Monday Aug 13, 2018 Kenya close to RWC 2019 spot but this sneaky try raised some eyebrows

Kenya close to RWC 2019 spot but this sneaky try raised some eyebrows
24
Comments

Saturday’s Africa Gold Cup clash between Kenya and Tunisia in Nairobi was hugely significant as it’s set up a direct qualification route for Rugby World Cup 2019. Despite the convincing win, the try below caused a bit of debate surrounding its legality. 

Kenya scored 11 tries to beat Tunisia 67-0, picking up five points for the win and stay three points behind leaders Namibia in this year’s Africa Gold Cup.

This year’s tournament doubles as a qualifier for next year’s Rugby World Cup, with the overall winner getting a spot as Pool B’s Africa 1 in Japan.

Captain Davies Chenge scored one of their more memorable tries. It came from some sneaky deception by his number nine, but questions have been asked about whether it was legal or not. 

The dummy run took out a number of the opposition, opening up the space for Chenge to cruise through as three Tunisian defenders were wrong-footed.

The resultant win sets up this coming weekend’s decider between Kenya and Namibia, with the winner set to claim the tournament title and that coveted Rugby World Cup spot.

The runner up will remain in world cup contention, but will have to win November’s repechage in Marseille, where they will face Canada, Hong Kong and Germany. That will be their last chance to qualify. 

Elsewhere, Uganda beat Morocco 47-29 but Kenya’s bonus point win over Tunisia killed the Ugandan hopes of picking up a repechage place.

Kenya and Namibia’s decider takes place this Saturday in Windhoek (KO 16:00 local time).

Another angle of the Chenge try can be seen below below

credit: apo/worldrugby

24 Comments

  •  drg
    drg

    copyright claim :( siiigh, business

    Reply
  •  pgrugby
    pgrugby

    Looks like the All Blacks were watching the game as well. Check out 7:40 in the first half https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7Sw_cK85eE The difference is that the scrum half keeps himself square to the defense so they can see he's not holding the ball and is obviously waiting for a pass. It gives the 8 a bit more of an option as the opposition 10 has to drift wide to cover the 9 and the flankers also have to be ready to sprint wide faster

    Reply
  •  drg
    drg

    Exactly, I think it's these sorts of things that promote the spirit of the game. This looks right out of the Baabaas playbook and really who can dispute that they are the greatest team out there. It doesn't matter who they pick, the style and the ethos that they bring is just champagne. As you said, this was designed to be legal, designed to be a good play, let things flow. But by all means, hammer things that are designed to cry for penalties etc..

    Reply
  •  pgrugby
    pgrugby

    ... and in the twitter view you can just see that the blind side winger is coming in behind the scrum to the open side as if he might get the ball from the scrum half - that draws the ref to lean to the open side perhaps - and more distractions for the defense A great play, next time they'll have the timing down better with the 8 and 9 going simultaneously Now that I think about it - a play that was designed to be legal but timing was just a fraction off but close enough that it wasn't picked up. Like someone just running in front of the ball on what was supposed to be a flat pass but ended up being a hair forward.

    Reply
  •  pgrugby
    pgrugby

    That's probably why the ref let it go - either he thought it was close enough to being simultaneous or couldn't tell that it wasn't simultaneous so wasn't going to blow it up. Looking at it in full speed the ref starts to lean the wrong way and gets wrong footed and to him it all looked like it was done at the same time. ... and thankfully there was no TMO to call it back for endless replays :)!!!

    Reply
  •  drg
    drg

    I guess when I look at why there is a law there which potentially covers this move, the reasoning is to stop what one would consider unsportsmanlike conduct, for instance the scrum half dummying off the base of a ruck/scrum, to force the opposition to move prematurely, then complaining about offside etc. Which is a totally understandable event to try and stamp out. But what happened here was not an invention to try and cream a penalty, it was an attempt to mis match, wrong foot, or just generally confuse/dummy the opponents... and it worked a treat, the same as for instance back line moves involving dummy runners, loops, miss passes etc etc.. I think given the very short space of time between the 9 dummying and the 8 picking up, it's fine to me, but of course if the 9 sets off, bringing the defenders forward and the 8 stands up and says "oh come on ref, they're offside" etc, then that's certainly the outcome we want to police/avoid.

    Reply
  •  drg
    drg

    I have since been schooled on the actual laws below. As a potential counteract, you could argue that IF they were simultaneous (the 8+9) then it's fine... having slowed the video down, it's not quite simultaneous however... But anyway, I was arguing on a personal opinion based standpoint... which as we all know feelings>reality... But that being said, there isn't much of a difference with my "dummy runner getting smashed" comment, given that penalties are often given for tackling an opponent without the ball.... which is something else I detest in that manner. If I sell a world class dummy run and get hit for it, then it's my own doing...

    Reply
  •  drg
    drg

    If however the scrum half and the 8 did act simultaneously, then there is no need for a penalty however. I note one of the comments in the topic suggest it's simultaneous... I'm not overly convinced on that matter, however I don't see anything wrong with this. (or at least from a personal point of view, I don't think there SHOULD be anything wrong with this).

    Reply
  •  drg
    drg

    Hahaha, I went off the above Twitter "ending a scrum" law. I'm surprised myself that I was that close...

    Reply
  •  pickay
    pickay

    Well, it's 38 f, but otherwise that's very accurate... :D

    Reply
  •  pickay
    pickay

    You can certainly argue in favour of dummies, but as it stands now, for this particular situation there is indeed a law explicitly ruling out the dummy. 19.38 f, as stated above...

    Reply
  •  im1
    im1

    the difference here is that the laws specifically state that the scrum half isnt allowed to make the other team think da rong fing, when that is making them think dat da ball is out of da scrum when it is not.

    Reply
  •  pickay
    pickay

    Section 19 "Scrum": 38. Other restricted practices at a scrum include: ... f. Scrum-half attempting to make an opponent believe the ball is out of the scrum when it is not. Sanction: Free-kick.

    Reply
  •  jmdavies
    jmdavies

    How dare the 9 fool the opposition! Next people will call for a ban to 'dummy' or 'blind' passes. Don't want to deceive players to open a hole in the defence, that's just not rugby....

    Reply
  •  drg
    drg

    36 f. Making the opposition look like a dum dum.

    Reply
  •  rdump0
    rdump0

    Can anyone find out which Law this would be in breach of? If any?

    Reply
  •  drg
    drg

    It*

    Reply
  •  drg
    drg

    "I made me fink da rong fing, ref penalty innit?" To me, this is the exact same bull shit as someone bitching they've been smashed after running a massive convincing dummy line!

    Reply
  •  pgrugby
    pgrugby

    The difference is that when the scrumhalf is waiting for the flick the opposition doesn't believe the ball is already out of the scrum. They are still waiting on defense waiting for the ball to come out. In this case the run by the scrumhalf makes the defense think the ball is out before it is, so it should be a penalty. If the scrumhalf had been standing in the wider position and then the 8 had dummied flicking the ball to him then it would have been fine.

    Reply
  •  the_osprey
    the_osprey

    Nice

    Reply
  •  drg
    drg

    I'm with you here! Totally agree. I don't see anything wrong with this.

    Reply
  •  marioaiello
    marioaiello

    This move was used by the All Black in a game against Canada during the 1991 or 1999 world cup. Other times other rules.

    Reply
  •  petersam
    petersam

    It is very common for the 9 to leave the back of the scrum and stand in a wider position in order to receive a flick pass directly from the 8. I don't see why this is different (other than the pass never being thrown).

    Reply
  •  reality
    reality

    That is in no way simultaneous to the number 8. The scrum half is 2-3m away before the ball is picked up.

    Reply

Great Tries

View All

Big Hits & Dirty Play

View All

See It To Believe It

View All

Funnies

View All

Training Videos

View All

Player Features

View All
Kenya close to RWC 2019 spot but this sneaky try raised some eyebrows | RugbyDump