They have to wait for us sir?

[Phil E]

Well, that taught them, didnt it?

Not sure what you mean by that comment. Your sarcasm is showing.
It dealt with the issue of delaying the lineout, because it didn't happen again. That's a win all round.

 

[crossref]

Quickly taken line out by Scotland (actually over the ARs head), England not expecting it, play on and scotland score a try .mm

 

[Stu10]

What would you do if Red (throwing team) arrives at the line out with 5 then drops down to 4 before Blue gets there with 2 players? Let it go or wait and allow numbers to be matched?

I'm confused... So red get 5 players to the line and then drop to 4 before 2 players are there? If blue have not yet got 2 players there then the lineout has not yet formed.

Speaking generally, a reminder of Law 18.14 may be useful regarding quickly taken lineouts:

Unless the throw is taken as soon as the lineout is formed, the non-throwing team may not have more players (but may have fewer players) in the lineout than the throwing team.

 

[Jarrod Burton]

I'm confused... So red get 5 players to the line and then drop to 4 before 2 players are there? If blue have not yet got 2 players there then the lineout has not yet formed.

Speaking generally, a reminder of Law 18.14 may be useful regarding quickly taken lineouts:

Red is going to throw in and stick 5 in the line, but before the LO is formed they drop one of their players out for a total of 4. Does blue now have time to match numbers - since its not their fault red changed. And if they have time to match, would you still allow an early throw when the first two blue players arrive or does blue get the chance to match numbers up to 4?

 

[Jz558]

I think the reply to that is, the devil is in the detail. Putting 5 in and then dropping one with the nearest opposition player 15 meters away is probably fine. Calling 5 and then droppping one with the opposition about to form the line out isnt. In the second scenario I wouldnt allow the quick throw, in the first I may do. Ultimately the level of dicking around by the throwing side would lessen my empathy with what they are trying to achieve particularly if it formed part of a pattern. I wouldnt necessarily disallow a quick throw becuse of one dopey forward who wasnt paying attention but corrected his actions in good time.

 

[didds]

note that time wasting sanction is a FK. Law 9.7:

A player must not:
Waste time. Sanction: Free-kick.

cheers Dickie for the rectifcation.

FKs of course being useless.

 

[Phil E]

cheers Dickie for the rectifcation.

FKs of course being useless.

Not exactly. It gives you possession of the ball, which you didn't have before?

 

[didds]

yes... but what I mean is the award may as well be a scrum. Because that's what it ends up as anyway. it being some sort of "higher penalty" than a scrum restart is a misnomer.

 

[Phil E]

yes... but what I mean is the award may as well be a scrum. Because that's what it ends up as anyway. it being some sort of "higher penalty" than a scrum restart is a misnomer.

That's not my experience, most FK's I give are taken as a FK....possibly because they don't stop to think that they could have a scrum?
FK's are for technical infringements (by and large) and merely hand possession to the other team, how they then restart the game is up to them.

 

[didds]

fair enough if that is your experience. The vast majority of FKs I see awarded are taken as a scrum. Maybe those inside a 22 get kicked to touch (no retention of throw obviously) - and even then those closer to a defending try line often get scrummed as part of a better exit strategy to subsequently advance the ball closer to the 22 before clearing to touch.

 

[Stu10]

Red is going to throw in and stick 5 in the line, but before the LO is formed they drop one of their players out for a total of 4. Does blue now have time to match numbers - since its not their fault red changed. And if they have time to match, would you still allow an early throw when the first two blue players arrive or does blue get the chance to match numbers up to 4?

Using law 18.14 as guidance, if the throwing team changes numbers and then quickly throws in the ball before the defending team can react, then play on... they are not getting a FK for unequal numbers!

Whether red have to wait for blue to form a full line is another question... the Scotland v England game would suggest the answer is no, with red being allowed to throw when they are ready provided the lineout is formed (at least 2 from each team). Certainly the law states that blue are not obliged to include equal numbers and may have less players.

There is a potential lesson here for teams... get 2 players in place quickly to stop a quick throw-in, otherwise ensure all the forwards arrive at the lineout together to avoid a potential disadvantage.

 

[didds]

I think the nmessage is even simpler. if its the oppo throw get there QUICKLY

 

[Jarrod Burton]

There is a potential lesson here for teams... get 2 players in place quickly to stop a quick throw-in, otherwise ensure all the forwards arrive at the lineout together to avoid a potential disadvantage.

I think you've missed the thrust of the thread. A QTI occurs prior to the LO being formed, while this thread is talking about waiting until the LO is formed by (at least) two players from each team being there, but the throwing team makes the throw in before the opposition team has the same numbers as them.

The laws specify that a QTI can be taken before the LO is formed (minimum of two players from each side) and the argument here is that effectively a LO throw down the line of touch can be taken at any time provided that the ball is still live/zombie (if we want to open that can while we are here). If that's the case, why include a provision that a QTI can occur at any time until the LO is formed - just say a throw in can occur at any time on or behind the LoT, but must be down the LoT if 2 or more opposition players are present - would simplify the whole s**t show of a law set and stop a team taking a quick one when the opposition is in the LoT - I've seen plenty of QTI's taken when the non-throwing team don't put any players into the LO but the opposition chasers were there and waiting.

 

[Dickie E]

If that's the case, why include a provision that a QTI can occur at any time until the LO is formed - just say a throw in can occur at any time on or behind the LoT, but must be down the LoT if 2 or more opposition players are present - would simplify the whole s**t show of a law set and stop a team taking a quick one when the opposition is in the LoT - I've seen plenty of QTI's taken when the non-throwing team don't put any players into the LO but the opposition chasers were there and waiting.

don't forget that a QTI requires same ball and untouched ball whereas a quickly taken LO doesn't

 

[Stu10]

I think you've missed the thrust of the thread. A QTI occurs prior to the LO being formed, while this thread is talking about waiting until the LO is formed by (at least) two players from each team being there, but the throwing team makes the throw in before the opposition team has the same numbers as them.

The laws specify that a QTI can be taken before the LO is formed (minimum of two players from each side) and the argument here is that effectively a LO throw down the line of touch can be taken at any time provided that the ball is still live/zombie (if we want to open that can while we are here). If that's the case, why include a provision that a QTI can occur at any time until the LO is formed - just say a throw in can occur at any time on or behind the LoT, but must be down the LoT if 2 or more opposition players are present - would simplify the whole s**t show of a law set and stop a team taking a quick one when the opposition is in the LoT - I've seen plenty of QTI's taken when the non-throwing team don't put any players into the LO but the opposition chasers were there and waiting.

I don't think I've missed the thrust of the thread at all, and I'm maintaining focus on the OP.

The non throwing team often get 2 players at the lineout mark quickly to prevent the opposition taking a potentially advantageous QTI, but, as in the OP, getting only 2 players into the lineout vs 4 or 5 opposition leaves you at a disadvantage competing at the lineout if thrown in promptly... Hence my previous post saying "ensure all the forwards arrive at the lineout together to avoid a potential disadvantage."

 

[crossref]

don't forget that a QTI requires same ball and untouched ball whereas a quickly taken LO doesn't

which make me wonder again if there really is such a thing as quickly taken lineout, equity really demands that any surprise move requires the same ball.

 

[didds]

but a "quickly taken lineout" doesnt always mean "quickly". It cold be some substantial time if one side (eg non throwing) dither to get their 2nd player in situ. It is just "done quicker" than waiting for two lines of equally matched numbers to form, then have a bit of a dance, then a lift ...

 

[Phil E]

which make me wonder again if there really is such a thing as quickly taken lineout, equity really demands that any surprise move requires the same ball.

18.14 suggests there is.

Unless the throw is taken as soon as the lineout is formed,

Suggests 2+2 is all you need to then throw the ball in.

 

[didds]

absolutely Phil.

 

[crossref]

18.14 suggests there is.

Unless the throw is taken as soon as the lineout is formed,

Suggests 2+2 is all you need to then throw the ball in.

Do you think the "same ball" matters?