QTI opportunity over when?

[Ian_Cook]

Play on! (And wonders why they didn't just take the tap)

Because that is what the opposition might be expecting. Kicking for touch might put them off their guard, just for a moment, and they would not be expecting the quick throw in.

 

[Browner]

Or how about this
Red are awarded a PK 5m from Blue line
They kick to touch, slightly backwards and ball crosses the touchline 6m out
Where it is caught by waiting red player who immediately executes a QTI

clever move? Or do you find some reason to disallow it?

Clever move. Immaculately executed. :clap:

 

[crossref]

Or how about this
Red are awarded a PK 5m from Blue line
They kick to touch, slightly backwards and ball crosses the touchline 6m out
Where it is caught by waiting red player who immediately executes a QTI

clever move? Or do you find some reason to disallow it?

Play on! (And wonders why they didn't just take the tap)

Creates confusion and surprise, as soon as you kick into touch the oppo relax

The QTI can be thrown to someone arriving at very high speed, which is not possible for a quick tap penalty

I'd like to see someone try this, I feel sure a try would result !

 

[talbazar]

Under that ethos, you'll be doing away with FKs per se' , preferring a "Manage it" 2nd attempt for all infringements.

& I'm saying why not give the change of possession, why is one FK award of lesser value than any of the Law 19.10 infringements ???? Are you going to ignore all those?

Insisting that the players come back and set a second ( but this time properly constructed) LO will ;
a) likely take longer than just giving the FK & recommencing play
b) wont discourage future 'chance your arm' ism
c) is what Law expects

The game will be ignoring unstraight feeds or early shoves next ..... Oh wait !

I guess you are to give a scrum to the opposition when a quick tap on a PK is wrongly taken... Because that "is what the law expects"...
I'm not... So let's agree to disagree :biggrin:

 

[Browner]

I guess you are to give a scrum to the opposition when a quick tap on a PK is wrongly taken... Because that "is what the law expects"...
I'm not... So let's agree to disagree :biggrin:

Its an interesting viewpoint indeed, which of the many FKs should be enforced ? Or which should be ignored & the player given 'another attempt' ?
Without doubt I'd give the FK and turnover against any team that seeks to profit/gain by pushing beyond the established law boundary

Catching the opposition napping by lobbing the ball to a single person prior to a 'LO' forming, to zip off up the field , falls into that 'profit' pile

In the subject game, had the try been disallowed, what other restart of play could there have been ???

[LAWS][FONT=fs_blakeregular] 6.A.4 The referee must apply fairly [/FONT][FONT=fs_blakeregular]all[/FONT][FONT=fs_blakeregular] the Laws of the Game [/FONT] [FONT=fs_blakeregular][/FONT][FONT=fs_blakeregular] (but only those that he chooses to )[/FONT][FONT=fs_blakeregular] in every match.[/FONT][/LAWS].

 

[Browner]

Creates confusion and surprise, as soon as you kick into touch the oppo relax

The QTI can be thrown to someone arriving at very high speed, which is not possible for a quick tap penalty

I'd like to see someone try this, I feel sure a try would result !

Nice idea, We're all going to try this , with the teams we coach etc :bday:

 

[ChrisR]

Because that is what the opposition might be expecting. Kicking for touch might put them off their guard, just for a moment, and they would not be expecting the quick throw in.

PK 5m out. The kick to touch and a QTI may surprise the opponents. And it may create some space as the ops trundle over toward touch. And it may get picked up by the spectator or land in the pond and kill the whole plan.

If a lineout is your best attacking platform then go for it. Personally, in most situations where there isn't a clear reason for the tap I'd chose a scrum with a well supported #8 take. But that's just a coach talking ....

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

Creates confusion and surprise, as soon as you kick into touch the oppo relax

The QTI can be thrown to someone arriving at very high speed, which is not possible for a quick tap penalty

I'd like to see someone try this, I feel sure a try would result !

Hardest thing would be coaching players to do something new that would require them to do a task that believe is away from which they are familiar.

I like the idea. I would consider not even top speed, have the receiver catch and teammates bind on either side as they move slowly forward and form a maul.

 

[Browner]

Hardest thing would be coaching players to do something new that would require them to do a task that believe is away from which they are familiar.

I like the idea. I would consider not even top speed, have the receiver catch and teammates bind on either side as they move slowly forward and form a maul.

That's not a Maul, that's a 10.4(p) 'un'flying Wedge !!!

 

[RobLev]

Possibly, but you need to be consistent. If you ping Red here because their thrower had been at the LOT for 10 seconds without a Red lineout appearing, what do you do at the next throw-in when no QTI is possible, but Blue have a strategy to huddle, agree the throw and then walk into the lineout. If Blue are still huddling after 15 seconds, do you ping them too?

....

Ping them under 19.8(d):

[LAWS](d) When the ball is in touch, every player who approaches the line of touch is presumed to do so to form a lineout. Players who approach the line of touch must do so without delay. Players of either team must not leave the lineout once they have taken up a position in the lineout until the lineout has ended.[/LAWS]

For strict compliance with the Law they should decide on the throw as they approach the LoT; allowing them any huddle is a concession.

Edit: Now seen Ian's #12

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

That's not a Maul, that's a 10.4(p) 'un'flying Wedge !!!

That was also sarcasm.

Anything out of the ordinary is a hard sell especially to young men who already know everything, and to a 35 yr old ref in the same category.
Although the ploy may have some validity, its implantation with participants is the flaw.

 

[ChrisR]

If you're going to 'implant' a 'ploy' it's best to use an anesthetic. Not too hard to find on a college campus.

 

[Dixie]

[LAWS]Law 19.8 (d) When the ball is in touch, every player who approaches the line of touch is presumed to do so to form a lineout. Players who approach the line of touch must do so without delay. Players of either team must not leave the lineout once they have taken up a position in the lineout until the lineout has ended.
Sanction: Free Kick on the 15-metre line
[/LAWS]

Yet another example of piss poor wording.

Agreed. And the first sentence is equally as bad as the highlighted one:

[LAWS]Law 19.8 (d) When the ball is in touch, every player who approaches the line of touch is presumed to do so to form a lineout. [/laws] So a winger has chased the kick beyond the LoT, and successfully deterred the QTI. He now jogs back to his position, and in doing so both approaches and traverses the LoT. How many of us would insist that he remain in the lineout, citing 19.8(d)?

 

[Browner]

That was also sarcasm.

Anything out of the ordinary is a hard sell especially to young men who already know everything, and to a 35 yr old ref in the same category.
Although the ploy may have some validity, its implantation with participants is the flaw.

"Ref , we're going to kick our PK to touch and then take a QTI, is that OK" ........ Yes player that's fine, thanks ref! . kick catch throw run = try

Although the more I think about this, the expectation behind QTI law was surely to get the ball active when your opponents booted it off the FoP ,not to have one of your own players stood outside the FoP awaiting a touch-finding kick , so I forsee own QTIs from your own PK being outlawed if it ever caught on.

 

[Taff]

"Ref , we're going to kick our PK to touch and then take a QTI, is that OK" ........ Yes player that's fine, thanks ref! . kick catch throw run = try

Although the more I think about this, the expectation behind QTI law was surely to get the ball active when your opponents booted it off the FoP ,not to have one of your own players stood outside the FoP awaiting a touch-finding kick , so I forsee own QTIs from your own PK being outlawed if it ever caught on.

But I can't see the problem, given that team mates have to be behind the kick when it's taken.

 

[Browner]

But I can't see the problem, given that team mates have to be behind the kick when it's taken.

Correct Taff, currently there isn't a problem, of that we agree. NKW is merely suggesting that unusual rarely gets allowed.

 

[ChrisR]

NKW is merely suggesting that unusual rarely gets allowed.

He has a point. "Trick plays" fail as often as the succeed especially if they require cooperation from more than one or two players.

I don't like or use trick plays but do use unusual elements of the game and have had them disallowed because the referee is unfamiliar with them. Now I go over them with the referee prior to the match.

 

[crossref]

one particular problem with this trick play is that the opportunity to use it is very limited.
- You need to be awarded PK close to the oppo line - 5-10m probably
- and in a situation where taking a shot at 3 points isn't attractive (ie very close to touchline or needing >3 points)
- and in a situation where a normal lineout or scrum isn't a safer option

So the opportunity to perform this move might come up very infrequently
- so it's a waste of valuable coaching time to practice it
- and when/if it finally does come up, probably the people invovled have forgotten about it and aren't ready for it, or have been subbed already.

So it's not a great idea really.

Much better to plan and work on moves that can be executed from a regualr scrum or lineout there are plenty of those and you'll certainly get a chance to use them.

 

[didds]

CRs points are reasonable but I would counter that

- its limited potential means it is entirely and hugely surprising if used
- i'd replace "safer" with "better". But it is ONLY an option. Not a default tactic.
- how long do you think this would really take to coach/practise? 5 minutes?
- how difficult is it to arrange on the field? hardly any time at all. One nominated played as the crash ball receiver, If subbed/carded, the replacement gets the job/a.n. other is selected. If nobody steps up to the mark - nothing lost - its the same lineout , maybe a metre further out.

I think it has merits. Just as a "something" . No biggy.

didds

 

[didds]

Mind you, backs practice passing for HOURS.

they still can't get that right as it is!


didds