Quick Line out (not quick throw in)

[SimonSmith]

But the throwing team haven't declared they're having a shortened LO. Would you ping the non-throwing team for having too many players if they had 3 players and the throwing team only had 2? Unless they state otherwise, I'll make them wait every time for the LO to be properly formed. Unless they take a QTI, but this isn't permissible under these circumstances.

This is covered in Law 18.14:

[FONT=fs_blakeregular]Unless the throw is taken as soon as the lineout is formed, the non-throwing team may not have more players (but may have fewer players) in the lineout than the throwing team. [/FONT][FONT=fs_blakeregular]Sanction: [/FONT][FONT=fs_blakeregular]Free-kick.[/FONT]

 

[didds]

so there you have it. the law makers have rather made it clear that it is possible to throw the ball in "quickly" while the LO is being "put together".


didds

 

[crossref]

But read the definition of a line out
It's a set piece.
The shortcut is a QTI

 

[thepercy]

I would make the kicking team wait until the receiving team were all behind the 10m line . As per the Laws

So as soon as the requirements are met, you would allow them to kick. But not by surprise? There is no such requirements for 22DOs so those could be done as quickly as the kicking team like?

 

[thepercy]

But the throwing team haven't declared they're having a shortened LO. Would you ping the non-throwing team for having too many players if they had 3 players and the throwing team only had 2? Unless they state otherwise, I'll make them wait every time for the LO to be properly formed. Unless they take a QTI, but this isn't permissible under these circumstances.

That's how I would have done it before, and get the numbers right. But now we have 18.14 that says the non throwing team is not liable to sanction for "numbers" if the throwing team throws in as soon as the LO is formed.

 

[crossref]

So as soon as the requirements are met, you would allow them to kick. But not by surprise? There is no such requirements for 22DOs so those could be done as quickly as the kicking team like?

Correct

For a restart everyone has to be in position

For a 22m DO they don't (but players caught in front of the kicker are offside in general play, as for any kick)

But that's standard stuff right, surely you don't disagree

 

[OB..]

For a restart everyone has to be in position

[LAWS]

• 12.5 When the ball is kicked:
  • Team-mates of the kicker must be behind the ball. Sanction: Scrum.
  • Opposition players must be on or behind the 10-metre line.

[/LAWS]That is a change from the previous law book, which failed to deal with restart kicks properly.

 

[The Fat]

Too many threads on this same topic.
Just saying.

 

[SimonSmith]

Correct

For a restart everyone has to be in position

For a 22m DO they don't (but players caught in front of the kicker are offside in general play, as for any kick)

But that's standard stuff right, surely you don't disagree

No. Just...no.
The lineout law makes that clear.

They want a dummy hooker. But a lineout can proceed without one, subject to sanction.
They want numbers to match (or defenders be less). But the law I cited makes it clear that the lineout can proceed if the numbers mismatch.

Please stop making things up. You are at odds with the law.

 

[Ian_Cook]

[LAWS]Lineout: A lineout is a set piece consisting of a line of at least two players from each team waiting to receive a throw from touch[/LAWS].

I don't think you can have a surprise lineout , any more than you can have a surprise scrum or a surprise restart kick

Even for those of you who think a surprise lineout is technically possible, I would suggest it's not good game management ... You won't he thanked for it

If there are two players from each team at the LoT, and the non-throwing team are surprised when the throwing team throw the ball in, then they need to do a few things

1. Read the Law book.
2. Get better coaching.
3. Learn what "situational awareness" means.
4. Wake up.
5. Get their collective arses into gear

 

[The Fat]

Yes, provided the line out is correctly formed. This to me isn't a correctly formed line out unless the throwing team has stated that they want to shorten the LO to 2 participants. As a player and a ref, I'd work with a full LO unless advised by the throwing team that there was a change. If they've siad the LO was to be shortened to 2 Players then I may allow the LO. But again, it doesn't sit well as one sides players will no doubt be in an offside position.

EG - Black have kicked the ball into touch, QUI not on. 2 players from each side arrive (+thrower). Red declare they want the shortened LO to specify that there is 2 participant. They then take the throw, most of their team and the Black's players will be on their way up to Mark, therefore they all may be offside, def the throwing teams players as they're in front of the player who is playing/has last played the ball. There probably also in the way of the defenders who will no doubt be trying to tackle.

Teams nominating how many players they are putting in the lineout is a Northern Hemisphere thing. Down under, we have learned to count to seven.
The throwing team can choose to throw into the lineout without waiting for the opposition to drop players out to match.
Why are some of you intent on allowing the non-throwing team to dictate how the lineout is taken?

 

[Dickie E]

*shrug*.

Not straight, options clearly.

Fr4ankly the sanctionb for no tramlone player seems a bit strange TBH. Yes defenders may have an extra backline defender. But jnopw they've nopbody defensing the tramline corridor.

however I appreciate that is what the law says, whatever.

Its still options for not straight for me.

didds

so what would you tell your assessor if he/she picked you up on it?

"yeah, I know its a law but seems a bit strange to me so I ignore it"

Are there any other "strange" laws that you ignore?

 

[crossref]

Teams nominating how many players they are putting in the lineout is a Northern Hemisphere thing. Down under, we have learned to count to seven.
The throwing team can choose to throw into the lineout without waiting for the opposition to drop players out to match.
?

Actually that has changed here since the Laws changed in 2018
.
Previously it was in the Law that the throwing team had to allow time for the non throwing team to match numbers.

But in 2018 they took that law away.

There wasn't an abrupt change in how it is played and reffed , but there has been a gradual one and we are now much closer to your approach .. but not there yet, teams still commonly announce , even though they may no longer be made to...

 

[crossref]

No. Just...no.
The lineout law makes that clear.

They want a dummy hooker. But a lineout can proceed without one, subject to sanction.
They want numbers to match (or defenders be less). But the law I cited makes it clear that the lineout can proceed if the numbers mismatch.

Please stop making things up. You are at odds with the law.

Well, you brought up restart kicks and drop outs
But they are different in law

The question is : is a lineout more like a restart kick , where both teams have to be in position

Or is a lineout more like a 22m dropout where they don't need to be in position ?

I am paying attention to the definition, a lineout is a SET piece , where two lines form waiting for the ball

So a lineout is more like a restart kick, teams in position
Whereas the QTI is like a 22m do , not

Indeed this the whole point of the QTI .. it's the way to avoid the set piece lineout

 

[Jz558]

Actually that has changed here since the Laws changed in 2018
.
Previously it was in the Law that the throwing team had to allow time for the non throwing team to match numbers.

But in 2018 they took that law away.

There wasn't an abrupt change in how it is played and reffed , but there has been a gradual one and we are now much closer to your approach .. but not there yet, teams still commonly announce , even though they may no longer be made to...

One of the things that irritated me when I started reffing was that as soon as the ball crossed the touch line non-throwing teams started shouting for numbers in the line. I actually now include it in my PMB and remind teams that the throwing side are not obligated to tell you, you need to count. Equally though I am not sympathetic to the 8/9 man conference by the throing side 5m from the line of touch which ends when 3 players move rapidly into the line with the remainder retiring and then the throw being taken before it is obvious how many they are putting into the line.

 

[crossref]

But what goes around comes around .. in general I find that both teams here still prefer to keep the other informed .. in return for it working both ways of course

 

[didds]

[LAWS]

• 12.5 When the ball is kicked:
  • Team-mates of the kicker must be behind the ball. Sanction: Scrum.
  • Opposition players must be on or behind the 10-metre line.

[/LAWS]That is a change from the previous law book, which failed to deal with restart kicks properly.

no sanction for a kick taken with kicking team players all behind the ball but oppo notn all behind the 10m line then?

Presumably a re-taken kick if that is the case?

didds

 

[didds]

so what would you tell your assessor if he/she picked you up on it?

"yeah, I know its a law but seems a bit strange to me so I ignore it"

Are there any other "strange" laws that you ignore?

I'm not ignoring them.

I'm saying it seems odd that the law insists on not exposing a tactical error.

didds

 

[Arabcheif]

[FONT=fs_blakeregular]Unless the throw is taken as soon as the lineout is formed, the non-throwing team may not have more players (but may have fewer players) in the lineout than the throwing team. [/FONT][FONT=fs_blakeregular]Sanction: [/FONT][FONT=fs_blakeregular]Free-kick.[/FONT]

so there you have it. the law makers have rather made it clear that it is possible to throw the ball in "quickly" while the LO is being "put together".

No it doesn't. The LO isn't "Formed," so the throw can't be taken quickly. The 2 player min requirement is for a formed LO. Unless they tell me at least, I'll expect them to have a full LO. As a player I'd expect it too.


didds

[FONT=fs_blakeregular]Unless the throw is taken as soon as the lineout is formed, the non-throwing team may not have more players (but may have fewer players) in the lineout than the throwing team. [/FONT][FONT=fs_blakeregular]Sanction: [/FONT][FONT=fs_blakeregular]Free-kick.[/FONT]

 

[thepercy]

Correct

For a restart everyone has to be in position

For a 22m DO they don't (but players caught in front of the kicker are offside in general play, as for any kick)

But that's standard stuff right, surely you don't disagree

You said you wouldn't allow "surprise restart kicks" in your argument that you shouldn't be allowed to throw in as soon as the LO is formed. This argument does not hold up, and I disagree with you on both counts. I would not require the kicking team or the throwing in team to wait for "everyone to be in position", just what's required by law, at a restart kick after a score for the players to all be past their 10 m line (not "in position"). At a 22DO (restart kick after a touchdown) I wouldn't make the kicking team wait for their opponents to get in position at all. At a LO, they need to wait for there to be 2 x 2 to throw in, but need not wait for everyone to be in position.