QTI taken behind the 22m line

[crossref]

We have discussed this a lot before -- but CJ seems to have a different answer from the majortiy view here.

Question: Green player on the 10 metre line kicks the ball which crosses the touch line on the full, the line of touch thus being abeam the kick. Blue player starting from inside his 22 executes a quick throw inside his 22. His kick goes out on the full at the half way line. Where is the subsequent line-out.

Craig Joubert: If the player gathered the ball behind the 22m line in touch and then threw it in he can gain ground, if he collects the ball in touch outside of the 22m line and then runs back into the 22m area while in touch before throwing the ball in, then no gain in ground.

The majority view on this site has been that what's important is the LoT -- if the LoT is outside the 22m, then a player taking a QTI inside his 22m has taken it back in, so can't kick for gain in ground.

Joubert is saying : No, what's important is is where the ball is retrieved.
http://www.sareferees.com/ref-replies/duty-ref-496--craig-joubert/2829628/

 

[OB..]

We have discussed this a lot before -- but CJ seems to have a different answer from the majortiy view here.



The majority view on this site has been that what's important is the LoT -- if the LoT is outside the 22m, then a player taking a QTI inside his 22m has taken it back in, so can't kick for gain in ground.

Joubert is saying : No, what's important is is where the ball is retrieved.
http://www.sareferees.com/ref-replies/duty-ref-496--craig-joubert/2829628/

It was a common argument from SA that the 22m line extended into touch. It is now clear that it does not. The diagram in Law 1 (the diagrams are part of the laws) shows the area of the 22 as being entirely within the Field of Play.

It was always a nonsense anyway because of the difficulty in deciding if the ball had crossed the mythical extended 22m line when several metres away from the touch line.

 

[crossref]

In this scenario the ball could have crossed the 22m inside the field of play... But because they kicked it straight out, the LOT is still way back on the 10m line, so by taking the QTI from inside the 22m line the defender could still be judged to have taken play into his own 22m.

 

[Dixie]

Craig is extrapolating from Clarification 10 of 2004, and does not seem to be stretching the point too far:

Clarification 10 2004

Ruling in Law by the Designated Members of the Rugby Committee
Ruling10-2004
Union / HP Ref ManagerWRU
Law Reference19,21
Date24 December 2004
Request
The WRU has requested a ruling with regard Law 19-Touch & line-out and Law 21 Penalty and Free Kicks

(1) A player of the attacking team kicks the ball indirectly into touch just outside the defenders 22 metre area. A defender gathers the ball, runs a few metres (still in touch) to a place behind his 22 metre line where he throws the ball straight infield. He gathers it and kicks direct to touch. What is the correct decision?

(2) ...
Ruling in Law by the Designated Members of the Rugby Committee
(1) The defender is allowed to take the quick line-out in the manner specified. A line-out at the place where the ball went into touch from the defenders kick is the correct decision.
(2) ... .

 

[OB..]

In this scenario the ball could have crossed the 22m inside the field of play... But because they kicked it straight out, the LOT is still way back on the 10m line, so by taking the QTI from inside the 22m line the defender could still be judged to have taken play into his own 22m.

If the ball crossed the line inside the 22, then it passed through the air over the 22. I treat that as the kicker putting the ball into the 22. I don't see why it is necessary for the ball to land there. It will be thrown into the 22 from touch in both cases, so that cannot be the distinguishing factor.

 

[crossref]

If the ball crossed the line inside the 22, then it passed through the air over the 22. I treat that as the kicker putting the ball into the 22. I don't see why it is necessary for the ball to land there. It will be thrown into the 22 from touch in both cases, so that cannot be the distinguishing factor.

which is Joubert's logic.

It is the opposite logic from the other hoary problem of a FK being advanced 10m to be outside to the 22m:

- In the FK case, because the new mark is outside the 22m, even though the ball is inside the 22m, if the team declines to advance to the new mark, but takes the kick from where they are - inside the 22m - they are treated as having 'carried it back', so can't kick for gain in ground

- Contrast the QTI case : when LoT is outside the 22m, if the ball is inside the 22m, they CAN take the QTI from where they are, and get gain in ground. In this case it doesn't count as carried back.

 

[OB..]

crossref - are you arguing that every time a team is awarded a lineout in their own 22, they are then responsible for putting the ball into the 22? [LAWS][FONT=fs_blakeregular]Defending team takes ball into their own 22 at a scrum or lineout. [/FONT][FONT=fs_blakeregular]When a defending team throws the ball into a scrum or lineout outside that team’s 22 [...][/FONT][/LAWS] I think we have a satisfactory negative inference. "Outside" is specified so "inside" is OK and the gain in ground is permitted.

The FK case is simply a disconnect between laws 19 and 21, which was presumably not spotted.

 

[crossref]

No, the opposite.

In the QTI option I think it's correct that if the ball reaches the 22m and goes out, then they can take the QTI behind the 22m and get gain in ground, even if the LoT is outside the 22m.

But I think this same logic should extend to the FK. A FK is given inside the 22m, and then - becasue of the actions of the opponent it's adavanced outside the 22m, I think that you should have the option to decline the extra 10m, stay within the 22m and kick for gain in ground.

 

[Taff]

... In the QTI option I think it's correct that if the ball reaches the 22m and goes out, then they can take the QTI behind the 22m and get gain in ground, even if the LoT is outside the 22m.

I don't think so.

If the LoT is outside the 22, and the defending team opt to take a QTI inside the 22, then in my book they have "taken it back in" and don't get a gain in ground if they kick it to touch.

They are entitled to a LO at the LoT. The QTI is an option - nobody forced them to take a QTI inside their own 22.

 

[crossref]

I don't think so.

If the LoT is outside the 22, and the defending team opt to take a QTI inside the 22, then in my book they have "taken it back in" and don't get a gain in ground if they kick it to touch.

They are entitled to a LO at the LoT. The QTI is an option - nobody forced them to take a QTI inside their own 22.

well see posts #1 and #4 .. it dosn't count as taken back.

 

[Taff]

well see posts #1 and #4 .. it dosn't count as taken back.

Sorry, but this makes no sense.

Post 1 is Jouberts opinion. Post 4 is a Clarification from 11 years ago.

Effectively suggesting that they didn't take the ball "back in" to the 22 because the ball was already there is stretching the point a bit IMO. My argument would be "You are entitled to a LO outside the 22. OK, the ball may have ended up inside the 22 but you opted to take the QTI from inside the 22. Nobody forced you to take the QTI inside the 22 - you opted to do it."

 

[OB..]

In the QTI option I think it's correct that if the ball reaches the 22m and goes out, then they can take the QTI behind the 22m and get gain in ground, even if the LoT is outside the 22m.

I think we are at cross purposes somehow.

If the ball leaves the field before reaching the 22, it is dead and it cannot thereafter get into the 22. Therefore the kicking team did not put the ball into the 22. If a QTI is taken, that is what puts the ball into the 22, so there can be no gain in ground from a kick to touch. The actual location of the line of touch is not relevant, it is whether or not the kicking team put the ball into (or over) the 22.

But I think this same logic should extend to the FK.

You can take a QTI behind the point it went out, but if that means you took the ball back into the 22, you cannot gain ground. The same applies to a FK: you can take it behind the mark, but if you take it back into your 22, you cannot gain ground.

A FK is given inside the 22m, and then - becasue of the actions of the opp
onent it's adavanced outside the 22m, I think that you should have the option to decline the extra 10m, stay within the 22m and kick for gain in ground.

I would like to see the law amended to do that for a FK, but at present it doesn't. I see no reason to amend the law for a QTI.

 

[crossref]

I think we are at cross purposes somehow.

If the ball leaves the field before reaching the 22, it is dead and it cannot thereafter get into the 22. Therefore the kicking team did not put the ball into the 22. If a QTI is taken, that is what puts the ball into the 22, so there can be no gain in ground from a kick to touch. The actual location of the line of touch is not relevant, it is whether or not the kicking team put the ball into (or over) the 22.

OB this isn't really a question about the ball rolling along in touch.

In the OP Green kick the ball out on the full, and in doing so the ball crosses the blue 22m, and then goes into touch inside the blue 22m.

Blue can take the QTI anywhere between where the ball went into touch, inside their 22m, and the LoT -- somewhere upfield outside the 22m, let's say on the half way line.

So the question is exactly parallel to the FK one.
- blue have the right to take a line out on the half way line
- instead they choose to take a QTI where the ball is - inside their 22m
- if they do the latter, have they - effectively - chosen to resume play inside 22m when they could have been outside at the LoT. the consequence being no gain in ground (which is the argument used in the advanced FK scenario). CJ says no - they get gain in ground. A big incentive to take a QTI.

 

[OB..]

OB this isn't really a question about the ball rolling along in touch.

Craig Joubert: If the player gathered the ball behind the 22m line in touch and then threw it in he can gain ground,

Craig joubert's reply does make that point, hence my challenge. I think he is wrong.

In the OP Green kick the ball out on the full, and in doing so the ball crosses the blue 22m, and then goes into touch inside the blue 22m.

The OP does not specify where the ball goes into touch, which is why Craig Joubert covers two different scenarios.

So the question is exactly parallel to the FK one.

No it isn't. The OP deals purely with the interpretation of Law 19. It is an argument South Africa espoused a few years back and IMHO it has subsequently been discredited by the change in the law book to show the 22 area. (The verbal description is defective.)

The FK location is governed by Law 21. Although the player is allowed to take it behind the nark, he was awarded the kick at the mark, so he is responsible for taking it back into his 22 if he kicks from there.

I agree that is unfair, and would like to see it rectified. As I said, I think the situation was overlooked - it is after all, very rare.

 

[beckett50]

I hate to say this but IMO CJ is wrong on this point.

The LotG clearly stipulate the playing enclosure and that touch is touch once the ball crosses the plane and the lines across and along the pitch stop at Goal Line and the Touch Line.

If the ball is out it's out. If this means it closed the Touch Line outside the 22m then there can be no gain in ground from taking the QTI from within the 22m. Simples.

 

[The Fat]

Just to stir the pot/stoke the fire etc etc etc,

This is an extract from ARU 2015 GMGs:

QUICK THROW AND LINEOUT
Put back into own 22m
• When a ball is passed into the 22 metre area and is touched by an opposing player, or a tackle, ruck,
scrum, maul or lineout is formed, then that team can now kick directly into touch and gain ground.
• The ball is considered to have been ‘taken back’ into a team’s 22m area in the following situations:
o When a team wins possession of a ball from a scrum, ruck, maul or lineout where the mark is outside
of the 22m area, even though the rear participants may have their feet within the 22m area
o When a quick throw-in is passed from in front of the 22m line, back across the 22m line and into the
22m area
o When a quick throw-in is taken within the 22m area after a player gathers it from in touch but in front
of the 22 metre line and then takes it behind the 22m line to throw.

 

[Dickie E]

The ball is considered to have been ‘taken back’ into a team’s 22m area in the following situations:
o When a quick throw-in is taken within the 22m area after a player gathers it from in touch but in front
of the 22 metre line and then takes it behind the 22m line to throw.

So the corollary to that must be "The ball is considered to have not been ‘taken back’ into a team’s 22m area when a quick throw-in is taken within the 22m area after a player gathers it from in touch but behind the 22 metre line".

ARU GMG is my bible.

 

[Ian_Cook]

I don't think so.

If the LoT is outside the 22, and the defending team opt to take a QTI inside the 22, then in my book they have "taken it back in" and don't get a gain in ground if they kick it to touch.

They are entitled to a LO at the LoT. The QTI is an option - nobody forced them to take a QTI inside their own 22.

Hang on a minute!

Gold player kicks ball in general play directly into touch from half way. The ball crosses the the Blue 22m in flight before going into touch 5m inside the 22m. This puts the the LoT back on the halfway. You are saying that because Blue take the QTi inside the 22m, they have carried it back!? Really!?

Surely, Gold have put the ball into Blue's 22m by kicking the ball through the corner of it. This is why you cannot use the LoT as a reference, you have to use the place where the ball ACTUALLY CROSSED the touchline, which is not always the LoT.,

 

[irishref]

World Rugby - new clarification please. Obviously for us refs and it is easier to keep an eye on where the QTI is taken in relation to the 22m line.

From an AR perspective - would he or she be running back to the place of the kick to indicate the mark since it went out on the full and ergo have a distinct chance of missing the QTI?

 

[crossref]

Hang on a minute!

Gold player kicks ball in general play directly into touch from half way. The ball crosses the the Blue 22m in flight before going into touch 5m inside the 22m. This puts the the LoT back on the halfway. You are saying that because Blue take the QTi inside the 22m, they have carried it back!? Really!?

Surely, Gold have put the ball into Blue's 22m by kicking the ball through the corner of it. This is why you cannot use the LoT as a reference, you have to use the place where the ball ACTUALLY CROSSED the touchline, which is not always the LoT.,

I agree with Ian - the Law here, which allows Blue to kick for gain in ground, is sensible.

Let's say, though that gold do the same kick, putting ball into the blue 22m but this time blue catch it and call a mark.

gold don't retreat from the mark as blue take it, and the referee blows and advances the mark 10m - outside the 22m

Now if blue remain inside the 22m and take the FK from inside - they are said to have 'carried' it back-- even though gold put the ball in the 22m and the ball has stayed inside the 22m ever since.

These two scenarios are contradictory.

e