PDA

View Full Version : Failed Long Throw - Offside



Lee Lifeson-Peart
12-09-08, 10:09
My 14 year old son (who has passed ELRA 1&2) got into a "discussion" after a school match after the (games teacher from the oppos) referee pinged him for running in (after the ball was thrown) from 10m away to collect a long throw over the line out.

Anyway this led to a discussion between us when he asked who is offside if say the throwing in side's #10 and his opposite number run to collect a long throw. The throw doesn't make it past the 15m line and/because the opponents catch it at the back and offload to their #10 who is by now within 10 m of the lineout along with #10 of the throwing in side. Materiality?

I said I wasn't sure so he suggested I ask all those clever men in the South of England :wow: (and beyond).

So there you go!

Dixie
12-09-08, 11:09
Law 19.10 is one of those pigs.
19.10 OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO PLAYERS NOT IN THE LINEOUT
In general, a player not taking part in a lineout must stay at least 10 metres behind the line of touch, or on or behind that player’s goal line if that is nearer, until the lineout ends.
There are two exceptions to this:
Exception 1: Long throw in. If the player who is throwing in throws the ball beyond the 15-metre line, a player of the same team may run forward to take the ball. If that player does so, an opponent may also run forward.
Penalty: Penalty Kick on the offending team’s offside line, opposite the place of infringement but not less than 15 metres from the touchline.As written, the exception only applies once the ball has crossed the 15m line. However, in practice it would be impossible for any back to run 10m and field this ball from a standing start once he sees the ball cross the 15m line. So the attacking #10 starts his run when the ball is thrown, on the basis of a pre-arranged call. The oppos #10 sees his counterpart encroach, and does so himself.

If the ball never makes it to the 15m line, in theory both 10s are offside, with the fault lying with the the attacking #10. The defender has merely shadowed the attacker's action, as the law allows him to do. In practice, I might either let this go (both 10s encroachment cancelling each other out) or, if the attacking 10 gets an unfair advantage, reset the lineout. I would be unlikely to go to a PK as the failure is one of competence rather than intent.

Simon Thomas
12-09-08, 11:09
As Dixie says law book and practice are in conflict.

I would expect both #10s to retire once ball is caught within 15m line, and await ball or back foot moving from l-o-t.

In reality both are likely to come up and stay there, see what happens with probable ensuing maul (which is likely to move off line of touch) and if both on back foot then materially no difference to coming up later.

In this case you say ball was fed off to original defending #10, who came upmirroring the attacking #10 going for long throw - which they messed up and lost !

U15 level - play on for me.

OB..
12-09-08, 11:09
You need Law 19.15 (b) Exception:


Long throw in. There is an exception to the Law of

offside at the lineout. It applies if the ball is thrown beyond the 15-

metre line. As soon as the ball leaves the hands of the player
throwing in, any players of the thrower’s team may run for the
ball.
This means that a player taking part in the lineout may run infield
beyond the 15-metre line, and a player not taking part in the
lineout may run forward across the offside line.
If this happens, an opponent may also run infield or run forward.
However, if a player runs infield or runs forward to take a long
throw in, and the ball is not thrown beyond the 15-metre line, this
player is offside and must be penalised.

So the #10 can start to run when the ball leaves the thrower's hands. If the throw does not reach the 15 m line, play penalty advantage if appropriate

SimonSmith
12-09-08, 12:09
Agree with OB.

It's similar to the situation that came up a couple of years with the long throw and the pod at the back going beyond the 15m.

If memory serves, if they went beyond the 15m and collected the ball, then great, play on. If the throw didn't make it - under thrown, caught by the opposition, then they are liable to penalty.

Seems to me to be the same situation.

Dickie E
12-09-08, 13:09
You need Law 19.15 (b) Exception:


Long throw in. There is an exception to the Law of

offside at the lineout. It applies if the ball is thrown beyond the 15-

metre line. As soon as the ball leaves the hands of the player
throwing in, any players of the thrower’s team may run for the
ball.
This means that a player taking part in the lineout may run infield
beyond the 15-metre line, and a player not taking part in the
lineout may run forward across the offside line.
If this happens, an opponent may also run infield or run forward.
However, if a player runs infield or runs forward to take a long
throw in, and the ball is not thrown beyond the 15-metre line, this
player is offside and must be penalised.

So the #10 can start to run when the ball leaves the thrower's hands. If the throw does not reach the 15 m line, play penalty advantage if appropriate



1/2 an answer. If both #10's run in, who is the penalty against?

OB..
12-09-08, 14:09
Dickie E - that has already been covered by Dixie quoting Law 19.10 above.

Deeps
12-09-08, 15:09
Dickie E - The team throwing in have displayed incompetence, that team's #10 would have run in first in response to the signal/call and thus committed the first offside offence when the ball failed to travel 15 metres.

As for Dixie's 'I would be unlikely to go to a PK as the failure is one of competence rather than intent.', intent is not an issue here. To be boring once again, rugby is a game and has laws, penalties and consequences. Penalty advantage would be entirely appropriate however.

Lee Lifeson-Peart
12-09-08, 17:09
Penalty advantage would be entirely appropriate however.

Penalty advantage to the non throwing in team?

I my scenario the non throwing in team end up with posession with #10 collecting the ball in an "offside" position. Or is he not offside because he ran in on the basis of the throwing in team's #10 going first?

:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:


1/2 an answer. If both #10's run in, who is the penalty against?

Lee Lifeson-Peart
12-09-08, 17:09
U15 level - play on for me.

Simon. The scenario came out of a conversation with my 14 year old - it didn't take place. He posed the "what if" and I didn't know.

OB..
12-09-08, 19:09
Recap: ball thrown in by Red who try to throw long. Red 10 advances as soon as the ball leaves the thrower's hands, and Blue 10 responds. Throw is too low, and a Blue forward manages to deflect it before it reaches the 15 metre line. Blue 10 gathers. Correct?

The argument is that both 10s are offside, and should not play the ball.

Realistically, Blue will always respond to Red's move. If you then penalise him for playing the ball (perhaps instinctively) when it is tapped to him, Red has benefited from its own error if he is penalised. That is inequitable. Red has caused the problem and must live with the outcome.

Lee Lifeson-Peart
13-09-08, 11:09
OB

That's it.

I think that's what I'd do having had two days to think about it! :biggrin: Unfortunately we are rarely granted that long to make a decision.

Cheers

Dickie E
13-09-08, 22:09
If you then penalise him for playing the ball (perhaps instinctively) when it is tapped to him, Red has benefited from its own error if he is penalised. That is inequitable. Red has caused the problem and must live with the outcome.

I think you're saying "play on"?

I disagree. Blue can't & shouldn't benefit from a Red offence by committing an offence themselves. It's the same as saying "Red threw a punch so Blue get a free shot in return".

As this is a lineout offence I'd have the lineout retaken. Similarly, if Red jumped early on a Red throw and Blue followed suit I's blow it up, have a word and start again. I certainly wouldn't let Blue win the ball under the banner of Red has caused the problem and must live with the outcome.

OB..
13-09-08, 23:09
I think you're saying "play on"?
Yes.


I disagree. Blue can't & shouldn't benefit from a Red offence by committing an offence themselves. It's the same as saying "Red threw a punch so Blue get a free shot in return".
No it isn't.
.
Blue was entitled to assume that Red was advancing because he knew the ball was going long. The law allows Blue to take that view. This is nothing like retaliation.

It only becomes a potential offence if the throw doesn't go long.

As it stands the law seems to make Blue technically offside, which would mean giving Red a penalty as a consequence of his team's mistake. I think that is highly inequitable.

I see this as a gap in the law.


As this is a lineout offence I'd have the lineout retaken.
For a penalty offence? surely not.


Similarly, if Red jumped early on a Red throw and Blue followed suit I's blow it up, have a word and start again.
It is not similar. The early jump occurs before the ball is put into play.


I certainly wouldn't let Blue win the ball under the banner of Red has caused the problem and must live with the outcome.
In this case I think that is the fair result.

Dickie E
13-09-08, 23:09
Y


For a penalty offence? surely not.




Yeah, no problem. eg During line dance both teams step across line of touch. Blow whistle, get them sorted, start again.

OB..
13-09-08, 23:09
Line dance is also before the ball is in play.