Does ball going into touch put everyone onside?

[KML1]

Seem to remember that IRB/WR issued a clarification somewhere about a player who was offside in front of a kick, still being liable to penalty even after the ball went onto touch and play resumes.

Scenario:
Gold hack the ball ahead from the Black 10m towards the try line.
Black 10 wins the race for the ball and kicks upfield with ball going into touch
Gold 2 takes a quick throw-in, caught by Gold 4. Black 11 - who was well in front of his kicker was near the point where the kick had landed and tackles Gold 4

What do you do?

1) It's now open play and he can make tackle - play on

2) He was offside and shouldnt have been there and influence next phase of play, so is liable to penalty?


If 2, can you point me to law or clarification?

thanks!

 

[Dickie E]

Seem to remember that IRB/WR issued a clarification somewhere about a player who was offside in front of a kick, still being liable to penalty even after the ball went onto touch and play resumes.

Scenario:
Gold hack the ball ahead from the Black 10m towards the try line.
Black 10 wins the race for the ball and kicks upfield with ball going into touch
Gold 2 takes a quick throw-in, caught by Gold 4. Black 11 - who was well in front of his kicker was near the point where the kick had landed and tackles Gold 4

What do you do?

1) It's now open play and he can make tackle - play on

2) He was offside and shouldnt have been there and influence next phase of play, so is liable to penalty?


If 2, can you point me to law or clarification?

thanks!

When we've discussed this before I'm not sure we reached consensus (surprise, surprise). I don't remember a clarification but would welcome one.

I've seen this often enough at elite level to know that option 1 is how it is applied. The only stipulation is that Black 11 wasn't moving forward before the ball went into touch.

 

[menace]

As Dickie says...if Black was moving forward and kept moving forward at the kick then the ball going into touch, IMO doesn't put him onside. BUT if I see that happening I try to manage Black 11 first and even penalise him before the ball goes into touch (easier to sell).

But as you're on the elite panel I was hoping you'd tell us the answer to this one!:wink:

 

[The Fat]

When we've discussed this before I'm not sure we reached consensus (surprise, surprise). I don't remember a clarification but would welcome one.

I've seen this often enough at elite level to know that option 1 is how it is applied. The only stipulation is that Black 11 wasn't moving forward before the ball went into touch.

That's the nuts and bolts of it right there.
If the player (Black 11) was in an offside position at the kick and moved toward the play/moved forward, then he is liable to sanction. The fact that the ball has gone into touch does cancel all offside lines however, it does not "pardon" Black 11 for moving forward from the kick. He should be managed and/or penalised as per menace's post. WR/IRB produced "guidelines" for managing such players. I'll find the link for it.
Now, had Black 11 stopped when the ball was kicked (assuming he was not within 10m of where the ball would land), even if he was only a short distance from where the QTI was about to occur, once the ball went into touch he is able to then move towards the QTI, i.e. we are back in general play.

 

[FlipFlop]

I would say that yes - ball going into touch puts everyone onside, but...

It depends is the ball is properly dead (team will take a normal lineout, subs permitted etc.), or a "zombie" ball, where it is technically dead, but still considered alive (quick throw, subs not permitted etc.)

A player who was offside before the ball went into touch, can't benefit from it. So they can't stop the quick throw for example. But if the oppo take the quick throw, then I would say play on (in effect they have accepted the position of the offside player, and I don't see how you can penalise a player for an action that happened before the ball went dead, given the next first phase has happened). In effect it is play on, or penalise immediately if offside play interferring with quick throw.

 

[crossref]

Here's the IRB guidance that KML recalls -- it's #2 here

Offside when the the ball is kicked into touch, thereby preventing quick throw ins

http://laws.worldrugby.org/?domain=9&guideline=5

So clearly the ball going into touch does NOT cancel all offsides

Unfortunately the IRB didn't provide any text or commentary so it's impossible to tell whether or not this is OK if the offside player was not moving forward.

I'd say it's still not OK, an offside player (1) cannot move forward but also, having stopped, (2) cannot interfere with play.

KML's scenario takes this one stage further, the offside player does not intefere with the quick throw in, but then after the throw in is taken , joins in with play. Instinctively I have more sympathy with that.

so
1- does the ball going into touch cancel offside -- No
2- does a QTI cancel previous offside lines -- interesting question

It would be nice for the IRB to consider this again. Perhaps a good question for the SA duty-ref

 

[L'irlandais]

...

http://laws.worldrugby.org/?domain=9&guideline=5

...
so
1- does the ball going into touch cancel offside -- No
2- does a QTI cancel previous offside lines -- interesting question

It would be nice for the IRB to consider this again. Perhaps a good question for the SA duty-ref

good point.

I accept we will not get a consensus about a point of law that is unwritten in The LoTG
But if you accept that clarification, the ball going into touch does not put the player onside.
Add
[laws] 11.5 Being put onside under the 10-metre law
(b)
While retiring, the player can be put onside before moving behind the imaginary 10-metre line by any of the three actions of the player’s team listed above in 11.2. However, the player cannot be put onside by any action of the opposing team.[/laws]so for me, the taking of the QT by the opposition has not put him back on side. They can throw the ball around as often as they like without ever putting him back on side.

 

[Dickie E]

1- does the ball going into touch cancel offside -- No

I disagree.

In the Fiji video the Fijiian player was not retiring under 10 metre law prior to ball going into touch.

In the All Black video the Black players were clearly moving forward before the ball went into touch.

That is what they are guilty of.

The point WR is making is this: consider if players are complying with law before the ball goes dead. If not, penalise. If so, ball in touch puts everyone onside.

 

[crossref]

The point WR is making is this: consider if players are complying with law before the ball goes dead. If not, penalise. If so, ball in touch puts everyone onside.

Unfortunately WR did not actually spell out the point they were making, so no one really knows for sure what it was.

Leaving aside the 10-metre law, an offside player has to observe two things
- ONE he cannot move forward toward the ball
- TWO he cannot interfere with play.

So it seems to me very clear that (TWO) means he cannot contest a QTI , and personally I believe that's what WR meant.

Not sure how you can argue otherwise.

Taking a QTI is like a pass, so presumably puts your opponents onside.

[ignoring players caught under 10m law which complicates everythng, and obscures the substance of this debate]

 

[Thunderhorse1986]

Surely 11.3 still stands for the offside player after a QTI? So he is not put onside by the QTI (it may be "like" a pass, but I would argue they are not one and the same thing). Therefore I would need to see the team in possession, pass again (after the QTI) or kick, run 5m, or intentionally touch (but not catch) the ball (this could be, for example a tap back from the player receiving the QTI, if he can't catch it, for example. Until then, I would expect all the offside players to remain stationary or moving backwards until put on by one of the above, or their team-mate, or if within 10m of the ball landing, would expect to see them retreating.

 

[crossref]

it's definitely an area I'd like to see explored by WR, and more guidance issued.

There are actually a number of distinct scenarios

1 offside players already moving forward before ball goes into touch
2 offside players who remain stationary, but then move forward AFTER the ball goes into touch
3 offside players who remain stationary, are ahead of the LoT, move backward to contest the QTI

for all three we then get two questions

A - are they free to contest a possible QTI
B - if a QTI is taken, are they free to now move forward and/or immediately tackle the recipient

 

[Thunderhorse1986]

Indeed, there are a number of different scenarios. But for me, as I stated above, I would argue these players all remain offside under 11.1 and remain so until 11.2 or 11.3 conditions have been met. I don't see 11.3 being met immediately after a QTI is taken (this is not a stated way of being made onside under 11.3) so would only permit them to interfere with play after one of the stated 3 methods of being put onside by an oppositions player has happened, or they've been put onside by their own player.

This seems the simplest way of managing all of the above - all 3 scenarios they are offside if they interfere with play, until either 11.2 or 11.3 have been met.

 

[crossref]

which is essentially the opposite side of the spectrum from Dickie E et al. (well, you agree on players in (1), but disagree on players in (2) and (3) )

 

[Dickie E]

Indeed, there are a number of different scenarios. But for me, as I stated above, I would argue these players all remain offside under 11.1 and remain so until 11.2 or 11.3 conditions have been met. I don't see 11.3 being met immediately after a QTI is taken (this is not a stated way of being made onside under 11.3) so would only permit them to interfere with play after one of the stated 3 methods of being put onside by an oppositions player has happened, or they've been put onside by their own player.

This seems the simplest way of managing all of the above - all 3 scenarios they are offside if they interfere with play, until either 11.2 or 11.3 have been met.

I think you're making too much of this thing called a QTI.

Let me ask you this:
Red kick into Blue in goal and ball is grounded by Blue fullback. Ref blows whistle & awards drop out. Blue fullback picks up ball, throws it forward to his #10 on the 22 who takes a quick drop out. Should the #10 be penalised because he benefited by being in an offside position and interfering with play? Of course not, he was not acting illegally when the ball went dead and becomes onside because the ball is made dead.

 

[crossref]

but the IRB explicitly tell us that it's an offence for offside players to contest the QTI, so the ball going into touch clearly doesn't make everyone onside ...

your 22m scenario is an intriguing one, however. Logically the recipient probably should be offside, but in practice he is allowed to do that. Good counter-example.

 

[Thunderhorse1986]

Ref blows whistle & awards drop out.

... he was not acting illegally when the ball went dead and becomes onside because the ball is made dead.

While I may be being too literal and pernickety, I would argue these points (my bolding) are the key differentiators. The "zombie ball" out of the FOP may not be dead in the same sense as after a defensive touch down and the ref has blown.

In your case, would I penalise if the full back threw the ball to the 10 before I had to time blow for the 22? Probably not, so it's an interesting point you raise. But there is a key difference for me is that for a defensive grounding in goal, we would never wait and see what happens in the same way we do with a kick to touch which has be gathered out of the FOP by the opposing team. It is widely understood the ref will blow his whistle and play will stop for the former. The same is not true for the latter, it is generally understood the ball remains live until the whistle is blown.

I just feel that the easiest / least complicated option is usually the best. For the original "grey area", for me it makes sense for these player to remain offside until put onside under one of the standard methods, or until the whistle is blown for the line out. No room for complications etc, just nice and easy.:smile:

 

[OB..]

My view is that if a player breaches the offside law before the ball goes dead, he can be penalised. However he cannot become offside after the ball has been made dead.

A QTI revives a zombie ball so we could apply 11.9[LAWS][FONT=fs_blakeregular]11.9[/FONT][FONT=fs_blakeregular] Loitering[/FONT][FONT=fs_blakeregular][/FONT][FONT=fs_blakeregular]A player who remains in an offside position is loitering. A loiterer who prevents the opposing team from playing the ball as they wish is taking part in the game, and is penalised. The referee makes sure that the loiterer does not benefit from being put onside by the opposing team’s action.[/FONT][/LAWS]

 

[crossref]

the 22m dropout is a type of zombie ball: one team remains free to play the ball at will, so the ball isn't completely dead.

although obviously with a 22m, it's a harder and slower procedure to bring the zombie-ball back to life than is the case in other zombie-ball situations, such as PK, FK or when the QTI is on..


Loitering is a tricky one, surely loitering only really applies in siuations where the offside player HAS to retire, and is doing so unduly slowly (ie generally rucks/mauls). In open play after a kick, a player is entitled to just stay still and wait, so I can't really see that he can be loitering.

 

[crossref]

The same is not true for the latter, it is generally understood the ball remains live until the whistle is blown.

I just feel that the easiest / least complicated option is usually the best. For the original "grey area", for me it makes sense for these player to remain offside until put onside under one of the standard methods, or until the whistle is blown for the line out. No room for complications etc, just nice and easy.:smile:

you are over-simplifying as the whistle being blown is a different thing from the ball being dead. There are plenty of situations where the whistle is blown but one team is still free to play the ball. (cf PK, FK, touch when the QTI is on). This is what we call the zombie ball. Not quite live, but not completely dead either.

 

[didds]

well, a PK isn't really a zombie ball is it? The ball IS dead, and is brought back into play by kicking it.

The FK is more zombie ball because while its dead the act of approaching to kick it is enough for a limited subset of the game to then occur, with no advantage if the defenders successfully prevent the FK being taken and play restarted.

didds