[Line out] Quick throw in

Dave Elliott

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
293
Post Likes
56
Current Referee grade:
Level 7
Just refreshing laws before new season, and had a little flash back to regular playing days, when as the quickest on the pitch I would run to the line out and stop the quick one, but in the laws as I'm reading them it's a min of two to form a line-out, so there was no reason they could not have taken the quick one with me there. Am I correct?
 

Phil E


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
16,136
Post Likes
2,409
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
Correct.

Two from each side means lineout formed.
Also you can't prevent a quick throw in by standing inside the 5m line.
 

Paule23


Referees in Scotland
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
394
Post Likes
153
Current Referee grade:
Level 7
Correct. You hear loads of shouts of "Mark it" os something similar, but as Davas pointed out you need 2 players from both teams to form a line out. You then get into a debate as to what happens if 2 of the defensive team arrive, but the attacking team just wander up to still allow a QTI as/when they want. I personally wouldn't allow it (on the grounds it's not exactly 'quick') but I know I'm on shaky ground in the eyes of the law.
 

Ian_Cook


Referees in New Zealand
Staff member
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
13,687
Post Likes
1,773
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
Correct. You hear loads of shouts of "Mark it" os something similar, but as Davas pointed out you need 2 players from both teams to form a line out. You then get into a debate as to what happens if 2 of the defensive team arrive, but the attacking team just wander up to still allow a QTI as/when they want. I personally wouldn't allow it (on the grounds it's not exactly 'quick') but I know I'm on shaky ground in the eyes of the law.

You are on shaky ground. As long as the attacking players are walking towards the LoT at a normal walking pace you should allow the QTi (you have no reason in Law not to)

If you think they are intentionally slowing or stopping, then you have always have Law 19.8(d)

[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.[/LAWS]

Of course, use ATP

It seems fairly common these days, especially in the elite game, for line-out players to stop well short of the LoT for a committee meeting. I would not allow this at all. If I see them stop, I would ask them to keep moving - if they want to have a chat, well, even prop forwards have sufficient multitasking capabilities to walk and talk at the same time.
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,824
Post Likes
3,161
Its a blurry area that would benefit from a tweak in the Laws
The simplest thing might be to say that a QTI must be taken without delay
 

ChrisR

Player or Coach
Joined
Jul 14, 2010
Messages
3,231
Post Likes
356
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
If I come home late I get the 3rd degree.
 

Ian_Cook


Referees in New Zealand
Staff member
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
13,687
Post Likes
1,773
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
Its a blurry area that would benefit from a tweak in the Laws
The simplest thing might be to say that a QTI must be taken without delay

Oh, great, just what the game needs. Make something that is definitive, and easy to understand (a QTi can be taken any time from when the ball goes into touch to when a line-out is formed) and turn it something subjective, and down to individual referee interpretation (as if we don't have enough stuff like that in the game already).

There is nothing wrong with the QTI laws as they are. All that needed is for the match officials and the defending team to STAY AWAKE!

Honestly, I despair sometimes. Some of you lot are worse than bloody software engineers, always trying to fix things that ain't broken!
 
Last edited:

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,164
Post Likes
1,846
Its a blurry area that would benefit from a tweak in the Laws
The simplest thing might be to say that a QTI must be taken without delay

now define "without delay" to everybody's satisfaction

didds
 

VM75

Player or Coach
Joined
Mar 7, 2017
Messages
442
Post Likes
92
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
now define "without delay" to everybody's satisfaction

didds

Don't ask me where I found this, but Didn't 7's successfully do this this with #4 ? - if so, the ideology works for me even if the time allowance could be extended.

Law Trials: Additional Sevens Changes, wef 1/12/2016


1] * Finals should last no longer than seven minutes each half (rationale is player welfare – the evidence shows that a disproportionate number of injuries take place in the second half of finals. Injuries per minute are higher in the second half of finals as opposed to the first half and throughout normal matches of seven minutes each way.)


2] * Referee Video Referral (RVR) to be taken out of the on-field referee's hands with the ultimate decision being taken by the TMO (rationale: it is often difficult to see the screen and make a call. The RVR protocol remains unchanged. The TMO will be one of the pool of tournament referees)


3] * The restart kick must be taken within 30 seconds of a penalty kick or dropped goal being attempted where the kick is successful or goes dead.


4] * Teams must form a line-out within 15 seconds from the time the referee indicates the place where the throw-in will take place.


5] * Teams must be ready to form a scrum within 15 seconds from the time the referee indicates the mark of the scrum.

6] * A penalty or free-kick must be taken within 30 seconds of being awarded.
 

Paule23


Referees in Scotland
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
394
Post Likes
153
Current Referee grade:
Level 7
Honestly, I despair sometimes. Some of you lot are worse than bloody software engineers, always trying to fix things that ain't broken!

You should change that to this YOU don't think are broken. You have very strong opinions Ian, and nothing wrong with that but your opinion is not always the same as everyone elses, or dare I say it, always right. I think the idea about wording a QTI to be tsken without delay is not a bad one. It looks very weird when a 'QTI' is taken say 30-45 seconds after the ball went into touch and players are approaching (but have not yet arrived) at the LOT.
 

Ian_Cook


Referees in New Zealand
Staff member
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
13,687
Post Likes
1,773
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
You should change that to this YOU don't think are broken. You have very strong opinions Ian, and nothing wrong with that but your opinion is not always the same as everyone elses, or dare I say it, always right. I think the idea about wording a QTI to be tsken without delay is not a bad one. It looks very weird when a 'QTI' is taken say 30-45 seconds after the ball went into touch and players are approaching (but have not yet arrived) at the LOT.

Well, I think its normal.

[LAWS]19.2 QUICK THROW-IN
(a) A player may take a quick throw-in without waiting for a lineout to form.[/LAWS]

There is absolutely NO merit whatsoever in monkeying with the quick throw in law just because some people have got a burr up their arse about clever and innovative thinking. Defenses can fix this simply by staying awake; its called "situational awareness" They need to be aware of the possibility of a quick throw-in right up until the point that line-out forms. Why on earth would we want to change the laws to give unconscious defenders a free pass?

If these people had their way, there would be no room for creativity. We'd end up with staid, boring game where everything has to be done to a preset pattern. I applaud those players who think creatively and outside the box, and who can fool the opposition (so long as they do not infringe the Laws) into ignoring what they are doing and then getting the drop on them. The more players we have like that, the better it is for the game.

If you want boring, staid and playing to a pattern, go play noughts and crosses.
 
Last edited:

Guyseep


Referees in Canada
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
378
Post Likes
48
You should change that to this YOU don't think are broken. You have very strong opinions Ian, and nothing wrong with that but your opinion is not always the same as everyone elses, or dare I say it, always right. I think the idea about wording a QTI to be tsken without delay is not a bad one. It looks very weird when a 'QTI' is taken say 30-45 seconds after the ball went into touch and players are approaching (but have not yet arrived) at the LOT.

Agreed. I would even argue for a change that states "A quick throw in is allowed only before the defending team approaches the lineout/line of touch".
 

Ian_Cook


Referees in New Zealand
Staff member
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
13,687
Post Likes
1,773
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
Agreed. I would even argue for a change that states "A quick throw in is allowed only before the defending team approaches the lineout/line of touch".

Oh, genius!!. That's even more confusing.
headscratch.gif


You will have different cutoff times depending on which half the game is being played in!
icon_rolleyes.gif
 

SimonSmith


Referees in Australia
Staff member
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
9,408
Post Likes
1,525
You should change that to this YOU don't think are broken. You have very strong opinions Ian, and nothing wrong with that but your opinion is not always the same as everyone elses, or dare I say it, always right. I think the idea about wording a QTI to be tsken without delay is not a bad one. It looks very weird when a 'QTI' is taken say 30-45 seconds after the ball went into touch and players are approaching (but have not yet arrived) at the LOT.

If we're going to change the laws, it needs to be to improve something or fix a problem.

This suggested change to the QTI does neither, and as referenced earlier, I think makes it worse. What does "without delay mean"?
 

Dickie E


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
14,225
Post Likes
2,219
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
if the thrower is on the LoT, opposing forwards all lined up nicely, backs in regular positions, throwing forwards in a little gaggle discussing the move and as they approach LoT the thrower throws to his #10 ... I wouldn't allow that eventhough QTI is still technically an option.
 

Ian_Cook


Referees in New Zealand
Staff member
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
13,687
Post Likes
1,773
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
if the thrower is on the LoT, opposing forwards all lined up nicely, backs in regular positions, throwing forwards in a little gaggle discussing the move and as they approach LoT the thrower throws to his #10 ... I wouldn't allow that eventhough QTI is still technically an option.

I wouldn't allow the gaggle in the first place!
 

Ian_Cook


Referees in New Zealand
Staff member
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
13,687
Post Likes
1,773
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
why on earth not? It's legal and part of their clever & innovative thinking.

Its not legal

[LAWS]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.[SUP]1[/SUP]
Players of either team must not leave the lineout once they have taken up a position in the
lineout until the lineout has ended
.[SUP]2[/SUP]
Sanction: Free Kick on the 15-metre lineLaw [/LAWS]

1. If they have stopped to have their gaggle before reaching the LoT, they have delayed forming a lineout (an infringement under the above Law). They haven't formed a lineout, so the option to take a QTi is still on. Why should the throwing team not be allowed to get on with the game (by taking a QTi) when the non-throwing team is intentially delaying the game by delaying the formation of a line-out.

2. If they have reached the LoT and thereby stopped the QTi from taking place, and then retreated away for their gaggle, they have left the LoT (an infringement under the above Law)

If its good enough for my under 15s to discuss line-out calls and tactics while they are walking to the LoT without stopping its good enough for adults and elite players.
 
Top