Can a player be offsides when they are not in the playing area?

[jdeagro]

Per 10.2:

A player can be offside anywhere in the playing area.

Keyword playing area not enclosure. So what about a player in touch, can they be offsides during open play? I can't imagine the answer being no, but had to ask for the sake of argument.

Here's an example scenario:

Blue Team is in possession of the ball. A (currently onside) player (not in possession of the ball) from the Blue Team runs off the pitch such that they are standing in touch, and then runs up the sideline until they are standing in line with the Red Team's half of the pitch.

1. Are they offsides currently?

Ball Carrier from Blue Team kicks the ball into Red Team's half of the pitch.

2. Is the Blue Team's player standing in touch, offsides now?

3. If not, would they be offsides if they entered the playing area?

Before the Blue Team player enters the playing area, let's say the previous Ball Carrier / Kicker runs ahead and passes where their teammate is standing in touch, in the Red Team's half of the pitch.

4. Is the Blue Team's player standing in touch, offsides now?

5. Depending on the answer to #2/#4, if the player standing in touch then entered the playing area, would they be offsides now?

Thoughts?

 

[smeagol]

Based on 10.7a, being in touch does not absolve you from being offside.

 

[jdeagro]

Based on 10.7a, being in touch does not absolve you from being offside.

I could be wrong, but my interpretation of 10.7a:

Other than under Law 10.4c, an offside player can be put onside when:

An onside team-mate of that player moves past the offside player and is within or has re-entered the playing area.

...is that it's stating in order for player A to be eligible to put an offsides player back onside, player A needs to be within the playing area - either entirely during their run or eventually by re-entering the playing area (after passing their offsides teammate), if during their run they entered touch (left the playing area) at any point.

It's kind of the converse of the scenario I'm asking about, and I don't think relates to my question.

 

[crossref]

In your scenario, @jdeagro .. when they interfere with play the best decision is

Peep . Offside

Nothing good will happen for you if you decide to play on, based on a weird technicality

 

[didds]

at least one ref Ive seen in my life has penalised a player for being outside of touch and stepping back in field without gaining his permission to do so!

I've no idea of that is even backed up in law!

 

[jdeagro]

In your scenario, @jdeagro .. when they interfere with play the best decision is

Peep . Offside

Nothing good will happen for you if you decide to play on, based on a weird technicality

Makes sense. Doubt I'll ever observe it in my lifetime - though I've seen stranger.

Perhaps someone could argue they're not "interfering with play" if they waited until their on the field teammate ran up and put them back onsides. But they theoretically still gain an advantage by not needing to run and chase the kick that occurred (exerting energy, etc), if they knew the kick was coming in a few phases, and walked up the sideline while in touch, waiting for it to occur.

Also, may be a little difficult to keep track of when, as a ref, you're typically focusing on the players in the playing area.

 

[didds]

Perhaps someone could argue they're not "interfering with play" if they waited until their on the field teammate ran up and put them back onsides. But they theoretically still gain an advantage by not needing to run and chase the kick that occurred (exerting energy, etc), if they knew the kick was coming in a few phases, and walked up the sideline while in touch, waiting for it to occur.

but thats no difference to somebody doing that an inch inside the touchline.

 

[jdeagro]

but thats no difference to somebody doing that an inch inside the touchline.

Technically it is, based on how the law is written, given that it sounds like you can only technically be offsides while in the playing area. So in my above case, the player was never offsides even after re-joining the playing area.

But I agree with crossref that the ref should blow the whistle for it. At the very least, it's not really in the spirit of the game, IMO.

Another question is where does one award the mark for the penalty in such a case?...Where the player entered the playing area? Do we give the option for a scrum where the ball was kicked from? What if the non-kicking team plays the ball for a bit before the offending player re-joins the playing area, do we still go back for the scrum option at the mark of the original kick or just treat this as a new offsides penalty?

 

[crossref]

But I agree with crossref that the ref should blow the whistle for it. At the very least, it's not really in the spirit of the game, IMO.

as always, I caution anyone to get involved in 'spirit of the game' judgements, as the spirit of the game is so subjective.

for me it's completely within the spirit of the game to look for and exploit hidden anomalies in the Laws. So fair enough for trying it, blue 11 (grin) but not this time, mate. PK!

 

[jdeagro]

as always, I caution anyone to get involved in 'spirit of the game' judgements, as the spirit of the game is so subjective.

for me it's completely within the spirit of the game to look for and exploit hidden anomalies in the Laws. So fair enough for trying it, blue 11 (grin) but not this time, mate. PK!

Eh, I think the spirit of the game is one of those good subjective things in rugby when it can be used to keep the game focused on and played in the manner it was intended to be. Someone trying to exploit being offsides because of a verbiage technicality is deviating from that spirit, IMO. It's a pretty apparent feels wrong technique to attempt to do.

As opposed to a player on the pitch who is offsides and retreats, but retreats at a slow pace (without interfering with play) because they know they're about to be put onsides (by any of the legal means available) is using the laws properly to their advantage and rightfully so, since they don't say one has to run or sprint while retreating.

But all of that aside, what's your take on where the penalty mark should be made? Especially after a kick scenario like my example?

 

[Stu10]

I feel like this is being overcomplicated.

Law 10.1
A player is offside in open play if that player is in front of a team-mate who is carrying the ball or who last played it.

I realise there may be room for assumption and interpretation, but I believe 10.2 is there to make it clear that 10.1 applies in-goal, not just the field-of-play (certainly in my early rugby career, many believed you could be in front of the kicker if you were both in-goal... maybe that was allowed in the 1980s, but not now).

 

[jdeagro]

I feel like this is being overcomplicated.

Law 10.1
A player is offside in open play if that player is in front of a team-mate who is carrying the ball or who last played it.

I realise there may be room for assumption and interpretation, but I believe 10.2 is there to make it clear that 10.1 applies in-goal, not just the field-of-play...

Yea that's fair. I'm being a bit pedantic on the verbiage, but they really should've used the term "playing enclosure" or something similar, when they last updated the verbiage for 10.2.

 

[Stu10]

at least one ref Ive seen in my life has penalised a player for being outside of touch and stepping back in field without gaining his permission to do so!

I've no idea of that is even backed up in law!

Laws 6.6 and 6.7... generally speaking, applying this would be a jobsworth, but I might use this if a player was trying to get clever as per the first post by claiming they are not offside because they are outside the playing area.

 

[Stu10]

Yea that's fair. I'm being a bit pedantic on the verbiage, but they really should've used the term "playing enclosure" or something similar, when they last updated the verbiage for 10.2.

Maybe I'm reaching, but using "playing enclosure" might bring replacements into the equation, which would obviously be ridiculous to penalise a replacement as being offside.

 

[jdeagro]

Laws 6.6 and 6.7... generally speaking, applying this would be a jobsworth, but I might use this if a player was trying to get clever as per the first post by claiming they are not offside because they are outside the playing area.

Heh, I was just thinking the same.

 

[jdeagro]

Maybe I'm reaching, but using "playing enclosure" might bring replacements into the equation, which would obviously be ridiculous to penalise a replacement as being offside.

Technically the replacements are not interfering with play, but they aren't retreating either, so I see your point on how it can get messy quick with such a term.

I guess maybe a more explicit sentence would need to be added to be more complete then, such as "a player may not intentionally leave the playing area to avoid being offsides". Idk.

 

[crossref]

I guess maybe a more explicit sentence would need to be added to be more complete then, such as "a player may not intentionally leave the playing area to avoid being offsides". Idk.

6.7 does say that a player may not leave the playing area so that does really cover it

- but it's not much use as a law as how would hookers throw in / players fetch the ball / kickers kick from the touchline etc etc without crossing the touchline first. Or are they supposed to ask permission for each?

 

[jdeagro]

6.7 does say that a player may not leave the playing area so that does really cover it

- but it's not much use as a law as how would hookers throw in / players fetch the ball / kickers kick from the touchline etc etc without crossing the touchline first. Or are they supposed to ask permission for each?

Yea, I suppose permission is given implicitly, either by how the law book dictates those scenarios, e.g. specifies that the thrower in a lineout does so from outside the playing area (not exact wording), or from normal convention over years of rugby at this point such as retrieving the ball for a lineout even if you're not the thrower.

 

[didds]

6.7 does say that a player may not leave the playing area so that does really cover it

- but it's not much use as a law as how would hookers throw in / players fetch the ball / kickers kick from the touchline etc etc without crossing the touchline first. Or are they supposed to ask permission for each?

... chip ahead and run around an opponent and the only way past is top breifly run in touch...

exactly as you say CR.

 

[Dickie E]

What if the non-kicking team plays the ball for a bit before the offending player re-joins the playing area, do we still go back for the scrum option at the mark of the original kick or just treat this as a new offsides penalty?

Well, 10.7 tells that playing the ball for a bit might actually put our in-touch friend onside