QTI scenario

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,815
Post Likes
3,153
Red player dots down for a 22 drop out and throws a long pass to a team mate on 22 for a quick restart.
A retreating Blue player catches the pass and immediately places ball on the floor and continues to retreat... Has an offence been committed
 

Dickie E


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
14,176
Post Likes
2,175
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
Red player dots down for a 22 drop out and throws a long pass to a team mate on 22 for a quick restart.
A retreating Blue player catches the pass and immediately places ball on the floor and continues to retreat... Has an offence been committed

is there an echo in here?
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,112
Post Likes
1,819
:)




The two 22mDO scenarios are similar but in your scenario the answer is yes, in mine it is no.


go on then - I'll bite :)

what's the difference between the ball being attempted to be thrown to the 22 d/o kicker and kicked to him?

I can see the nuance about in the kick scenario the ball is removed from the kicker, whilst in the throw scenario it is caught in mid flight. In one the kick is prevented, in the other the catch is rpevented.

I am however interested genuinely in CR's nuance.

didds
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,815
Post Likes
3,153
The difference is that
1 blue takes the ball out of the red players hands
2 blue catches a poor throw that comes his way

That seems more than a nuance
1 is a flashpoint
2 is a shrug, fair enough, nice idea but poorly executed and didn't work
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,112
Post Likes
1,819
OK. The pass wasn't necessarily poorly thrown - not from the description. it may have been thrown directly to the 22 d/o kicker but the oppo just stepped in the way imediately adjacent to him etc.

?
didds
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,815
Post Likes
3,153
So there you have two sub-scenarios .. and no doubt there are othe minor variations... Possibly with different answers

The answer to the QTI question won't be found by analysing 22DO scenarios !


What do we think about VM actions in post 52 ?
 

Dickie E


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
14,176
Post Likes
2,175
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
The answer to the QTI question won't be found by analysing 22DO scenarios !

Why not? Both involve opposition players slowing down restarts.
 

L'irlandais

, Promises to Referee in France
Joined
May 11, 2010
Messages
4,724
Post Likes
325
Some of you are very adept at dancing on pinheads it seems. :sarc:

Not wishing to derail the discussion, but rather to get back to a comfortable level 1 or 2. While not mentioned in your original scenario this is definitely worth bearing in mind.
Ask yourself- Is the defender on side?
Should he actually be retreating behind his own kicker instead of preventing this QTi?
[LAWS]A short WR clip gives a couple of practical examples.
Offside when the ball is kicked to touch thereby preventing quick throw ins
WR puts it like this:
Zero tolerance to offsides from kicks to be strictly policed
Players in front of the kicker of their side must not advance until onside and offside players within 10metres of the ball alighting must retire and continue to retire until outside the 10metres or put onside[/LAWS].

My point being, that while the law isn’t clear on your scenario, the situation might not arise all that often if we enforced existing Laws a little better. QTi is often only on when the opposition kick deep, for the OP scenario to exist there is a strong chance the preventer is not onside.
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,815
Post Likes
3,153
A good point ...
But the other time a QTI is often on is when the ball carrier is bundled into touch, and in that scenario everyone will normally be onside , and also close , so you do get the opportunity to touch the ball
 

SimonSmith


Referees in Australia
Staff member
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
9,389
Post Likes
1,495
USA Rugby have this very day issued a diktat*:

If another player of the team that took the ball into touch, plays the ball to prevent a quick throw-in, they are liable to PK. This was discussed with some law makers recently that the law 18.5b could read, “The ball had been touched after it went into touch by anyone other than the player throwing in or the team (instead of player) who carried the ball into touch;”
It is a long process to present a law change.

So, we're clear on this over here anyway.


*quoting diktats in no way indicates endorsement of said diktat

 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,815
Post Likes
3,153
USA Rugby have this very day issued a diktat*:

If another player of the team that took the ball into touch, plays the ball to prevent a quick throw-in, they are liable to PK. This was discussed with some law makers recently that the law 18.5b could read, “The ball had been touched after it went into touch by anyone other than the player throwing in or the team (instead of player) who carried the ball into touch;”
It is a long process to present a law change.

So, we're clear on this over here anyway.


*quoting diktats in no way indicates endorsement of said diktat


What does the diktat actually say, can you copy and paste it ?

I am not clear, if a blue touches it, is it a PK to Red , or just that Red can still take the QTI regardless ?
Or both ?

Why would they take a QTI when they could have a PK ?
 
Last edited:

Dickie E


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
14,176
Post Likes
2,175
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
I am not clear, if a blue touches it, is it a PK to Red , or just that Red can still take the QTI regardless ?
Or both ?

"they are liable to PK" seems pretty crystal to me
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,815
Post Likes
3,153
"they are liable to PK" seems pretty crystal to me

Yes, but then what about the bit about 18.5 b ? How can a QTI still happen if a PK has been awarded ?
 
Last edited:

Rich_NL

Rugby Expert
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Messages
1,621
Post Likes
499
The QTI can't happen, so PK on the 15 (I guess).

It's likely a flashpoint to be managed. It would have to be pretty C&O for me.
 

Rich_NL

Rugby Expert
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Messages
1,621
Post Likes
499
I read it as saying that a proposed law change would be to allow the QTI, but in the meantime it's a PK.
 

SimonSmith


Referees in Australia
Staff member
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
9,389
Post Likes
1,495
That was the diktat.

Handed down on the 8th ring of Hell that is the USA Referees Facebook page.
 
Top