[Line out] How do you resume the game for ball not going 5m?

[menace]

it's an empathy thing. If a player attempts to kick off but it ends up as a fresh air swing, what do you do?

add one stroke to his scorecard? :biggrin:

…..ill get me coat.

 

[menace]

if the non-throwing team had picked up the ball and played on, is this an advantage situation?

Great question.

At first I thought "no". But on deeper thought I think "why not?". Not reaching 5m is in the same law as "not straight throw "(18.23) and I've played on/advantage to the defence receiving the ball from a crooked throw (surely others have too?). So under the same law it seems reasonable to me to allow "play on" if the 2 x 2 defending hooker grabbed the ball and ran on?

I could be convinced either way - so it would be interesting to see what other thoughts and law logic others would apply?

Edit: meant to also say that the throw has started legally and met one of the criteria for "ended" ie 18.37.a.ii

 

[Marc Wakeham]

It's not in the list of "when advantage must not be played" so why not?

 

[crossref]

It's not in the list of "when advantage must not be played" so why not?

My question is is the ball still dead ?

 

[Flish]

My question is is the ball still dead ?

No, the line out has commenced, I'd allow positive play to the non infringing team, give them the advantage and see what they can do with it,

 

[Jz558]

I can’t make up my mind on this one. There appears to be no reason why advantage cannot be played in that situation but in practice I suspect that there are few occasions when the non-throwing side would prefer it over options. It would feel slightly odd playing advantage and then coming back 3 or 4 phases later if no advantage was forthcoming for this. I would also be half aware that it wouldn’t be something the opposition would expect and could potentially therefore be at an additional disadvantage (although they should of course play to the whistle). On balance it seems as though not playing advantage would be tidier and what was expected but I could also be persuaded otherwise.

 

[crossref]

As a ref you will have a happier time blowing whistle (safe decision). No one will blame you for that .

If you play advantage and they score from it you will have a try in a situation where most of the players didn't know what was happening ... It may be right but....

 

[Marc Wakeham]

I can’t make up my mind on this one. There appears to be no reason why advantage cannot be played in that situation but in practice I suspect that there are few occasions when the non-throwing side would prefer it over options. It would feel slightly odd playing advantage and then coming back 3 or 4 phases later if no advantage was forthcoming for this. I would also be half aware that it wouldn’t be something the opposition would expect and could potentially therefore be at an additional disadvantage (although they should of course play to the whistle). On balance it seems as though not playing advantage would be tidier and what was expected but I could also be persuaded otherwise.

You call "advantage "X" ball not 5". see what happens but done wait for too many phases in hope. If players are not expecting the possibility of advantage that is their problem.

 

[Rich_NL]

If you're standing at the back of the lineout or in the back line and the ref calls advantage to the opposition, you likely don't know what it's for (unless it's obvious - e.g. clearly not straight), but you play on. Same for a knock on in the lineout, which is often invisible to most players. I'd call the advantage and let play continue.

 

[menace]

As a ref you will have a happier time blowing whistle (safe decision). No one will blame you for that .

If you play advantage and they score from it you will have a try in a situation where most of the players didn't know what was happening ... It may be right but....

I see what youre saying but what about the opposition all-knowing-clever captain interogates as to why his hooker was denied?

It may not be the happy ending you were hoping for..:biggrin:

 

[mcroker]

I see what youre saying but what about the opposition all-knowing-clever captain interogates as to why his hooker was denied?

It may not be the happy ending you were hoping for..:biggrin:

Law 23 - Line out was not complete, advantage cannot apply (and smile)

 

[menace]

Law 23 - Line out was not complete, advantage cannot apply (and smile)

oooh - I see what you did there!

yes - you can try that. But lying often results in lose of credibility. :biggrin:

 

[mcroker]

Me Sir? Really I just couldn't resist the jest...
I'm actually playing advantage if I have sufficient wits about me to do so at the time.

 

[OB..]

Law 23 - Line out was not complete, advantage cannot apply (and smile)

(Law 22 would have done, given the renumbering.)

[LAWS]18.26 [FONT=fs_blakeregular]The lineout commences once the ball leaves the hands of the thrower.[/FONT][/LAWS]
[LAWS]18.37

• The lineout ends when:
  • The ball or a player in possession of the ball:
    • leaves the lineout; or
    • enters the area between the touchline and the five-metre line; or
    • goes beyond the 15-metre line.

[/LAWS]
If the area includes the space above the ground, this is saying the lineout is over as soon as the ball leaves the thrower's hand!

If it doesn't include that, then the lineout is not over when the ball is caught inside the 5m area (but that is an infringement, or course).

The reason the lineout starts as defined must be that this releases the players for the long thrown-in, otherwise the lineout could start when the ball reached the 5m line. To make sense of the way the law is phrased, I think we must assume the ball has to be played into the area from the lineout. That means the lineout is over, and it is hard to see any case against playing advantage, if appropriate.

 

[cccref]

(Law 22 would have done, given the renumbering.)

[LAWS]18.26 [FONT=fs_blakeregular]The lineout commences once the ball leaves the hands of the thrower.[/FONT][/LAWS]
[LAWS]18.37

• The lineout ends when:
  • The ball or a player in possession of the ball:
    • leaves the lineout; or
    • enters the area between the touchline and the five-metre line; or
    • goes beyond the 15-metre line.

[/LAWS]
If the area includes the space above the ground, this is saying the lineout is over as soon as the ball leaves the thrower's hand!

If it doesn't include that, then the lineout is not over when the ball is caught inside the 5m area (but that is an infringement, or course).

The reason the lineout starts as defined must be that this releases the players for the long thrown-in, otherwise the lineout could start when the ball reached the 5m line. To make sense of the way the law is phrased, I think we must assume the ball has to be played into the area from the lineout. That means the lineout is over, and it is hard to see any case against playing advantage, if appropriate.

This seems a paradox, as soon as the lineout starts it ends.
If i recall correctly the area includes the space above the ground.

:wtf:

 

[Taff]

This seems a paradox, as soon as the lineout starts it ends.

What the lawbook means is "Re-enters the area between the touchline and the five-metre line."

Ie the ball is thrown into the LO, a player catches it and chucks it back to a teammate in the 5m channel.

 

[Pablo]

What the lawbook means is "Re-enters the area between the touchline and the five-metre line."

Ie the ball is thrown into the LO, a player catches it and chucks it back to a teammate in the 5m channel.

Careless drafting in the law book? Say it ain't so! :wow:

 

[Taff]

Careless drafting in the law book? Say it ain't so! :wow:

Get used to it sunbeam. :biggrin: