Line Out Query

Na Madrai


Referees in England
Joined
Feb 5, 2008
Messages
261
Post Likes
1
Under fifteen schools' knock out cup match.

Blue putting into a LO. All blue players in LO except the very first, run backwards taking their opponents with them. Hooker throws ball to stationary player who has dropped to one knee and catches the ball eighteen inches or so off the ground.

It simply looked wrong and I gave a penalty for playing the ball 'off his feet' which everyone bought without question.

Thinking about it later, however, was my instinct correct?




NM
 

Stuartg


Referees in England
Joined
Feb 7, 2009
Messages
401
Post Likes
37
Under fifteen schools' knock out cup match.

Blue putting into a LO. All blue players in LO except the very first, run backwards taking their opponents with them. Hooker throws ball to stationary player who has dropped to one knee and catches the ball eighteen inches or so off the ground.

It simply looked wrong and I gave a penalty for playing the ball 'off his feet' which everyone bought without question.

Thinking about it later, however, was my instinct correct?




NM

Interesting question. My instinct would be to play on. They've been positive and inventive, something to be encouraged with so much boring over-coached rugby to be seen. Unless it's clearly wrong I'd not blow the whistle. If in doubt, don't blow.

Did the coach say anything afterwards?
 

Browner

Banned
Joined
Jan 20, 2012
Messages
6,000
Post Likes
270
Deliberately going to ground to receive the ball ( and expecting law protection from being landed on?) does not fit the spirit of "trying to play the game on your feet"

Never seen this happen, so if it did my initial reaction would probably be .....IMO the catcher has placed himself in a vulnerable position ( ie unable to evade a tackle) so I'd disallow it, although id probably FK it, as a line out error ..... Seems a more appropriate sanction, albeit not covered in law specifically.
 

RobLev

Rugby Expert
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
2,170
Post Likes
244
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
Under fifteen schools' knock out cup match.

Blue putting into a LO. All blue players in LO except the very first, run backwards taking their opponents with them. Hooker throws ball to stationary player who has dropped to one knee and catches the ball eighteen inches or so off the ground.

It simply looked wrong and I gave a penalty for playing the ball 'off his feet' which everyone bought without question.

Thinking about it later, however, was my instinct correct?

In my amateur view - no, you were not correct.

The ball went 5m before hitting the ground, and was presumably straight, so no lineout offence.

There's no ruck, so no prohibition on going to ground to pick up the ball.

Aren't we in Law 14 territory here?

[LAWS]Definitions

This situation occurs when the ball is available on the ground and a player goes to ground to gather the ball, except immediately after a scrum or a ruck.[/LAWS]

Or are we saying that the player has to let the ball hit the ground before trying to gather it? If it had been a pass in open play that dropped short of the intended receiver, would you ping him for going to one knee to catch it?

By Law 14:

[LAWS](a) A player with the ball must immediately do one of three things:

Get up with the ball
Pass the ball
Release the ball.[/LAWS]

Provided he did one of these things - no infringement, play on, surely?
 

Browner

Banned
Joined
Jan 20, 2012
Messages
6,000
Post Likes
270
I don't see that we are in Law 14 territory, until the Lineout has ended.

The pictorial in 19.8 , nor any wording in any of Law remotely suggests that being off your feet when receiving the lineout throw is acceptable , whatever next?, a player lying on the ground receiving the ball, I'm dismissing this invented ( imaginative that i grant you ) ploy as being not in the spirit or ethos of the game, and specifically outside the general expectation of where players must STAND .

19.8(h)
[LAWS] All lineout players must stand between these two points.[/LAWS]
 

ChrisR

Player or Coach
Joined
Jul 14, 2010
Messages
3,231
Post Likes
356
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
which everyone bought without question.


.... and if they didn't they'd be 10m toward their own goal. Just because there is not a howl of protest doesn't mean you got it right. Rather, it means that these kids have been well coached to respect your decision, right or wrong.

It simply looked wrong and I gave a penalty


If you don't know, don't blow. Read the definitions of Law 14. There is no prohibition for gathering the ball but there is a requirement to act immediately afterwards.

Browner, your extrapolations are beyond reason, again.
 

RobLev

Rugby Expert
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
2,170
Post Likes
244
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
I don't see that we are in Law 14 territory, until the Lineout has ended.

The pictorial in 19.8 , nor any wording in any of Law remotely suggests that being off your feet when receiving the lineout throw is acceptable , whatever next?, a player lying on the ground receiving the ball, I'm dismissing this invented ( imaginative that i grant you ) ploy as being not in the spirit or ethos of the game, and specifically outside the general expectation of where players must STAND .

19.8(h)
[LAWS] All lineout players must stand between these two points.[/LAWS]

So if the ball lands on the LoT and sticks in the mud, the lineout player can pick it up from a standing position; but he can't make an attempt to catch it on the way down if that involves putting a knee down? I've been accused in the past of being pedantic and lacking empathy...
 

SimonSmith


Referees in Australia
Staff member
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
9,402
Post Likes
1,520
I'm struggling with that decision. Nothing in law precludes it. Why on earth would you penalize it?
 

Rushforth


Referees in Holland
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
1,300
Post Likes
92
If you don't know, don't blow. Read the definitions of Law 14. There is no prohibition for gathering the ball but there is a requirement to act immediately afterwards.

Browner, your extrapolations are beyond reason, again.

It definitely looks like Law 14 territory to me, specifically the definition "The Game is to be played by players who are on their feet. A player must not make the ball unplayable by falling down."

Falling on both knees, a better case could be made under dangerous play (to himself). Not in the original scenario as posted by NM, though.

If it looks wrong because it might be dangerous, whistle immediately. If it 'just looks wrong', see what happens.
 

menace


Referees in Australia
Joined
Nov 20, 2009
Messages
3,657
Post Likes
633
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
which everyone bought without question.


.... and if they didn't they'd be 10m toward their own goal. Just because there is not a howl of protest doesn't mean you got it right. Rather, it means that these kids have been well coached to respect your decision, right or wrong.

It simply looked wrong and I gave a penalty


If you don't know, don't blow. Read the definitions of Law 14. There is no prohibition for gathering the ball but there is a requirement to act immediately afterwards.

Browner, your extrapolations are beyond reason, again.

So if the ball lands on the LoT and sticks in the mud, the lineout player can pick it up from a standing position; but he can't make an attempt to catch it on the way down if that involves putting a knee down? I've been accused in the past of being pedantic and lacking empathy...

I think you're both being a bit harsh on browner for his perceived extrapolation. If they weren't meant to stand in the lineout then perhaps why did the law lords write 'stand' at all in that part?I have some sympathy as to why Browner may interpret that to mean the lineout players literally must stand up at all times.

Browner could equally accuse you of extrapolating law 14 beyond its realm. Its definition specifically says "ball available ON THE ground AND player goes
to ground to gather the ball" - so technically both conditions need to be true before before law 14 is enacted. In the OP only one condition is true, and that is the player has gone to ground, the ball was not on it. One could argue that law 14 is not in play here.
So by induction you're extrapolating law 14 beyond its meaning just as much as Browner may be in his interpretation.
It's not his fault as it is not yours that you're trying to make the best of poorly written laws.

Having said that, my inclination would have been to allow play on if I thought going to one knee was in reaction to catching the ball because it wasn't going to reach, but perhaps if I saw it as a planned move and the player went to his knee in advance of the throw then I'd be inclined to just reset it and ask the lineout player to remain on his feet.
 
Last edited:

RobLev

Rugby Expert
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
2,170
Post Likes
244
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
I think you're both being a bit harsh on browner for his perceived extrapolation. If they weren't meant to stand in the lineout then perhaps why did the law lords write 'stand' at all in that part?I have some sympathy as to why Browner may interpret that to mean the lineout players literally must stand up at all times.

Browner could equally accuse you of extrapolating law 14 beyond its realm. Its definition specifically says "ball available ON THE ground AND player goes
to ground to gather the ball" - so technically both conditions need to be true before before law 14 is enacted. In the OP only one condition is true, and that is the player has gone to ground, the ball was not on it. One could argue that law 14 is not in play here.
So by induction you're extrapolating law 14 beyond its meaning just as much as Browner may be in his interpretation.

Browner was ignoring my comment:

Or are we saying that the player has to let the ball hit the ground before trying to gather it? If it had been a pass in open play that dropped short of the intended receiver, would you ping him for going to one knee to catch it?

Are we? Would you?

If it is legal to pick the ball up off the ground, going to one knee while doing so, I see it as the height of pedantry to require the player to make no effort to prevent it hitting the ground by catching it - even if that does require his putting a knee down. Provided of course he immediately gets up with it, passes it or releases it.
 
Last edited:

menace


Referees in Australia
Joined
Nov 20, 2009
Messages
3,657
Post Likes
633
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
You seem to have conveniently left out the the part of my quote where I pretty much answered that. But ho hum.

You can't also tell me that you weren't having a crack at Browner because of his interpretation of the words?

I seem to recall you said this in another thread.
Gold #1 is supporting illegally (Law 19.10(d)):

[LAWS]Lifting and supporting. Players may assist a team-mate in jumping for the ball by lifting and supporting that player providing that the lifting and/or supporting players do not support the jumping team-mate below the shorts from behind or below the thighs from the front. [/LAWS]

and bearded Gold, if he helped his team-mate get up there, is acting illegally, because he isn't "lifting and supporting" him. Mind you, he would have been supporting illegally anyway (hands below shorts).

So one the one hand you seem to suggest that applying the 'and' is the heigh of being pedantic in interpreting one law, but not when interpreting another! Interesting.
 

RobLev

Rugby Expert
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
2,170
Post Likes
244
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
You seem to have conveniently left out the the part of my quote where I pretty much answered that. But ho hum.

I apologise; I saw the piece I left out as takihjg the view that you considered going to one knee to take the catch not to be permitted by the Laws, but you'd let it go if you thought it wasn't a planned move. If that isn;t what you meant, let me know.

My position is that it isn't forbidden by the Laws.

You can't also tell me that you weren't having a crack at Browner because of his interpretation of the words?

No, I'm not. I'm suggesting that insisting that the player allow situation B to develop before taking expressly legal action, rather than taking action in situation A which isn't expressly legal, is pedantic.

I seem to recall you said this in another thread.


So one the one hand you seem to suggest that applying the 'and' is the heigh of being pedantic in interpreting one law, but not when interpreting another! Interesting.

Not guilty of the first. As for Law 19.10(d), if a lifter isn't required to continue to support the player he llfted, Law 19.10(g) requiring him to bring the jumper safely to ground becomes a dead-letter.
 

RobLev

Rugby Expert
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
2,170
Post Likes
244
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
To approach it slightly differently:

The lineout player is expressly permitted to try to catch the ball while it is in the air - that's the point of a lineout. He is expressly permitted to pick the ball up, going to one knee as he does so, after it hits the ground. Why would you want to prevent him from going to one knee to catch the ball before it hits the ground?
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,824
Post Likes
3,159
I think that

- if you receive a poor pass, clearly it's acceptable to go off your feet to gather it (and then immediately get up/pass/place etc)

- but you can't throw a pass to someone who is already on the floor. The game is to be played by players on their feet.

And I would apply the same in the line out.
It's hard to imagine a poor throw that necessitated a player to go off his feet to catch, but if it happens that's OK.

But this was a planned move and they planned to throw to a player who was not on his feet, so NM was right. peep.
 

ChrisR

Player or Coach
Joined
Jul 14, 2010
Messages
3,231
Post Likes
356
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
I don't see that we are in Law 14 territory, until the Lineout has ended.

The pictorial in 19.8 , nor any wording in any of Law remotely suggests that being off your feet when receiving the lineout throw is acceptable , whatever next?, a player lying on the ground receiving the ball, I'm dismissing this invented ( imaginative that i grant you ) ploy as being not in the spirit or ethos of the game, and specifically outside the general expectation of where players must STAND .
19.8(h)
[LAWS] All lineout players must stand between these two points.[/LAWS]

You're right, menace, taking shots at Browner is unfair and not in the spirit of this forum. So let me, instead, point out what I see wrong with his post.

In his previous post he quotes "trying to play the game on your feet" which is taken(mangled) from Law 14 then, in this post, says "we're not in Law 14 territory".

To suggest that the Law Makers use the word "stand" to imply that any other posture would be liable for sanction is just silly. What would he expect them to say? If you are restricted to 'standing' then 'jumping' would be prohibited.

Did Browner read the OP? From the OP: "All blue players in LO except the very first, run backwards taking their opponents with them." So, is the catcher in danger from being crushed?

As a coach it can be wholly frustrating to have the referee pull this kind of logic out of his arse.
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,151
Post Likes
1,842
Hooker throws ball to stationary player who has dropped to one knee and catches the ball eighteen inches or so off the ground.

It simply looked wrong and I gave a penalty for playing the ball 'off his feet' which everyone bought without question.

Thinking about it later, however, was my instinct correct?




NM


IMO - it was incorrect.

If there is general open play and as an inside centre passes to the outside centre, the OC slips and ends up on a knee(s), catches the ball and passes it onto a winger... are you really going to penalise the OC for playing the ball whilst off his feet?

Look for a reason to NOT blow the whistle - have some empathy with what is going on. Play on for pete's sake...

didds
 

ChrisR

Player or Coach
Joined
Jul 14, 2010
Messages
3,231
Post Likes
356
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
The game is to be played by players on their feet.


crossref, this is an oft quoted sentiment and, as a sentiment, I agree with it. But when you apply it as a piece of law then you should include the rest of the paragraph to put it in its proper context. Law 14, definitions, third paragraph expressly addresses players going off their feet to make the ball unplayable.

Nowhere in Law 14 does it prohibit a player from going to ground to take possession of a ball in the air. It does require that players on the ground, in possession of the ball, to act immediately to allow play to continue.
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,824
Post Likes
3,159
The game is to be played by players on their feet.


crossref, this is an oft quoted sentiment and, as a sentiment, I agree with it. But when you apply it as a piece of law then you should include the rest of the paragraph to put it in its proper context. Law 14, definitions, third paragraph expressly addresses players going off their feet to make the ball unplayable.

Nowhere in Law 14 does it prohibit a player from going to ground to take possession of a ball in the air. It does require that players on the ground, in possession of the ball, to act immediately to allow play to continue.

I agree with you, bu there's a world of difference between going to ground, and being on the ground.

In open play if there is a player sitting/kneeling on the ground -- can you pass the ball to him ? I'd suggest no, a player on the ground can't receive a pass.

So by extension a player on the ground can't receive a line out throw.
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,151
Post Likes
1,842
In open play if there is a player sitting/kneeling on the ground -- can you pass the ball to him ? I'd suggest no, a player on the ground can't receive a pass.

law reference?

In my query above if the OC slips as the IC passes and ends up kneeling on the ground, OC catches the ball and passes it on to the winger... what do you do?

didds
 
Top