Law 11.6 Accidental offside

[Dickie E]

The law says this:

[LAWS]11.6 Accidental offside
(a) When an offside player cannot avoid being touched by the ball or by a team-mate carrying it, the player is accidentally offside. If the player’s team gains no advantage from this, play continues. If the player’s team gains an advantage, a scrum is formed with the opposing team throwing in the ball.[/LAWS]

Scenario 1: Lineout won by Red. Red halfback attempts box kick but it's a shocker and the ball hits one of his team mates in the lineout. Ball careens into touch. Has Red gained an advantage (so scrum) or not (so lineout)? How would you be able to tell if advantage was gained?

Scenario 2: Same lineout, same attempted box kick and ball hits same lineout player. This time the ball flies to the Blue #10 who promptly knocks it on. Hard to see how the accidental offside has benefited Red as the ball has gone neatly to an opponent. So scrum Red for the knock on?

 

[Rich_NL]

The law says this:

[LAWS]11.6 Accidental offside
(a) When an offside player cannot avoid being touched by the ball or by a team-mate carrying it, the player is accidentally offside. If the player’s team gains no advantage from this, play continues. If the player’s team gains an advantage, a scrum is formed with the opposing team throwing in the ball.[/LAWS]

Scenario 1: Lineout won by Red. Red halfback attempts box kick but it's a shocker and the ball hits one of his team mates in the lineout. Ball careens into touch. Has Red gained an advantage (so scrum) or not (so lineout)? How would you be able to tell if advantage was gained?

Scenario 2: Same lineout, same attempted box kick and ball hits same lineout player. This time the ball flies to the Blue #10 who promptly knocks it on. Hard to see how the accidental offside has benefited Red as the ball has gone neatly to an opponent. So scrum Red for the knock on?

1: A Blue lineout isn't an advantage for Red, unless it careens a long way down the pitch first... I'd give Blue the lineout.

2: I'd agree. The "play on" covers the play going to Blue, once Blue has possession they should do something with it.

It's interesting that this is explicitly stated, though - shouldn't a Blue advantage in a minor issue mean play on regardless?

 

[FlipFlop]

Scenario 1: Lineout won by Red. Red halfback attempts box kick but it's a shocker and the ball hits one of his team mates in the lineout. Ball careens into touch. Has Red gained an advantage (so scrum) or not (so lineout)? How would you be able to tell if advantage was gained?

For me: Scrum Blue. I might even consider offering the choice to Blue. If Blue were awful in the scrum (such that a lineout is a better choice) - I might also consider the Lineout to Blue. But this is on the basis of "advantage Blue, Red accidentally offside" .. "advantage over". But in essence, the Scrum is the call. Advantage in this scenario to Red - no chance of a quick lineout for Blue, removing quick counterattacking options.

Scenario 2: Same lineout, same attempted box kick and ball hits same lineout player. This time the ball flies to the Blue #10 who promptly knocks it on. Hard to see how the accidental offside has benefited Red as the ball has gone neatly to an opponent. So scrum Red for the knock on?

Blue #10 wasn't waiting for the ball. The flight, concentration etc, will all be affected by the ricochet, and the #10 might well have been turning to cover back etc, then have to change. So I'm going with the Scrum to Blue for the accidental offside here as well. Red advantaged - chasers are nearer the ball, less chance for Red to counter attack from deep etc.

You can always find an arguement for the accidental offside creating an advantage. Much harder is to find the occassion when it clearly doesn't. And in those cases, you can almost certainly play "advantage, advantage over".

 

[Pegleg]

Scenario 1:

Ref is sole judge of advantage. So you make the call in your mind. Team has crap line out. So give them the scrum instead? Would you consider offering an "option"?


Senario 2:

Again judge the ever situation on its own merits. was the knock on the result of an "instinctive" hand out or a real attempt to catch the ball?

Just don't paint your self into a corner always judge a situation on its merits not on set calls.

 

[crossref]

I would give the accidental offside, scrum blue in both scenarios -- keep it simple.

the second scenario seems to me rather like two knock ons -- when red knock on and blue attempt to handle the ball, and themselves knock on, we go back to the first one.

in the first scenario I do have some sympathy with the argument of judging whether blue would prefer a lineout or a scrum -- but only really in extreme cases where it's blinding obvious that one option or the other is a dead loss (perhaps a youth game). In general a scrum is better than a lineout.

 

[Dickie E]

I would give the accidental offside, scrum blue in both scenarios -- keep it simple.

the second scenario seems to me rather like two knock ons -- when red knock on and blue attempt to handle the ball, and themselves knock on, we go back to the first one.

In practice I would agree with you. However the intent of this law appears to be slightly different to the regular advantage situation.

After a knock on we look to see if the opposition gain an advantage.

For accidental offside the law seems to be asking us to look if the infringing team gain an advantage which is a bit different.

Anyway, happy to treat this as an academic exercise.

 

[crossref]

yes, it's a good question.

 

[ddjamo]

I am in the play on camp for both - based on the description and not knowing the usual; temperament, score, issues, was the blue catcher under pressure illegally by an offside player, etc.

crap kick and turn the ball over when the accidentally offside player is in an appropriate position as a lineout player? a bit harsh?

I feel that we have to remember that a set piece is going to have it's own nuances vs general play.

 

[OB..]

A clear example of advantage to Red would be if the ball rebounded straight into the scrum half's hands.

Scenario 1 leads to a scrum because it is a (possibly minor) advantage to Red to give Blue a lineout instead. Scenario 2 would clearly be a scrum if Blue #10 was presented with a difficult chance. Even if he had a simple catch and messed it up, he is likely to be under pressure from Red flankers. Unless Blue actually gain an advantage, then it is hard to argue that Red has not done so here. I would again expect a scrum.

If you want a "play on" scenario, how about winger and full back going for a kick? Full back calls for it, winger tries to get out of the way, but full back catches and bumps into him. If there was no effective kick chase, then the bump was if anything a disadvantage to the fullback.

 

[ChrisR]

Law 11.6 requires "Play on" unless Red gains an advantage.

Therefore scenario 1 is lineout to Blue. Trying to ascertain Blue's chances in lineout vs. scrum is beyond the call of duty.

In scenario 2 Red did gain an advantage, albeit through misplay by Blue, therefor scrum Blue.

 

[crossref]

Law 11.6 requires "Play on" unless Red gains an advantage.
Therefore scenario 1 is lineout to Blue. Trying to ascertain Blue's chances in lineout vs. scrum is beyond the call of duty.

except that (making no judgements about red or blue) generally a scrum offers better possession, more secure, less risky, than a lineout.
Percantage of own scrums won, will be greater than percentage of own lineouts.

So if you award a lineout red have got an advatage - go with the scrum.

 

[ChrisR]

Crossref, I can't argue with your analysis and if I were Blue captain and were offered the choice, an in a knock-on into touch, I'd probably opt for the scrum.

That isn't the scenario here. The law asks you to decide if banging the ball off a Red teammate directly into touch gained Red an advantage. The choice of scrum or lineout never figures into it.

Now, if the ball bounces off Red (accidental offsides) but is grabbed by Blue but Blue gets bundled into touch, giving the lineout to Red, then you could argue that Red got an advantage. This scenario is similar to the OP's.

 

[crossref]

That isn't the scenario here. The law asks you to decide if banging the ball off a Red teammate directly into touch gained Red an advantage. The choice of scrum or lineout never figures into it.

actually I think you are correct.
from a red perspective, they didn't gain advantage - they are probably ruing their bad luck as the clever box kick ahead that might have gained them 20m and been gathered by their speedy 7, instead cannoned into touch for a blue line out.

 

[OB..]

Is it not axiomatic that if one side is disadvantaged, the other is advantaged?