They have to wait for us sir?

[Ciaran Trainor]

Had this scenario a few weeks ago.
Red v Blue, Red had said before the game that they like to get on with lineouts quickly.
Both teams were clear with numbers called, 75% was 5, so no confusion there.
Blue kick for touch in open play, Red line out.
I arrive, make a mark Red call numbers and form up I move to back of line.
Blue slow to react and as soon as two blue are in the line Red throw in and win lineout, play continues.
Blue complain "they have to give us time to match numbers".
I explain I'm there, red are there and want to go and with two of your players there, the line has formed.
Thoughts please.

 

[Shelflife]

Sounds fine to me.

 

[didds]

bang on.

Red dont even have to wait for 2 x blue to arrive. they can take a quick throw in - which could be directly to the person in the receiver position at that juncture.

Summary: the non throwing team really need to get their sharpish to best defend a QTI

 

[Phil E]

Spot on for me.
The law below implies that you can take the throw as soon as the lineout is formed (minimum 2+2), but if they throw in quickly they can't get a FK for numbers.

Law 18.14
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. Sanction: Free-kick.

 

[Phil E]

bang on.

Red dont even have to wait for 2 x blue to arrive. they can take a quick throw in - which could be directly to the person in the receiver position at that juncture.

Summary: the non throwing team really need to get their sharpish to best defend a QTI

Don't get confused between a "quick throw in" which doesn't require a lineout to be formed; and a "quickly taken lineout" which does.
See my law reference above.

 

[didds]

Don't get confused between a "quick throw in" which doesn't require a lineout to be formed; and a "quickly taken lineout" which does.
See my law reference above.

that was exactly my point.

red don't have to even wait for blue to arrive to throw the ball in.

they can throw the ball in backwards as well if blue doesn't arrive.

Once blue have deigned to add two players the throw in must then be straight as the L/O is formed.

Red never ever have to wait for blue ever for those options of when to throw in. The only nuance is minimum two and where the ball can be thrown.

 

[Ciaran Trainor]

Just to clarify, the Quick Throw in cannot be taken as the ball has touched somebody.

 

[didds]

fine.

then its either penalty red for blue wasting time getting to the lineout, or red can throw as soon as two blues arrive.

 

[crossref]

Letting them throw sounds like a recipe for chaos.. what if it's exactly the same next lineout

Manage it, and have a proper lineout

 

[Decorily]

Just to clarify, the Quick Throw in cannot be taken as the ball has touched somebody.

Expand please. .

 

[Jarrod Burton]

Expand please. .

I think Ctrainor is saying that a ball in touch who has touched another person (with the exception of the player who took it into touch) can't be used for a QTI.

5. A quick throw is disallowed and a lineout is awarded to the same team if:
a. A lineout had already been formed; or
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; or
c. A different ball is used from the one that originally went into touch.

That doesn't preclude them from waiting until there are two opposition in the line before throwing in but this could be a recipe for chaos. As the ref if you were going to try to PK Blue for timewasting at the LO, everyone better be ready for a scrum or you've painted yourself into a corner for ongoing timewasting PK's and looking like a jobsworth.

 

[Phil E]

Lets face it 99 times out of 100 it's the defending team who are there first waiting for the attackers to join the line.

If on the odd occasion the attackers are there first and the defenders are messing about there is nothing to stop the attackers throwing in once the line is formed (minimum two people). In fact the law allows it (see my law quote above), so why would you stop them taking advantage of the defenders being half asleep?

Would you stop a quick tap at a penalty because it's a recipe for chaos? I see no difference.

 

[Zebra1922]

Letting them throw sounds like a recipe for chaos.. what if it's exactly the same next lineout

Manage it, and have a proper lineout

So what if the same happens next line out? Hopefully the opposition will learn to get to the line out on time. Now if the throwing team are springing over I’ll manage that and make them wait. But if they form normally and the oppo are just slow, I’m not going to penalise the throwing team.

 

[Jarrod Burton]

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? What if a Red player is approaching the LO and is in an offside position when the throw in occurs and then takes part? Or the Blue players are in an offside position even though they were approaching the LO in good faith? What takes precedence - Blue players who are approaching the LO to match numbers being offside at the throw or the throwing team undertaking an action to try to catch the opposition in the offside position?

 

[Dickie E]

fine.

then its either penalty red for blue wasting time getting to the lineout,

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

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

 

[crossref]

If on the odd occasion the attackers are there first and the defenders are messing about there is nothing to stop the attackers throwing in once the line is formed (minimum two people). In fact the law allows it (see my law quote above), so why would you stop them taking advantage of the defenders being half asleep?

Would you stop a quick tap at a penalty because it's a recipe for chaos? I see no difference.

If you ever tried it, I suspect you'd see the difference

 

[Phil E]

If you ever tried it, I suspect you'd see the difference

I have had lineouts where the attacking team are set and the defenders aren't, and they ask if they can go. I say yes.
It only happens once, the defenders are always there first after that.

 

[Blackberry]

This "its OK to go with two in each line" is the kind of thing players should learn from their coaches, not on the pitch from us. I wish there was a way of referees feeding back to the clubs common problems. The other refs would see it too
Common problems I find are defending a quickly taken penalty and swift line outs. If the refs and the players both read the same explanation there's be less penalties and more consensus.

 

[crossref]

This "its OK to go with two in each line" is the kind of thing players should learn from their coaches, not on the pitch from us. I wish there was a way of referees feeding back to the clubs common problems. The other refs would see it too
Common problems I find are defending a quickly taken penalty and swift line outs. If the refs and the players both read the same explanation there's be less penalties and more consensus.

RFU should write some Game Management Guidelines ?
I would be very much in favour .. many unions write them, can't understand why the RFU don't

 

[crossref]

I have had lineouts where the attacking team are set and the defenders aren't, and they ask if they can go. I say yes.
It only happens once, the defenders are always there first after that.

Well, that taught them, didnt it?