Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
NZ NZ

Watch: 'Fairness' of Willi Heinz's sneaky try questioned

By Ned Lester
Willi Heinz celebrates a try for the Crusaders. Photo by Hannah Peters/Getty Images

A tight contest in Queensland concluded Friday night with a Crusaders win that extended their dominant run over the Reds, one that has reigned since the famous 2011 Super Rugby final.

ADVERTISEMENT

It was an untidy match, handling errors and ill-discipline intervened regularly and one of the biggest talking points to come out of the contest was an unorthodox play that resulted in seven points for the visitors.

A try from former England international Willi Heinz in the 54th minute pushed the defending champions’ lead to 22-7. The whistle from referee Damon Murphy was met with confusion from both the commentary team and the opposing players as the ball was called short initially on the leg drive by Tamaiti Williams, but placed on the try line by the quick-thinking halfback without leaving the ruck.

Video Spacer

Video Spacer

While the ball was placed on the line, Australian pundits took another look at the play postgame and had questions over whether such play should be legal.

“It’s a bit of curiosity on this one, promoting the ball forward through the back of a ruck,” Justin Harrison said on Stan Sport.

“We just think that there could be a possibility of an obstruction rule or that you have to clear it from the ruck before you’re able to then promote it back into the play because that’s an interesting ruling, isn’t it?”

Former Reds captain James Horwill joined the panel after the match and contributed his thoughts.

ADVERTISEMENT

“You look at it from a fairness point of view. There’s nothing actually the Reds can do legally to stop that happening,” Horwill said.

“So, is there a way that that should be allowed? I’m not sure.

“It’s good game management from Willi Heinz, who I thought when he came on was really good, you know, understands the laws of the game but, you know, the fairness and is it something that they might look at it from the referees?”

Related

Harrison went on to agree that the play could warrant a review from Super Rugby lawmakers.

“Well, we’ve seen it before when players have taken the ball back in there and not grounded it properly and then an opposing player has reached over and dotted it down,” Harrison said.

ADVERTISEMENT

“We’re not talking about that. We’re talking about ball is held with someone else. He’s on the ground, no longer able to promote it in either direction. Then someone comes from behind, joins the ruck and then promotes it through the very same ruck. It’s going to be one that the judicial system I’m sure are going to look at.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Join free

Fresh Starts | Episode 1 | Will Skelton

ABBIE WARD: A BUMP IN THE ROAD

Aotearoa Rugby Podcast | Episode 8

James Cook | The Big Jim Show | Full Episode

New Zealand victorious in TENSE final | Cathay/HSBC Sevens Day Three Men's Highlights

New Zealand crowned BACK-TO-BACK champions | Cathay/HSBC Sevens Day Three Women's Highlights

Japan Rugby League One | Steelers v Sungoliath | Full Match Replay

Rugby Europe Women's Championship | Netherlands v Spain

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

S
Senzo Cicero 12 hours ago
'If the South Africans are in, they need to be all in'

1. True, if that “free” ticket means access to all but the prized exhibit - EVIP only. SA cannot host semis, even if they’ve earned it (see Sharks vs ASM Clermont Auvergne at… Twickenham Stoop). 2. Why no selective outrage over Lyon doing the exact same thing a week earlier? Out of all the countries France send the most “B teams”, why nobody talking about “disrespect” and “prioritising domestic leagues” and “kicking them out”? 3. Why no mention of the Sharks fielding all of their Springboks for the second rate Challenge cup QF? No commitment? 4. Why no mention of all the SA teams qualifying for respective euro knock out comps in the two seasons they’ve been in it? How many euro teams have qualified for KO’s in their history? Can’t compete? 5. Why no mention of SA teams beating French and English giants La Rochelle and Saracens? How many euro teams have done that in their history? Add no quality? The fact is that SA teams are only in their second season in europe, with no status and a fraction of the resources. Since joining the URC, SA has seen a repatriation of a number of players, and this will only grow once SA start sharing in the profits of competing in these comps, meaning bigger squads with greater depth and quality, meaning they don’t have to prioritise comps as they have to now - they don’t have imports from Pacifica and South America and everywhere else in between like “European” teams have - also less “Saffas” in Prem and T14, that’s what we want right? 'If the South Africans are in, they need to be all in' True, and we have to ensure we give them the same status and resources as we give everyone else to do just that. A small compromise on scheduling will go a long way in avoiding these situations, but guess what, France and England wont compromise on scheduling because they ironically… prioritise their domestic comps, go figure!

19 Go to comments
FEATURE
FEATURE Swashbuckling Hurricanes and Harlequins show scrum still matters Swashbuckling Hurricanes and Harlequins show scrum still matters
Search