PDA

View Full Version : Not Straight Call



Bryan
29-08-05, 15:08
Mainly a question for pedantic referees like myself:

At a line-out (Red team throwing in), ball is not thrown in straight. No advantage played (assume Red jumper catches ball in the air cleanly), so whistle blown right away.

When is the signal for not straight given? If it is a secondary signal, then it should be given after the awarding of the scrum on the 15m line. However, if blue team elects to take a line-out, when would the signal be given?

Normally a referee would communicate with his voice i.e. "not straight, options blue?", but this should not go along with the signal to indicate a ball is not thrown in straight? I was wondering when other refs give this signal. Is it right after the whistle is blown (and hence at the same time as the verbal communication), or is it after the non-offending team decides which option they want (so at a scrum you'd trot back to the 15m line, give the primary signal for a scrum, then the secondary signal for the not straight)?

I suppose I would do it right after the whistle is blown, as the team may elect to have a line-out and then it would look silly giving the signal.

Holy crap that was a lot of writing for such a rediculously small point! Good thing it's time for lunch!

-Bryan

SimonSmith
29-08-05, 16:08
Whistle, signal and voice simultaneously.

It's like the sequence when a team kicks the ball dead in goal and yuou have the scrum/22 option.

There is no primary signal here until the team has taken the option made available from the secondary signal, IMO/

OB..
29-08-05, 16:08
Signals are for the benefit of the crowd (and his dog), so I suggest signalling "not straight" so that he knows what is going on while the captain is pondering his decision.

If a scrum, go to the mark and give the primary and secondary signals.

jboulet4648
29-08-05, 16:08
Use three signals maybe. I always tend to hold my arm out to the side which will have the scrum, or potential lineout in this case. Once they determine what they want, then you can make your scrum signal, and the not straight signal.

Another question is this.

Line out taken by Red. Ball is not thrown in entirely straight. Blue does not contest the throw.....Play on or blow the whistle?

Unless the throw is grotesquely not straight, and opposition does not contest throw...my feeling is play on. Team throwing in did not gain an advantage from the throw being not stgaright since it wasn't contested.....any other differing opinions?

madref
29-08-05, 17:08
Hi

Non contested line outs they can throw it to the out half in my book!

If they are not contesting it, then it is irrelvant if it is striaght or not

David

Bryan
29-08-05, 18:08
If they are not contesting it, then it is irrelvant if it is striaght or not

I respectfully disagree. There is naturally a greater amount of leeway that we can give if the defending team is not contesting a line-out, but there has to be an reasonable amount of effort made by the attacking team to make it a "fair contest".

By ignoring the "not straight" at the line-out if the defending team does not contest it, then this becomes the thin end of the wedge. Just as I don't like seeing forwards pass the ball back to the scrum-half in a ruck they have already won, I don't like seeing a line-out ball being thrown to the outside shoulder of the jumper so all they have to do is drop it down to the reciever. The advantage to the attacking team in a line-out is there already as they know where the ball is going before it has been thrown in (most of the time, anyways).

While I give more leeway, I still want to see a fair contest. If I whistle for a not-straight when there is no contest I will say "I know they didn't contest it fellas, but you've still got to keep it straight." This is where Equity comes into play.

-Bryan

Robert Burns
29-08-05, 19:08
I think any infringement that leads to a scrum choice (not PK or FK though) should always have the following order (asuming no advantage)

whistle
shout and signal the reason for stopage (as many times as needed)
give signal for scrum (if chosen at choice)
show team putting in

Thats what I seem to find most effective on the field, and the players seem to respond to this most.

madref
29-08-05, 19:08
Hi Bryan

How can it be a fair contest if the defending team are not jumping or being supported ?

There is not contest so if the ball is not straight what is the problem they have decided not to compete for it so as far as I am concerend play on.

More and more last season I saw lineouts being uncontested by the defending team stepping back and then one player tackling the ball carrier, not a maul a tackle. (Had a massive discussion about this on the development course last year!).

Anyway thats why the game is so so wonderful different styles and opionions!

David

OB..
29-08-05, 20:08
Madref - my observation is that you are out of step, which is likely to be confusing.

I am well aware that various bits of law are widely ignored, but there has to be some consistency about it.

If team can throw in crooked without penalty, then they make life easier for themselves. You are essentially inviting them to do it deliberately, and gamble on spotting when the opposition are planning to contest. Why should they be allowed to do that? How do they react when the opposition unexpectedly challenges? Suppose the opposition challenges in the wrong place?

madref
29-08-05, 21:08
I agree OB about consistency , but what about if it is not material to the game manage it, if it is material penailise it.

If they are not contesting line out and one is not straight a quite word with the hooker will sort it out.

Penailise everything you may loose the respect of the players and the spectators because we want a good flowing game of rugby.

David

Fabio
29-08-05, 21:08
Penailise everything you may loose the respect of the players and the spectators because we want a good flowing game of rugby.

David
I agree with you, David, when you say we all want a good flowing game of rugby. But the point here is continuity can not be achieved braking the Laws. It is the player's responsability to keep it going, not the referee's. We can help them by playing advantage and talking to players before they do something wrong, but that is it, we can not break the Law. After all, if the defending team is not contesting, how hard is it to win a straight thrown in line-out? Why give them even more advantage?

It HAS to be thrown in straight, no matter what. Well, at least I believe that. ;)

jboulet4648
29-08-05, 21:08
I agree with MadRef.

If a team throws in not straight at a particular throw in, and the defending team does not contest, then why blow it. Manage it at the next line. Let the hooker know that if the line was contested, the throw would not be allowed.

I also let the FR players know in pregame talk that I like a wide tunnel, anything in the tunnel is "straight" and if they don't contest, I am not going to call it.....

Why blow the whistle if you don't need to!

Mike Whittaker
29-08-05, 23:08
If a team throws in not straight at a particular throw in, and the defending team does not contest, then why blow it. Manage it at the next line. Let the hooker know that if the line was contested, the throw would not be allowed.



..and when the assessor says that of course they didn't contest it and that was to make it obvious to you that there was no point in contesting it when it was so crooked??

.. and I don't think you can tell a team to contest it.. It isn't like the scrum where there is a safety angle. If they don't want to contest then that is their prerogative, but it doesn't mean you can opt out of the law. For them to drive through on the clean catch is a fair tactic but for them to do this effectively the ball has to have been thrown in straight.. Well that is how I see it. :)

OB..
29-08-05, 23:08
If you allow crooked throws to go, then the hooker will note that and start aiming slightly off to take advantage. That will increase the probability of a crooked throw, and reduce the incentive for the opposition to challenge. You take this as confirmation that it doesn't matter. Frustration builds up and ...

Can't happen? Are you sure? Why take the risk?

Next game they meet a stricter referee, and have to unlearn their bad habit. Who benefits in the long run?

jboulet4648
30-08-05, 00:08
What is the materiality if there is no opposition and the throw is slightly (Grotesquely not straight yes call it) not straight?

Why not just tell the hooker to straighten his throw at the next line. If he continues to throw them in not straight, yes bang him for it, but one or two in the course of a match, if its immaterial I am not going to call it.

Same with a slightly skewed throw in to the scrum...usually give the scrum half a freebie, and tell them to watch their throws.

Mike Whittaker
30-08-05, 09:08
What is the materiality if there is no opposition and the throw is slightly (Grotesquely not straight yes call it) not straight?



Let us put this in a slightly wider perspective. "Shades of grey!"

When we are looking for clear unequivocal and decisive refereeing why introduce the concept of a 'slightly not legal' as opposed to one which is 'grotesquely not legal'. As far as the players are concerned the ball is either straight or it isn't.

You may in your own mind recognise the difference but to allow the players to know that you have seen a not straight and allowed it play on is the start of a very risky slippery path.

My advice to any ref would be to keep it simple. And the best way to get them to throw in straight is to penalise if they don't. ;)

didds
30-08-05, 10:08
maybe it wasn't contested because it wasn't quite straight and the jumper cancelled the jump on the basis it would leave his side with a weaker immediate defence-on-the-ground situation?



didds

didds
30-08-05, 10:08
so all you'll get then is crooked lineouts as no one will try to contest them (cos they are crooked) - so the lineouts can then remain uncontested.

There are parallels (oft debated here) in the scrum feed - if oits so crokked then the oppo hooker won;t try dn strike - but then as the oppo hooker isn;t striking you can allow the crokked feed.

didds

didds
30-08-05, 10:08
of course they may not have cjosed to compete because the ball cannot be competed for.

You wouldn;t expect a team to committ 8 forwatrrds to a ruck that is clearly won/lost, so why wouod you expect a team to cointest a lineout that is is unwinnable?

didds

Robert Burns
30-08-05, 11:08
You been on an allnighter Didds? your typing's not normally that bad, lol.

I agree that if you are seen to allow things that you know are not correct then you are making yourself look bad, and could even be called biast in a game where there is something at stake.

The tunnel is wide enough for the hooker to throw between, if he can't do that, he deserves the ping.

sometimes the ping is better management as next time you can look at something else.

Mike Whittaker
30-08-05, 11:08
and could even be called biast in a game where there is something at stake.



Have never heard it called that.... Even after a Bud / Lucozade shandy... :D

OB..
30-08-05, 12:08
You been on an allnighter Didds? your typing's not normally that bad, lol.[...]
could even be called biast ......
Pot. Kettle. :(

(Been there. Done that. :D )

Mike Whittaker
30-08-05, 12:08
Pot. Kettle. :(

(Been there. Done that. :D )

Come along OB.. try to keep up with play.. you are 40 minutes behind on this one... which even for assessors like us is a bit slow.... :)

SimonSmith
30-08-05, 12:08
Disagree Madref.

Not straight isn't just about the competition. It'seant to be difficult to synchonize throwing ball to a prearranged spot, lifting a man, and him getting his arms to the right place to be able to catch or palm the ball.

I've seen plenty of uncontested throws go straight, only for the team to knock it on becauase they didn't get the lift quite right.

If the throw isn't being competed, fair enough, it should be easy enough to win - there are no excuses for not getting it right!

Robert Burns
30-08-05, 12:08
Have never heard it called that.... Even after a Bud / Lucozade shandy... :D


Pot. Kettle. :(

(Been there. Done that. :D )

Grrrrrr, Trying to type fast and work just doesn't seem to come out right!!

Wheres that flogging the dead horse emoticon??????


:D

OB..
30-08-05, 16:08
http://www.fourteenballstoy.co.uk/floggingadeadhorse.htm

Robert Burns
30-08-05, 16:08
http://www.fourteenballstoy.co.uk/floggingadeadhorse.htm
lol, that'll do!

Mike Whittaker
30-08-05, 17:08
lol, that'll do!


OB wins!!! :D

didds
30-08-05, 20:08
its these mangled ex-props fingers Robert!

sometimes dey work, sometimes dey donhasjkdkjhd3t

didds

Ian_Cook
31-08-05, 00:08
Not straight isn't just about the competition. It'seant to be difficult to synchonize throwing ball to a prearranged spot, lifting a man, and him getting his arms to the right place to be able to catch or palm the ball.

Law 19.9 (g) Lifting. A line-out player must not lift a team-mate.
Penalty: Free Kick on the 15-metre line

OB. I'm surprised you let this go. You must have been watching for all that offside lucozade bud stuff going on in the backline

OB..
31-08-05, 10:08
Ian :p :)

I'm afraid I have rather given up on this one. Yes, it is 'supporting', not 'lifting', and at the top levels you are not allowed to pre-grip, but as far as I am concerned it is a distinction without a difference. I don't think I have ever seen anybody penalised for lifting.

SimonSmith
31-08-05, 12:08
Lifting is easier to type than supporting!

jboulet4648
31-08-05, 21:08
I don't think I have ever seen anybody penalised for lifting.

Well then to play devils advocate....based on the huge opposition to the viewpoint I presented.....

WHat if Team A has two huge bohemoth props who are capable of LIFTING their jumper, and Team B does not have the manpower to do this they can only SUPPORT their jumper. Well Team B seeing that Team A is LIFTING their jumper decides that the won't win any lineouts because by just supporting their jumper is not going to be enough to win a lineout so they just take a defensive role....How is this fair...Only going to lead to the same frustration that was presented to refute my point....no?

Ian_Cook
31-08-05, 22:08
OB. I'm inclined to agree with you. I was merely pointing out the Law

I'm of the opinion that they should just drop the lifting bit out of the law altogether (just don't mention lifting) thereby making it legal. If both sides are doing it, and it makes for cleaner takes and a quicker ball clearance, then wheres the problem. The ref already has so much to watch for at line-out time, anything less would surely be welcome.


jboulet.

In your case Im afraid life is unfair. If you don't think so, ask anyone who has had to try to tackle Jonah Lomu at his most devastating, like Mike Katt for example. Sometimes you cant compete with the opposition because of some aspect of their skills. a la All Blacks v France last year, when the French front row just could not compete.

Mike Whittaker
01-09-05, 08:09
I'm of the opinion that they should just drop the lifting bit out of the law altogether

Personally I would like to see all the supporting stopped. Alas it will take a high profile broken neck for it to happen as it is considered spectacular...

Incidentally I find it interesting that in law it is illegal to use a team member as support for jumping but is legal to support a player who has jumped (after the ball has been thrown of course...)
But if someone is supporting you are you not using them for support....?

Please don't bother to debate this issue... as you say Ian. 'life is unfair' :)

Ian_Cook
01-09-05, 12:09
:mad: OK Mike I wont. I'll just sit and watch :D