Quick Throw - Oooops

[RobLev]

Tough question so early in the morning...first question would be how did blue 2 get the ball? If he picked it up after it was kicked out, or got it from the player that carried it into touch, I would guess play on, as the minimum requirements for forming a lineout wasn't met. If blue 2 received the ball in any other way, disallow the quick throw and have blue throw in at proper LO.

How does 19.8(d) affect the position?

[LAWS]When the ball is in touch, every player who approaches the line of touch is presumed to do so to form a lineout[/LAWS]

 

[Dixie]

Blue lineout throw. Bluue hooker has ball in hand on line of touch.

2 Blue players approach the line of touch and 2 Red players do likewise.

However, only 1 Blue player makes it to the line of touch. The other stops short and takes up the receiver position.

Blue hooker throws in ball at 45 degree angle to his #10.

Play on?

How does 19.8(d) affect the position?

[LAWS]When the ball is in touch, every player who approaches the line of touch is presumed to do so to form a lineout[/LAWS]

And that is exactly where Dickie E was coming from - nice one Dickie; nice one son [who can complete the song line there?].

I think the ref would be perfectly within his rights to either call play on, or to pull it back. Both can be justified by 19.8(d) - surely a rare instance when the same law justifies diametrically opposite views. On the one hand, he could argue that the blue player in the receiver position was approaching to form a lineout, but had not yet got there and so the lineout had not yet formed - though its potential formative participants could be identified. On the other hand, Blue receiver clearly delayed forming the lineout by failing to take up the position he was presumed by law to be heading for. Consequently, any ref opting to pull it back should not simply have the lineout taken again, but should FK blue for delaying forming a lineout - quoting the next sentence of 19.8(d):

[LAWS]Players who approach the line of touch must do so without delay.[/LAWS]

 

[Dickie E]

And that is exactly where Dickie E was coming from - nice one Dickie; nice one son [who can complete the song line there?].

Nice one, Dickie, let's have another one

 

[RobLev]

And that is exactly where Dickie E was coming from - nice one Dickie; nice one son [who can complete the song line there?].

I think the ref would be perfectly within his rights to either call play on, or to pull it back. Both can be justified by 19.8(d) - surely a rare instance when the same law justifies diametrically opposite views. On the one hand, he could argue that the blue player in the receiver position was approaching to form a lineout, but had not yet got there and so the lineout had not yet formed - though its potential formative participants could be identified. On the other hand, Blue receiver clearly delayed forming the lineout by failing to take up the position he was presumed by law to be heading for. Consequently, any ref opting to pull it back should not simply have the lineout taken again, but should FK blue for delaying forming a lineout - quoting the next sentence of 19.8(d):

[LAWS]Players who approach the line of touch must do so without delay.[/LAWS]

Although there's also 19.2(g) to deal with:

[LAWS]At a quick throw-in, a player may come to the line of touch and leave without being penalised.[/LAWS]

But then the question becomes whether the second player approaching the line of touch prevents a QTI, so that the initial words of the Law aren't fulfilled so the Law doesn't apply.

Simples...:biggrin:

 

[ChrisR]

And if the player who approached the LO was the SH? "Lineout" is both the two lines of players each side of the LoT and it is the event that occurs between the 10m from the LoT. So, not every player approaching the LoT will be in the "line-out".

Play-on!

 

[Dixie]

And if the player who approached the LO was the SH? "Lineout" is both the two lines of players each side of the LoT and it is the event that occurs between the 10m from the LoT. So, not every player approaching the LoT will be in the "line-out".

Play-on!

A SH is just a player, like any other. If he's the first to arrive at a lineout, the expectation stated in law is that he's getting there to form the lineout, not merely to participate in it. Having formed it, he's free to swap places with another player to get into his habitual position; but the SH and receiver are not necessarily synonymous, and it would be a mistake to assume they are.

 

[RobLev]

And if the player who approached the LO was the SH? "Lineout" is both the two lines of players each side of the LoT and it is the event that occurs between the 10m from the LoT. So, not every player approaching the LoT will be in the "line-out".

Play-on!

The expression used in 19.8(d) is "to form a lineout"; which, in the context of the definitions, includes only the two lines. The receiver is merely a "participating player" and defined as:

[LAWS]... the player in position to catch the ball when lineout players pass or knock the ball back from the lineout.[/LAWS]

Lineout players, on the other hand:

[LAWS]...are the players who form the two lines that make a lineout.[/LAWS]

(My emphases).