Do you have to tell the referee how many you are putting into the lineout?

[Dan Cottrell]

One I have faced when I have refereed and coached...a shortened lineout...do you need to tell the referee? (Other than after the event!)

 

[beckett50]

Hi Dan

The short answer is "No" you don't. However, the LotG do stipulate that the opposition have to be given reasonable time to adjust should the throwing In team change numbers.

Many refs, as a management tool and to speed the game, ask to be informed so the message can be relayed quickly.

 

[crossref]

I thnk that if the whole aim of a shortened line out seems to be a hope of getting a FK from it, then I think referees don't have much patience with the idea...

but if the aim of the shortened line out is a positve one: to increase your chance of winning the ball and/or to execute some move that depends on it, then why wouldn't you tell clearly tell the oppo, and the referee, so you can quickly get the line out formed with the numbers you want, and get on with your plan.

 

[Taff]

There's no requirement in the book, but personally I make it a requirement as it's one of the 5 additional points I now cover in my PMB.

I know that I am not particularly good at counting the numbers - especially when they are moving about, some are crouched etc etc, and then you have to count the other side. How people do it 100% perfect is beyond me, so I now say "If you want a shortened LO please make sure you tell me. I'm going to assume it's a full LO until I get told differently - OK?"

Nobody has questioned it, and it works well.

 

[didds]

I thnk that if the whole aim of a shortened line out seems to be a hope of getting a FK from it, then I think referees don't have much patience with the idea...

but if the aim of the shortened line out is a positve one: to increase your chance of winning the ball and/or to execute some move that depends on it, then why wouldn't you tell clearly tell the oppo, and the referee, so you can quickly get the line out formed with the numbers you want, and get on with your plan.

Other than of course if you run a 4 man lineout and the oppo put in 7 because they can't be arsed to count, now you have a numbers benefit in the backline potentially. So why would you give the oppo the chance to overcome that?

This isn't to say that you rush in with only 4 after 7 have formed and throw the ball in immediately - just a case of setting up with 4, ensuring you're ready then continuing, steadily. If the oppo can't see there are only 4 there that's their issue. Its not about a FK either. Who wants a FK between the two 22s anyway? they are pretty bloody useless .


didds

 

[crossref]

it's an odd Law isn't it. If you are throwing in do you actually want them to match you? would you rather they didn't match? is the whole law flawed?

I can see why we had the ELV that said abandon the whole numbers thing. I wadsn't clear why it was abandoned.

 

[thepercy]

I thnk that if the whole aim of a shortened line out seems to be a hope of getting a FK from it, then I think referees don't have much patience with the idea...

but if the aim of the shortened line out is a positve one: to increase your chance of winning the ball and/or to execute some move that depends on it, then why wouldn't you tell clearly tell the oppo, and the referee, so you can quickly get the line out formed with the numbers you want, and get on with your plan.

I think sometimes the aim of a short LO is to confuse the oppo, and not to buy a FK.

 

[crossref]

I think sometimes the aim of a short LO is to confuse the oppo, and not to buy a FK.

yes, epsecially at youth levels. in which case there's no reason not to tell the referee.

my son's team used to often have five.
#3 could obviously lift either 2 or 4 . If your opposition have never practiced that it's very difficult for them, as they will have practiced with distinct pods, and their #3 will find a 5 man line tricky to say the least. it's a quite a good ploy. Often the oppo would not be able to put up a jumper at first.

 

[didds]

yes, epsecially at youth levels. in which case there's no reason not to tell the referee.

well as I've already said there's every reason to not tell the referee and thus in effect the oopo if it means you maintain an advantage in another area of the pitch if the oppo cannot count.

didds

 

[OB..]

I can see why we had the ELV that said abandon the whole numbers thing. I wadsn't clear why it was abandoned.

It effectively removed variable line outs from the playbook. Defending sides would usually put in 4 or 5 players, so all lineouts looked pretty much the same.

 

[irishref]

Personally I think the point of the shortened line out is to have half of your forwards ready to hit the next ruck, presuming you'll win the lineout and there is no box kick or clearing kick?

I used to think, when watching a game on TV, "why is the ref physically aksing teams for numbers" but as I progressed up the reffing ranks it gets increasingly more difficult to keep a good eye on the numbers. So now I just call "numbers blue/red etc..." as I make the mark and both teams approach the lineout. Just a management tool as previously mentioned rather than something stipulated by law. Most of the refs I know, if not all, also ask the team to define their numbers clearly.

 

[crossref]

It effectively removed variable line outs from the playbook. Defending sides would usually put in 4 or 5 players, so all lineouts looked pretty much the same.

they can still put in 4/5 players if they wish.

 

[ChrisR]

The following is a hypothetical scenario but I'm curious as to the response.

At every lineout through most of the game Red put just three in the lineout on their throw. Before the lineout forms and as players are approaching the line the SH loudly yells out "Three, three, three" and their three players form the lineout. Blue match numbers.

Late in the game they are awarded a LO 10m from Blue's goal, the SH yells the usual "Three, three, three", Blue put in three, Red put in seven, throw to the back, maul and score.

Is this acceptable miss-direction or cheating?

 

[crossref]

The following is a hypothetical scenario but I'm curious as to the response.

At every lineout through most of the game Red put just three in the lineout on their throw. Before the lineout forms and as players are approaching the line the SH loudly yells out "Three, three, three" and their three players form the lineout. Blue match numbers.

Late in the game they are awarded a LO 10m from Blue's goal, the SH yells the usual "Three, three, three", Blue put in three, Red put in seven, throw to the back, maul and score.

Is this acceptable miss-direction or cheating?

it's a good one.
I think everyone accepts you can't trick your way to a FK for numbers, but this way round is good one.

 

[OB..]

they can still put in 4/5 players if they wish.

But not if the throwing side want a short lineout - which was the point. Putting 4 defenders in meant a 2-man lineout became too much of a lottery, so it never happened.

 

[OB..]

The following is a hypothetical scenario but I'm curious as to the response.

At every lineout through most of the game Red put just three in the lineout on their throw. Before the lineout forms and as players are approaching the line the SH loudly yells out "Three, three, three" and their three players form the lineout. Blue match numbers.

Late in the game they are awarded a LO 10m from Blue's goal, the SH yells the usual "Three, three, three", Blue put in three, Red put in seven, throw to the back, maul and score.

Is this acceptable miss-direction or cheating?

On the last occasion they were lying. For me that certainly borders on 10.4 (m). It's akin to the trick of shouting "Six" when you are going to put 5 in.

 

[Browner]

One I have faced when I have refereed and coached...a shortened lineout...do you need to tell the referee? (Other than after the event!)

In law, no.

I subscribe to the view that teams should be able to outmanouver each other on the field of play, especially the quick thinking players.

This aligns with QTI, QTP, Dummy runners, miss passes, trojan horse plays (long list possible ) kidologies.

The argument over whether it warrants a FK sanction will rage, but irrespective of that I'd always want to see a team being able to get an advantage through quick thinking/organisation

 

[OB..]

I'd always want to see a team being able to get an advantage through quick thinking/organisation

Does that include verbal trickery?

 

[ChrisR]

If the 10 dummies the ball to the 12 who on a switch run yelling "NOW, NOW, NOW" is he miss-directing or lying?

 

[ChrisR]

On the last occasion they were lying. For me that certainly borders on 10.4 (m). It's akin to the trick of shouting "Six" when you are going to put 5 in.

Except the purpose there is to get the FK on numbers. Call 3 and putting in 7 isn't entrapment.