Quick Line out (not quick throw in)

DarrenJones

New member
Joined
Apr 24, 2015
Messages
12
Post Likes
0
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
If black got the ball in touch, you decide there are 2 players from each team at the line of touch so you call "lineout set" or however you let the teams know the QTI is no longer an option. Right after you call this the black player throws the ball in straight along the line of touch to the front receiver at 5.5m. Red was sauntering back assuming a more relaxed set up to the line out. They start crying that you had called of the QTI. Because the requirement for a QTI to be over is that a lineout has been set, Would it be appropriate to say that this was a quick line out not a quick throw in and that when a QTI is called off that simply removes the options of throwing in backwards or from behind the line of touch?
 

SimonSmith


Referees in Australia
Staff member
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
9,408
Post Likes
1,525
Assuming all Black are compliant?

Play on . Stop crying.

And then maybe have a quick chat with the captain to explain what just happened.
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,824
Post Likes
3,161
Was the "lineout" properly formed including straight lines, 1m apart, and everyone else 10m back, and a red player in the tramline ?

I wouldn't allow the OP as described as a valid lineout .
 
Last edited:

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,164
Post Likes
1,846
Was the "lineout" properly formed including straight lines, 1m apart, and everyone else 10m back, and a red player in the tramline ?

I wouldn't allow the OP as described as a valid lineout .

so to clarify - once 2 x 2 player lines are set you wouldn;t allow the throw in until both sides have fully clear 10m spacing??

didds
 

Dickie E


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
14,225
Post Likes
2,219
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
Was the "lineout" properly formed including straight lines, 1m apart, and everyone else 10m back, and a red player in the tramline ?

I wouldn't allow the OP as described as a valid lineout .

Law 18.35 doesn't require everyone else back 10 as long as they continue back 10. Looks like opponent in tram lines is a requirement.

[LAWS]Players not participating in the lineout must remain at least 10 metres from the mark of touch on their own team’s side or behind the goal line if this is nearer. If the ball is thrown in before a player is onside, the player will not be liable to sanction if the player immediately retires to the onside position. The player cannot be put onside by the action of any other player. [/LAWS]

Which raises an interesting question. If opponent hasn't yet reached tramlines when ball is thrown, that is a FK infringement by that player. I can't see any reference to giving him time to reach the tramlines.
 
Last edited:

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,824
Post Likes
3,161
All our guidance is to work hard at getting line outs set up correcty - and then they run smoothly.
This one sounds like chaos.

I think if you let that go all the red team, all the spectators and (in fact) most of the black team will all think you announced that the QTI was off - and then let them take one. There is nothing in it for the ref in this circumstance.


I think there are two ways to return a ball fro touch
- a QTI which is unstrucutre, informal and quick
- a lineout which is strucutred, formal, and is properly set up

The OP is neither one nor the other, and doesn't sound like good game management.
 
Last edited:

Treadmore

Avid Rugby Lover
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
413
Post Likes
38
Law 18.35 doesn't require everyone else back 10 as long as they continue back 10. Looks like opponent in tram lines is a requirement.

[LAWS]Players not participating in the lineout must remain at least 10 metres from the mark of touch on their own team’s side or behind the goal line if this is nearer. If the ball is thrown in before a player is onside, the player will not be liable to sanction if the player immediately retires to the onside position. The player cannot be put onside by the action of any other player. [/LAWS]

Which raises an interesting question. If opponent hasn't yet reached tramlines when ball is thrown, that is a FK infringement by that player. I can't see any reference to giving him time to reach the tramlines.

Indeed, it reads as a requirement on the non-throwing team, not a requirement for a line-out to be formed per se, which seems to be covered minimally by 18.9-13. And 18.14 permits a quickly taken throw at the (minimal) line-out.

It might however be good management to allow time for a bit of order at a set piece.
 

Rich_NL

Rugby Expert
Joined
Apr 13, 2015
Messages
1,627
Post Likes
505
If the kicking team can get to the line of touch quickly, they're rewarded by having a chance to compete in the lineout rather than allow a (generally uncontested) QTI. So the throwing-in team has to comply with the lineout requirements and their opponents have a reasonable time to comply too, as is good LO management.
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,164
Post Likes
1,846
All our guidance is to work hard at getting line outs set up correcty - and then they run smoothly.
This one sounds like chaos.

I think if you let that go all the red team, all the spectators and (in fact) most of the black team will all think you announced that the QTI was off - and then let them take one. There is nothing in it for the ref in this circumstance.


I think there are two ways to return a ball fro touch
- a QTI which is unstrucutre, informal and quick
- a lineout which is strucutred, formal, and is properly set up

The OP is neither one nor the other, and doesn't sound like good game management.

i get that ... but that se4ems to benefit thebteam that is tardy and not orgainsed over the team that is on the ball, smart in their approach (in all senses of smart) and wants to get on with the game. why should they be constrained by the oppoosition deliberately taking time?
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,824
Post Likes
3,161
If teams are being tardy I will manage that as well (but not with a sudden unexpected lineout gotcha)
 

The Fat


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jul 15, 2010
Messages
4,204
Post Likes
496
Was the "lineout" properly formed including straight lines, 1m apart, and everyone else 10m back, and a red player in the tramline ?

I wouldn't allow the OP as described as a valid lineout .

What if Black captain says to you at the coin toss, "Occasionally we like to go quickly on our throw into the lineout Sir".
What is your reply?

What tactics would you be prepared to allow Red to use to slow down the lineout?

Are you, as the referee, going to deliberately slow down the taking of the lineout so that it all looks textbook perfect to your eye?
 
Last edited:

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,824
Post Likes
3,161
This thread is about managing a team that is trying to hold a surprise lineout, by going very quickly .. I gave my answer for the OP scenario . Reset the lineout .

Do you have another particular scenario in mind ? Hit me ..


(Managing teams that are trying slow things down is a different topic ... )
 

SimonSmith


Referees in Australia
Staff member
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
9,408
Post Likes
1,525
This thread is about managing a team that is trying to hold a surprise lineout, by going very quickly .. I gave my answer for the OP scenario . Reset the lineout .

Or: Managing a team who are acting compliance with the law.

If you have a law reference for holding it, then that's what we need. A "surprise" lineout that complies with law is their right; if the other team is taken by surprise, I'd rather tactfully suggest that they waken up. Referees shouldn't be in the business of pandering.
 

Dickie E


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
14,225
Post Likes
2,219
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
Or: Managing a team who are acting compliance with the law.

If you have a law reference for holding it, then that's what we need. A "surprise" lineout that complies with law is their right; if the other team is taken by surprise, I'd rather tactfully suggest that they waken up. Referees shouldn't be in the business of pandering.

How many players from the non-throwing team do you require to be in position to allow the quick throw in?
 

Drift


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
1,846
Post Likes
114
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
All our guidance is to work hard at getting line outs set up correcty - and then they run smoothly.
This one sounds like chaos.

I think if you let that go all the red team, all the spectators and (in fact) most of the black team will all think you announced that the QTI was off - and then let them take one. There is nothing in it for the ref in this circumstance.


I think there are two ways to return a ball fro touch
- a QTI which is unstrucutre, informal and quick
- a lineout which is strucutred, formal, and is properly set up

The OP is neither one nor the other, and doesn't sound like good game management.

I'd agree for the first lineout of the match to each team (so first red throw and first black throw) but after that I am not going to call back a team for employing a quick line out if they want to play up tempo rugby as long as we have 2 from each side and the ball is thrown straight.
 

Dickie E


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
14,225
Post Likes
2,219
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
I'd agree for the first lineout of the match to each team (so first red throw and first black throw) but after that I am not going to call back a team for employing a quick line out if they want to play up tempo rugby as long as we have 2 from each side and the ball is thrown straight.

But Drift the law requirement is 3 from each side (thrower, opponent to thrower and 2 participating players). Why 2?
 

Drift


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
1,846
Post Likes
114
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
But Drift the law requirement is 3 from each side (thrower, opponent to thrower and 2 participating players). Why 2?

2 players along the line of touch. For a quick lineout if there isn't a player in the channel then just play a quick FK advantage, ball gets the to backs is advantage over, no need to stop a team wanted to expose the defence for relaxing.
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,824
Post Likes
3,161
I'd agree for the first lineout of the match to each team (so first red throw and first black throw) but after that I am not going to call back a team for employing a quick line out if they want to play up tempo rugby as long as we have 2 from each side and the ball is thrown straight.

An up tempo line out implies that we have a lineout. So great

Throwing the ball into a general melee, a split second after I have said the no QTI (the scenario in the OP ) is just chaos
 
Top