No Maul Obstruction at lien out in over time

[Flish]

Not something that happened, but the question was asked on todays appointment as happened at end of the teams prior fixture.

Time is over, penalty awarded, kick for touch, so we're allowed to give them time for the line out (doesn't matter which team, just that we have a line out in over time). Throw is in, caught, non catching team don't contest to form a maul, catching team don't twig and pass the ball back as per maul drill. At this point we're supposed to call 'use it now', but they don't, so ping them for accidental offside - scrum defending team put in.

Except, time is over, so match over (assuming that we've communicated that time is up at least!). Seems unfair that a team can infringe (through a conscious action as opposed to an accidental knock on etc) to end the game, but unless I'm missing something, that's just how it is?

 

[Treadmore]

The infringement that ends the game is by the team that had the penalty, yes?

 

[crossref]

Ref calls "use it" and they don't ....
They can't complain that much when the whistle goes

 

[Christy]

Lets ask same question , but not from a penalty .
As treadmore suggests ,,if they wanted to end game , tap to tnem selves & then kick out ,,game over .

When we tell them to use it ,,because ball is transferred to back & opposition dont engage .
The onus is on them to use it ..
They cant complain or do i feel they are entitled to complain .

The situation has been reffed very well .
Its not our fault if they dont listen ..

If they didnt use it ,,,what exactly did they do ??.

 

[Decorily]

Just to be clear...remember we 'MUST' have the lineout.

 

[beckett50]

One is presuming that this is the first 'accidental offside' offence? In which case the sanction is Scrum in 15, put-in to the non offending side.

As time has expired and we have a scrum call the Laws deem the ball to be dead and so referee should call end of play.

Unfair as it may seem, we do not write the Laws

 

[OB..]

If you feel it appropriate, you could use Intentionally Offending.

All a bit academic though. Not the sort of thing one needs to plan for.

 

[Dickie E]

Ref calls "use it" and they don't ....
They can't complain that much when the whistle goes

I think Flish is suggesting that it is unfair to the other team. As Beckett says, them's the rules.

 

[crossref]

I think Flish is suggesting that it is unfair to the other team. As Beckett says, them's the rules.

Ah , right .
But if the team with the PK had wanted to end the game they would have used it , and done so.

And also one of the main reasons for the non compete strategy is to draw an offence , so you wouldn't use it if you wanted to keep the game going

 

[Marc Wakeham]

If the side with the penalty (and the line out) were losing, more fool them. By conceding the scrum they know they are lost.

If they were the leading side and thus gained by offending. Then I have some sympathy with the other team. Of course as they were winning at the time then all they had to do was tap and then kick to end the game. Why did they not do so?

To allow a side to "cheat" to wim the game seems not to be eqitable but that is the law makers choice not our.

 

[Camquin]

You need to call "use it" and possibly "no engagement use it".
Call it loudly and clearly, so they hear it.
They can then comply and keep playing, or not.

Rugby players have to react to what happens - not what they expect to have happened.
But we need to be fair - which means clearly telling them what we need them to do.

 

[Flish]

If the side with the penalty (and the line out) were losing, more fool them. By conceding the scrum they know they are lost.

If they were the leading side and thus gained by offending. Then I have some sympathy with the other team. Of course as they were winning at the time then all they had to do was tap and then kick to end the game. Why did they not do so?

To allow a side to "cheat" to wim the game seems not to be eqitable but that is the law makers choice not our.

This is my confusion as well, I got the impression that for some reason they weren't contesting their own through (agree, if it was winning teams penalty then tap, kick, end game), maybe their line out went wrong. Equally, coach seemed to think that in this scenario they would have got a penalty (I explained probably not), but somehow the catching team it seemed got a penalty instead. Can't entirely trust that the hard done by coach has portrayed it correctly! Could also be that maybe in not engaging they stepped out of the line, or it was interpreted as so. Just struck me as odd.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Well yes, if a side leaves the line out they are liable to penalty.

 

[OB..]

Well yes, if a side leaves the line out they are liable to penalty.

Unfortunately the criterion for leaving the line is unclear. We know players are allowed to change places, which necessarily means moving out of the original straight line, so does "leaving" have to be more than that?

 

[didds]

doesn't seen unfair to me.

They cocked up, turn over restart, full time as a result.

Same as if the ball got passed back to the scrumhalf who knocked on, who caught it and ran and accidentally bumped into his own forward in front of him with a defender in the vicinity.

UPDATE: just picked up on the nuance that it may be unfair to the opposition! Hmm... if its deliberate offending to end the game then a PK is in order.

But otherwise the oppo haven't much to complain about - they gave away th PK that led to the lineout in the first place ie effectively handed control to their oppo.

didds

didds

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Unfortunately the criterion for leaving the line is unclear. We know players are allowed to change places, which necessarily means moving out of the original straight line, so does "leaving" have to be more than that?

If they are "changing places" I'd expect to see that happen. If they and stop still or keep moving away that I will assume they are not changing places.

 

[Dickie E]

If they are "changing places" I'd expect to see that happen. If they and stop still or keep moving away that I will assume they are not changing places.

there is also a view that any number of players can "peel off" as far as 9.99 metres from LoT, not receive the ball and still be legal

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Well to a point that is true.

18.28
"Leave the lineout so as to be in a position to receive the ball, provided they remain
within 10 metres of the mark of touch and they keep moving until the lineout is
over. Sanction: Free-kick."

However if the other side have caught the ball and you move out from the line out you are not really in a position to receive the ball.

 

[Jolly Roger]

there is also a view that any number of players can "peel off" as far as 9.99 metres from LoT, not receive the ball and still be legal

Really? I have not come across that. Any linout player may move between the 5m and 15m lines so long as they remain within the line out i.e. within about 1m from the LofT.

 

[Christy]

Not something that happened, but the question was asked on todays appointment as happened at end of the teams prior fixture.

Time is over, penalty awarded, kick for touch, so we're allowed to give them time for the line out (doesn't matter which team, just that we have a line out in over time). Throw is in, caught, non catching team don't contest to form a maul, catching team don't twig and pass the ball back as per maul drill. At this point we're supposed to call 'use it now', but they don't, so ping them for accidental offside - scrum defending team put in.

Except, time is over, so match over (assuming that we've communicated that time is up at least!). Seems unfair that a team can infringe (through a conscious action as opposed to an accidental knock on etc) to end the game, but unless I'm missing something, that's just how it is?

1 more thing to add .
The team who take ball to back of their maul set up .from line out
The opposition dont engage .
So ref shouts use it .

THE TEAM WHO DIDN'T ENGAGE IN MAUL ,,,CAN INFACT COME TO BACK OF MAUL & TACKLE BALL CARRIER ,, OR RIP BALL FROM THEIR POSSESSION .

so they can still have an opportunity to keep game alive .