[Line out] Another Line Out Question..

[Arabcheif]

@cr, did the OP not say the Red (no-throwing team) had a receiver but blue didn't. He joined the lineout once the ball was thrown? So he's a participating player - IF he's in the receiver position. Which from what I read, he was when the LO commenced. So using that, nothing wrong no need to blow for anything.

 

[crossref]

Red placed a receiver then a second later quickly threw the ball in

Blue had no receiver. Once the ball was thrown it was too late thy can't add one

 

[Arabcheif]

Yes, but they opted not to have one at the start, blue was the throwing team. Plus the thrower can move to the receiver position if it's free once he throws the ball. So he can also join the LO too.

 

[tewdric]

Ok, so based on the information that we've been given that there hasn't been any fundamental Law changes from the 2017 Laws ( as has been mentioned by numerous people previously). These state that all participating players (and it defines that throwers and receivers are participating player) can compete for the ball. Therefore both receivers can enter the line. Seems a bit daft to allow one and not the other.

Thats the thing though, I cant find anywhere in the 2019 law that says receivers can join the lineout. It does say throwers and their counterparts can - did they intentionally exclude receivers or just forget to include them? If it was an intentional change where does that leave a receiver joining a maul while the lineout is still live? Are they competing for the ball in a lineout?

 

[Arabcheif]

For me there's been no change to the definition of a participating player. That includes from the 2018 Laws/defs too. On the flip-side of that. There's nothing that states they can't. Since the last specified Law states they can, that's what I'd go for. If they had changed it so they can't now enter the line, it would've specified this I would've expected.

 

[crossref]

I think you are answering a slightly different question

 

[Arabcheif]

Unless I'm mistaken there were 2 parts to the question essentially.

1. Can Red have a receiver if Blue don't - IMO yes
2. Can the receiver join the Maul - again yes as a participating player

Happy to be corrected if I'm wrong guys, but please cite the Law for reference too.

 

[crossref]

The other part of the discussion was whether it is ok to join lineout at last second

 

[Arabcheif]

The other part of the discussion was whether it is ok to join lineout at last second

Would you allow a number match in the line at the last second?

 

[thepercy]

I'm just trying to navigate myself through the fog of the revised lineout law here. I used to think I understood it as a player!

As far as the receiver binding on to the maul goes - can he or she do this given the lineout is not yet over? I think there's got to be a distinction between the lineout when it's a line and when the lineouty bit has finished but before it's "over" for offside line purposes, but the law doesn't make this clear.

18.27

 

[Phil E]

Would you allow a number match in the line at the last second?

But this is a team adding a player at the last second to give them a one player (receiver) advantage in numbers. It's not the same thing at all.

But to answer your question if the numbers were wrong I would stop the game and get them to sort themselves out before we progressed.

 

[Jz558]

18.27

18.27 refers to the thrower and his opposite number not the receiver.

 

[ChrisR]

But this is a team adding a player at the last second to give them a one player (receiver) advantage in numbers. It's not the same thing at all.

But to answer your question if the numbers were wrong I would stop the game and get them to sort themselves out before we progressed.

Not relevant as the numbers advantage is in 'participating players', not in the lineout.

The critical question is when does the receiver join. If he delays until after the ball is thrown then he must wait until the line-out ends before moving up.

Appreciate you wanting ti nip the silly buggers in the bud but . . . .

I doubt if this will initiate a silly buggers cascade and . . .

if you do this every time something odd shows up then it may wel crimp some creative play.

 

[crossref]

Would you allow a number match in the line at the last second?

Yes
But if numbers were matched I wouldn't allow the throwing team to then add one at the last second

 

[Arabcheif]

@cr Ok, so if the receiver was in position all the time, would you allow that?

 

[crossref]

I am in agreement with Phil in his posts ..

Or in my words
It's lineout set it properly don't let them arse about

 

[Arabcheif]

I am in agreement with Phil in his posts ..

Or in my words
It's lineout set it properly don't let them arse about

So at the most, you'd just delay the LO. No sanctions?

 

[thepercy]

Red placed a receiver then a second later quickly threw the ball in

Blue had no receiver. Once the ball was thrown it was too late thy can't add one

Blue was throwing in. They could have delayed the throw to add a receiver, but didn't.

 

[Arabcheif]

Blue was throwing in. They could have delayed the throw to add a receiver, but didn't.

I'm in agreement with you, blue are controlling the put in so it's their choice to have a receiver or not. If there's one not there then I'm taking it that they don't want one.

 

[thepercy]

But this is a team adding a player at the last second to give them a one player (receiver) advantage in numbers. It's not the same thing at all.

But to answer your question if the numbers were wrong I would stop the game and get them to sort themselves out before we progressed.

Blue is the throwing team, they have chose not to have a receiver, as is their right, this does not restrict Red's choice to have a receiver or not. The fact the Red receiver arrived at the last second is not a violation of law. Blue as the throwing team control the timing of the lineout, and could wait to throw if they want to add a receiver.

I think a more interesting question would be if you would allow Blue to add a receiver at the last second, after Red have "matched" their lack of receiver. I think in this scenario I would ask them to wait for red as "managing it".