
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net