[Line out] Long arm transfer sanction

[HappyScrummie]

Hi all! Just a quick one - I wondered what the sanction is for a long arm transfer at the lineout? Would you give a penalty kick or a free kick to the opposition? Presumably on the fifteen?

Any idea on the secondary signal?!

Thank you!

 

[tim White]

PK; Obstruction by immediate supporting players preventing tackle of eventual pass back receiver; Lineout infringement so Pk on 15m line. Make sure everyone understands what it is for-GIVE THE SIGNAL as well as verbals.

 

[Christy]

If a maul HAS started , yes i agree penalty kick . ( signal an imitation of a long arm pass & also obstruction )
Your question doesnt state maul scenario .

If no maul started ,,as in opposition intentionally dont engage ( as some teams prefer not to )
I would suggest use it or loose it .even if it was a long arm pass . ( accidental off side ,scrum turn over ball )

However if they make a maul type formation ( with opposition deliberately not engaging )
And start marching forward ,,this then would be penalty . For obstruction also

 

[Balones]

PK; Obstruction by immediate supporting players preventing tackle of eventual pass back receiver; Lineout infringement so Pk on 15m line. Make sure everyone understands what it is for-GIVE THE SIGNAL as well as verbals.

I raised this question as soon as this was explained as being illegal. The answer was that the penalty is on the place of the obstruction because as soon as the pass has been made the lineout is over.

 

[ChrisR]

If a maul HAS started , yes i agree penalty kick . ( signal an imitation of a long arm pass & also obstruction )

If a maul has started, ie. opponents engaged, then surely the 'long pass' restriction doesn't apply.

 

[Balones]

If a maul has started, ie. opponents engaged, then surely the 'long pass' restriction doesn't apply.

I think what is meant is that if a player takes the ball off a long pass then players that are in front of the long pass and have bound onto the ball carrier are now obstructing because the pass taker with the ball now in hand now binds onto players in front of him.

 

[Decorily]

If the ball is 'long' passed to a player who then binds onto the 'passer' to form a maul then that is a penalty for obstruction.

The ripper should be in contact with the ball carrier before the ball is transferred.

However don't forget that if the ball is 'long' passed to a player who then runs or passes it is play on.

 

[Balones]

I think it is universally agreed that it is penalty. The point to remember is that the penalty in this circumstance is at the point of the offence and not on the 15M line. This is totally different to the obstruction caused by lifters stepping in front of the catcher where the penalty ios on the 15M line because it is a lineout offence.

 

[Phil E]

Watching games in the Premiership over the last few weeks. Referees at that level seem to have stopped penalising this.

 

[didds]

Quelle surprise....

 

[HappyScrummie]

If the ball is 'long' passed to a player who then binds onto the 'passer' to form a maul then that is a penalty for obstruction.

The ripper should be in contact with the ball carrier before the ball is transferred.

However don't forget that if the ball is 'long' passed to a player who then runs or passes it is play on.

So the 'long arm transfer' ban is only applicable if it leads to a maul?

A long arm pass to a player who then takes it into open play is fine?

(Does make sense when I think about what I've seen in practice but just wanted to check!)

 

[Decorily]

Yes...effectively this scenario is similar to any other pass in open play.
ie if the ball is passed backwards to a support player who then runs in to a player in front of him (and gains a material advantage by doing so ) then it is penalisable.