• Please bear with us. We have moved to a new provider, and some images and icons are not working correctly. We are working hard to fix this

Quick Line out (not quick throw in)

D

DarrenJones

New member
If black got the ball in touch, you decide there are 2 players from each team at the line of touch so you call "lineout set" or however you let the teams know the QTI is no longer an option. Right after you call this the black player throws the ball in straight along the line of touch to the front receiver at 5.5m. Red was sauntering back assuming a more relaxed set up to the line out. They start crying that you had called of the QTI. Because the requirement for a QTI to be over is that a lineout has been set, Would it be appropriate to say that this was a quick line out not a quick throw in and that when a QTI is called off that simply removes the options of throwing in backwards or from behind the line of touch?
 
Assuming all Black are compliant?

Play on . Stop crying.

And then maybe have a quick chat with the captain to explain what just happened.
 
Was the "lineout" properly formed including straight lines, 1m apart, and everyone else 10m back, and a red player in the tramline ?

I wouldn't allow the OP as described as a valid lineout .
 
Last edited:
crossref said:
Was the "lineout" properly formed including straight lines, 1m apart, and everyone else 10m back, and a red player in the tramline ?

I wouldn't allow the OP as described as a valid lineout .
Click to expand...

so to clarify - once 2 x 2 player lines are set you wouldn;t allow the throw in until both sides have fully clear 10m spacing??

didds
 
crossref said:
Was the "lineout" properly formed including straight lines, 1m apart, and everyone else 10m back, and a red player in the tramline ?

I wouldn't allow the OP as described as a valid lineout .
Click to expand...

Law 18.35 doesn't require everyone else back 10 as long as they continue back 10. Looks like opponent in tram lines is a requirement.

[LAWS]Players not participating in the lineout must remain at least 10 metres from the mark of touch on their own team’s side or behind the goal line if this is nearer. If the ball is thrown in before a player is onside, the player will not be liable to sanction if the player immediately retires to the onside position. The player cannot be put onside by the action of any other player. [/LAWS]

Which raises an interesting question. If opponent hasn't yet reached tramlines when ball is thrown, that is a FK infringement by that player. I can't see any reference to giving him time to reach the tramlines.
 
Last edited:
All our guidance is to work hard at getting line outs set up correcty - and then they run smoothly.
This one sounds like chaos.

I think if you let that go all the red team, all the spectators and (in fact) most of the black team will all think you announced that the QTI was off - and then let them take one. There is nothing in it for the ref in this circumstance.


I think there are two ways to return a ball fro touch
- a QTI which is unstrucutre, informal and quick
- a lineout which is strucutred, formal, and is properly set up

The OP is neither one nor the other, and doesn't sound like good game management.
 
Last edited:
Dickie E said:
Law 18.35 doesn't require everyone else back 10 as long as they continue back 10. Looks like opponent in tram lines is a requirement.

[LAWS]Players not participating in the lineout must remain at least 10 metres from the mark of touch on their own team’s side or behind the goal line if this is nearer. If the ball is thrown in before a player is onside, the player will not be liable to sanction if the player immediately retires to the onside position. The player cannot be put onside by the action of any other player. [/LAWS]

Which raises an interesting question. If opponent hasn't yet reached tramlines when ball is thrown, that is a FK infringement by that player. I can't see any reference to giving him time to reach the tramlines.
Click to expand...

Indeed, it reads as a requirement on the non-throwing team, not a requirement for a line-out to be formed per se, which seems to be covered minimally by 18.9-13. And 18.14 permits a quickly taken throw at the (minimal) line-out.

It might however be good management to allow time for a bit of order at a set piece.
 
If the kicking team can get to the line of touch quickly, they're rewarded by having a chance to compete in the lineout rather than allow a (generally uncontested) QTI. So the throwing-in team has to comply with the lineout requirements and their opponents have a reasonable time to comply too, as is good LO management.
 
crossref said:
All our guidance is to work hard at getting line outs set up correcty - and then they run smoothly.
This one sounds like chaos.

I think if you let that go all the red team, all the spectators and (in fact) most of the black team will all think you announced that the QTI was off - and then let them take one. There is nothing in it for the ref in this circumstance.


I think there are two ways to return a ball fro touch
- a QTI which is unstrucutre, informal and quick
- a lineout which is strucutred, formal, and is properly set up

The OP is neither one nor the other, and doesn't sound like good game management.
Click to expand...

i get that ... but that se4ems to benefit thebteam that is tardy and not orgainsed over the team that is on the ball, smart in their approach (in all senses of smart) and wants to get on with the game. why should they be constrained by the oppoosition deliberately taking time?
 
crossref said:
Was the "lineout" properly formed including straight lines, 1m apart, and everyone else 10m back, and a red player in the tramline ?

I wouldn't allow the OP as described as a valid lineout .
Click to expand...

What if Black captain says to you at the coin toss, "Occasionally we like to go quickly on our throw into the lineout Sir".
What is your reply?

What tactics would you be prepared to allow Red to use to slow down the lineout?

Are you, as the referee, going to deliberately slow down the taking of the lineout so that it all looks textbook perfect to your eye?
 
Last edited:
This thread is about managing a team that is trying to hold a surprise lineout, by going very quickly .. I gave my answer for the OP scenario . Reset the lineout .

Do you have another particular scenario in mind ? Hit me ..


(Managing teams that are trying slow things down is a different topic ... )
 
crossref said:
This thread is about managing a team that is trying to hold a surprise lineout, by going very quickly .. I gave my answer for the OP scenario . Reset the lineout .
Click to expand...

Or: Managing a team who are acting compliance with the law.

If you have a law reference for holding it, then that's what we need. A "surprise" lineout that complies with law is their right; if the other team is taken by surprise, I'd rather tactfully suggest that they waken up. Referees shouldn't be in the business of pandering.
 
SimonSmith said:
Or: Managing a team who are acting compliance with the law.

If you have a law reference for holding it, then that's what we need. A "surprise" lineout that complies with law is their right; if the other team is taken by surprise, I'd rather tactfully suggest that they waken up. Referees shouldn't be in the business of pandering.
Click to expand...

How many players from the non-throwing team do you require to be in position to allow the quick throw in?
 
crossref said:
All our guidance is to work hard at getting line outs set up correcty - and then they run smoothly.
This one sounds like chaos.

I think if you let that go all the red team, all the spectators and (in fact) most of the black team will all think you announced that the QTI was off - and then let them take one. There is nothing in it for the ref in this circumstance.


I think there are two ways to return a ball fro touch
- a QTI which is unstrucutre, informal and quick
- a lineout which is strucutred, formal, and is properly set up

The OP is neither one nor the other, and doesn't sound like good game management.
Click to expand...

I'd agree for the first lineout of the match to each team (so first red throw and first black throw) but after that I am not going to call back a team for employing a quick line out if they want to play up tempo rugby as long as we have 2 from each side and the ball is thrown straight.
 
Drift said:
I'd agree for the first lineout of the match to each team (so first red throw and first black throw) but after that I am not going to call back a team for employing a quick line out if they want to play up tempo rugby as long as we have 2 from each side and the ball is thrown straight.
Click to expand...

But Drift the law requirement is 3 from each side (thrower, opponent to thrower and 2 participating players). Why 2?
 
Dickie E said:
But Drift the law requirement is 3 from each side (thrower, opponent to thrower and 2 participating players). Why 2?
Click to expand...

2 players along the line of touch. For a quick lineout if there isn't a player in the channel then just play a quick FK advantage, ball gets the to backs is advantage over, no need to stop a team wanted to expose the defence for relaxing.
 
Drift said:
I'd agree for the first lineout of the match to each team (so first red throw and first black throw) but after that I am not going to call back a team for employing a quick line out if they want to play up tempo rugby as long as we have 2 from each side and the ball is thrown straight.
Click to expand...

An up tempo line out implies that we have a lineout. So great

Throwing the ball into a general melee, a split second after I have said the no QTI (the scenario in the OP ) is just chaos
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top