QTI - What is included in the Playing Enclosure

[Jarrod Burton]

OK guys, a quick QTI question.

There are heaps of places with fixed fences etc that surround and mark out the playing enclosure. If the ball leaves the playing enclosure, no QTI. But at what point does the playing enclosure end? At the bottom of the fence or the top?

I've had two (three actually but the third bloke told me to worry about the players not where the ball was...) contrasting answers to this, one saying if it wasn't touched by a person QTI is on, the other (the better coach IMO) felt that the fence is outside the playing enclosure.

As AR, I had a kick to touch bounce off the top of the fence and into the arms of the LO team who flicked it in (less than 5m) to a player who went on to score. Told the ref both issues, both of which they ignored.

 

[crossref]

Seems to me if the ball hits a fence , that doesn't matter , qti is on .

 

[Decorily]

Seems to me if the ball hits a fence , that doesn't matter , qti is on .

Absolutely.... play on.

 

[chbg]

Where do the Laws say that a ball leaving the Playing Enclosure can no longer be used for a QTI?

 

[Marc Wakeham]

I'd go more ore by what the law says than what some coach says.

 

[Decorily]

As AR, I had a kick to touch bounce off the top of the fence and into the arms of the LO team who flicked it in (less than 5m) to a player who went on to score. Told the ref both issues, both of which they ignored.[/QUOTE]

The only relevant issue seems to be that the QTI didn't travel 5m.
Maybe you were talking too much and the ref lost focus by the time you got to the relevant information!
No offence intended... but I find that 'less is more' while acting as a TJ or AR and while interacting with assistants as a referee!

 

[Jarrod Burton]

Decorily - as a ref I understand the need for concise language. My report was "not 5, no Quick" to which I got the response "both fine". Given I was 3-5 m from the ball and the ref was 25m+ away, what else do you recommend that I do? Keep in mind that this ref is well known for ignoring AR's.

 

[Jarrod Burton]

chbg - Surely a ball leaving the playing enclosure is no longer able to be used for a QTI. If a player boots it into the bush, can another leave the FoP, duck under the rope, run over pick it up and then come back into the enclosure to throw a Quick Throw In (assuming the forwards are too slow to get there in time to form the LO)? Yet if it brushes another player within the enclosure it cannot be used for a QTI?

 

[damo]

chbg - Surely a ball leaving the playing enclosure is no longer able to be used for a QTI. If a player boots it into the bush, can another leave the FoP, duck under the rope, run over pick it up and then come back into the enclosure to throw a Quick Throw In (assuming the forwards are too slow to get there in time to form the LO)? Yet if it brushes another player within the enclosure it cannot be used for a QTI?

I don't believe there is any law which indicates if the ball leaves the enclosure it can not be used for a QTI. In fact I am fairly certain there is no such law.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

chbg - Surely a ball leaving the playing enclosure is no longer able to be used for a QTI.

Please support with law!

 

[Dickie E]

[LAWS]5. A quick throw is disallowed and a lineout is awarded to the same team if:
b. The ball had been touched after it went into touch by anyone other than the player throwing in or the player who carried the ball into touch[/LAWS]

Law 18. Nothing about playing enclosures, fences, hoardings or dogs

 

[crossref]

chbg - Surely a ball leaving the playing enclosure is no longer able to be used for a QTI. If a player boots it into the bush, can another leave the FoP, duck under the rope, run over pick it up and then come back into the enclosure to throw a Quick Throw In (assuming the forwards are too slow to get there in time to form the LO)? Yet if it brushes another player within the enclosure it cannot be used for a QTI?

In that scenario i do agree you wouldn't allow a QTI but it's more to do with how long it took .

But you are correct, if a player has had to dig around sat the bottom of a bramble covered ditch to retrieve a lost ball, it's not going to be appropriate when he finally returns with the ball, to do a qti

But i think that's very different from the ball hitting a fence and bouncing back

 

[Decorily]

Decorily - as a ref I understand the need for concise language. My report was "not 5, no Quick" to which I got the response "both fine". Given I was 3-5 m from the ball and the ref was 25m+ away, what else do you recommend that I do? Keep in mind that this ref is well known for ignoring AR's.

Fair enough Jarrod ... well I guess there is no more you can do in that case. It is the referees decision at the end of the day and certainly some referees can be difficult to work with!

 

[Zebra1922]

In that scenario i do agree you wouldn't allow a QTI but it's more to do with how long it took .

But you are correct, if a player has had to dig around sat the bottom of a bramble covered ditch to retrieve a lost ball, it's not going to be appropriate when he finally returns with the ball, to do a qti

But i think that's very different from the ball hitting a fence and bouncing back

Although this might seem counterintuitive, as far as I am aware there is no time restriction on a QTI. As long as all other criteria are met and the lineout had not formed, a QTI remains on no matter how long has expired since the ball went into touch.

 

[crossref]

The Law really should say that a QTI has to be taken without undue delay , or something similar , so that the referee has some license to use common sense judgement on this .
Meanwhile I think we have to use some common sense judgement regardless ... ?

I would t let a player emerge from a thicket and lob the ball into the FoP for a QTI

 

[Phil E]

On AR's course we were always told that if the ball goes out of sight (behind a hoarding or a hedge) then the QT is not allowed as you cannot say for certain that it's the same ball or that it wasn't touched.

 

[crossref]

Mind you, if a player was allowed to run out of sight and then re-emerge unexpectedly, in a different place, and take a QTI ... That would be quite a lot of fun

 

[Dickie E]

Mind you, if a player was allowed to run out of sight and then re-emerge unexpectedly, in a different place, and take a QTI ... That would be quite a lot of fun

what if the thicket was behind the DBL and he re-appeared on the other side of the field. Allow QTI? epper:

 

[didds]

Decorily - as a ref I understand the need for concise language. My report was "not 5, no Quick" to which I got the response "both fine". Given I was 3-5 m from the ball and the ref was 25m+ away, what else do you recommend that I do? Keep in mind that this ref is well known for ignoring AR's.

not ever AR for said ref again is about all you can do.

didds

 

[didds]

The Law really should say that a QTI has to be taken without undue delay

but has a player that has sperinted 30m to collect the ball and sprinted 30m back to then take a Q"TI had an "undiue delay" ? etc.

As opposed to trotting over to pick the ball up laying a foot outside touch having gently rolled there, looked once, twice, stooped to put the ball down, then stopped in mid stoop and stood up again , looked again and THEN made the QTI?

its all semantics I appreciate.

didds