PDA

View Full Version : Tramsman Offside at a lineout



Dixie
07-11-08, 16:11
What Chopper evocatively calls the Tramsman (immediate opponent to the thrower) is a lineout participant, and increasingly these days, he's the opposition scrum half - and so likely to act differently than his predecessor in that role.

Scenario: Red throw in on Blue's 22m line, and the ball is caught at the back. A maul forms. Blue Tramsman has been running into the SH position, but on realising that the ball is well set up by Red, he moves beyond the 15m line and stands wide, opposite the Red #10 in line with the back foot of the maul. This is just a few metres wide of the posts. He doesn't hear, or ignores, the ref's calls to get onside.

Red release the ball, the ref's arm goes out and he calls Penalty Advantage Red. No advantage comes - primarily due to the speed with which Blue #9 closes down the options. Where is the PK awarded?

Options as I see them are:

- at the line of the base of the maul, almost in front of the posts (no justification other than a vague sense of equity)
- at the line of the base of the maul, on the 15m mark [law 19.16(d)]
- at the line of the offside line for the backs, on the 15m line [Law 19.16(d)]
- at the line of the offside line for the backs, almost in front of the posts (i.e in line with where the #9 stood)


the same sort of thinking applies equally when the tramsman stays in the trams, level with the back froot of the maul. Should the offside be 15m in on the line of the back foot, 15m in at the offside line for the winger, or behind where the tramsman was standing at the offside line for the winger? Not at all clear to me - your advice valued, please.

tim White
07-11-08, 16:11
Option 4. He went beyond 15m so his offside line becomes 10m back from LOT.:nono:

Deeps
07-11-08, 17:11
Option 2. He may take part in the line out once the ball has been thrown in; he chose not to join the maul which is part of the ongoing line out and so his offside line becomes the back foot of the maul within the 15 metre line. So assuming he remained behind the back foot then the place for the penalty would be on the line of the back foot offside line where the #9 crossed the 15 metres line.

Supposing instead he had been the last man in the line out and, expecting a long throw, had stepped over the 15 metre mark which he would be allowed to do if the ball was thrown to him. Having stepped over the 15 metre line without getting the ball thrown to him then he is offside at that point because this is 'the offending team's offside line' as it applies to him. Likewise the offside line for the #9 that has run around is the back foot of the maul as he has become a participating player in the line out although not in the maul and not a member of the backs either. He is effectively a flanker at this point.

The tramsman who stays in the tramlines also abides by the back foot of the maul and, should he step forward beyond the back foot then he would be offside at that point where he steps forward.

David J.
07-11-08, 18:11
I see the primary offense being 19.13(e). "No player of either team...may leave the lineout until it has ended."

So I choose Option 5: PK on the 15m line and LOT.

OB..
07-11-08, 18:11
I see the primary offense being 19.13(e). "No player of either team...may leave the lineout until it has ended."
The #9 is not a "lineout player", he is a "participating player", which is different (see the Definitions section).

It was a maul as part of a lineout, so 19.16 (d) applies.

Deeps
07-11-08, 18:11
When a maul has formed at the line out, those participating players (including our #9) who choose not to become part of this maul are now governed by the offside line at the back foot of the maul Law 19.16(d). Technically the #9 never joined the line out although he remains a line out participating player.

So the #9 has two constraints (1) the line out maul's back foot and (2) the 15 metre line.

David J.
07-11-08, 18:11
19.13(e) says in full (I originally edited out of laziness):
"No player of either team participating in the lineout may leave the lineout until it has ended."

Clearly that covers receiver and tramsman. PK under 19.13(e).

Edit: Also it would be odd for a player to become offsides by moving sideways, would it not?

Dixie
07-11-08, 19:11
It was a maul as part of a lineout, so 19.16 (d) applies.So where is the penalty? On the 15m somewhere, but is that in line with the back foot or the three quarters?

Deeps
07-11-08, 19:11
19.13(e) says in full (I originally edited out of laziness):
"No player of either team participating in the lineout may leave the lineout until it has ended."

Clearly that covers receiver and tramsman. PK under 19.13(e).

Edit: Also it would be odd for a player to become offsides by moving sideways, would it not?

Yes David but as I said in my previous post and as echoed by OB, the #9 has not joined the line out even though he remains a participating player which are two different things. To spell that out, as the scrum half or the player throwing into a line out or the players in opposition to either, you are a participating player in the line out set piece even though you are not a line out player e.g. you are not actually in the line out. So in Dixie's example you cannot leave the line out because you (the #9) have not joined it.

As to becoming offside by moving sideways, this is what happens when, again in my example, the last man in the line out steps over the 15 metre line to take a long throw that doesn't happen thus making him offside i.a.w. Law 19.15 (b) Exception 3rd paragraph.

David J.
07-11-08, 19:11
Some of the law regarding"lineout players" and "participating players" is clearly vague ("clearly vague" an oxymoron?), but I don't think that's true in this case.

The receiver and transman are defined as being 2 of the 3 types of "participating players" (Definitions). The heading of 19.13 is "Offsides when taking part in the lineout". The law regarding leaving the lineout (19.13(e)) specifies players "participating in the lineout". Taking Part = Participating.

I'm not sure how much further we can go here.

Deeps
07-11-08, 20:11
Some of the law regarding"lineout players" and "participating players" is clearly vague ("clearly vague" an oxymoron?), but I don't think that's true in this case.

The receiver and transman are defined as being 2 of the 3 types of "participating players" (Definitions). The heading of 19.13 is "Offsides when taking part in the lineout". The law regarding leaving the lineout (19.13(e)) specifies players "participating in the lineout". Taking Part = Participating.

I'm not sure how much further we can go here.

Good point David, no wonder confusion abounds. I think of lineout players and participating players and try and deal with them separately. Perhaps 'participating' in 19.13 (e) is misplaced which could instead read 'No lineout players of either team may leave the lineout until it has ended.' to avoid confusion.

chopper15
07-11-08, 21:11
. . .

I'm not sure how much further we can go here.



'Trammer' instead of 'tramsman'. Don't want to be sexist do we?

It is, after all, a recognised mining term for an operator working the tramlines.

ddjamo
07-11-08, 21:11
#2 is where I would go to make the mark

Dixie
08-11-08, 10:11
Edit: Also it would be odd for a player to become offsides by moving sideways, would it not?Scrum half follows the ball, then moves 2m wider. There is now one fewer limited-length offside lines after the ping-pong of rulings regarding the SH offside line at the base of the scrum, but the one for lineout players at a maul is indeed one of them. It is only 10m long - 5m to 15m lines.

Deeps
08-11-08, 11:11
Scrum half follows the ball, then moves 2m wider. There is now one fewer limited-length offside lines after the ping-pong of rulings regarding the SH offside line at the base of the scrum, but the one for lineout players at a maul is indeed one of them. It is only 10m long - 5m to 15m lines.

Well, actually, if a maul forms at the lineout then all lineout players who decide not to join in the lineout maul have the maul's back foot plus the 5 - 15m to worry about. That is except those non lineout players but players participating in the lineout who were either throwing in or in direct opposition to the player throwing in who elect to remain in the tram lines. Their offside line is also the back foot of their respective lineout mauls but this line can extend from 0 - 15 metres.

chopper15
08-11-08, 15:11
Am I right in assuming that as soon as the maul forms 2 players are free to occupy the offside area ie. touch to 15m and 10m to opp's ball lines?

If so, when the receiver (who chose to take the position of 'the player in direct opposition to the player throwing in the ball' ie. the trammer) moves across to cover the maul, can another player enter the fray from the 10m line . . . . say, running just inside the 15m line to the o/s line of the ball to mark the FH?

David J.
08-11-08, 15:11
It's utterly irrelevant, but no where in the law does it say the offsides lines at rucks and mauls at a lineout do not extend across the field. Or that a player crossing that line 20m from touch is NOT offsides.

The player cannot legally cross the 15m anyway, so it doesn't matter.

Deeps
09-11-08, 00:11
Am I right in assuming that as soon as the maul forms 2 players are free to occupy the offside area ie. touch to 15m and 10m to opp's ball lines?

Under Law 19.4 the player throwing in and his immediate opponent have four options which they can do as soon as the ball has been thrown in, they don't have to wait for a maul to form though it probably already has by the time they get there:

(1) they may stay within the 5 metre tramlines but behind the lineout maul's back foot.

(2) they may retire to the 10 metre offside line.

(3) they may join in the lineout and or the subsequent maul.

(4) they may occupy the receiver's position if that is empty.

Law, which predates the current ELVs of course, then states that if they then go anywhere else they are offside. However this has been further complicated and best illustrated if I quote directly from an Ed Morrison letter dated 30 Sep 08.

'At a recent ERC Match Officials Conference held in Dublin agreement between the six unions represented could not be reached on the position of the direct opponent of the player throwing the ball into the lineout. It was agreed to seek confirmation from the iRB and this was sought with immediate effect.

The outcome of the clarification confirmed the direct opponent of the player throwing the ball into the lineout must take up a position at least two metres from the five metre line and he is permitted to stand between his teamís lineout and his teamís 10 metre off side line

Our present interpretation clearly states the direct opponent of the player throwing the ball into the line has to remain in a position close to line of touch.

.......

Please accept my sincere apologies for any inconvenience.

Kind regards


Ed Morrison'

Clearly the RFU were stunned by this revelation from the iRB and were at pains to say so. Thus, in addition to the other places the 'trammers' can go, the player in opposition to the player throwing in may now take up a position between the line of touch, or the maul's back foot, anywhere all the way back to his 10 metre line providing that he is no closer than 2 metres to the 5 metre line.

Make sense...?



If so, when the receiver (who chose to take the position of 'the player in direct opposition to the player throwing in the ball' ie. the trammer) moves across to cover the maul, can another player enter the fray from the 10m line . . . . say, running just inside the 15m line to the o/s line of the ball to mark the FH?

No.

chopper15
09-11-08, 17:11
Many thanks, Deeps, for such a comprehensive reply. Much appreciated.



But I will still pursue my query for the following reasons;

Morrison's statement:
The outcome of the clarification confirmed the direct opponent of the player throwing the ball into the lineout must take up a position at least two metres from the five metre line and he is permitted to stand between his team’s lineout and his team’s 10 metre off side line.

Deeps, this is before the ball is thrown in.

I state this because as soon as the ball is thrown in the 'trammer' can move out and act as 'receiver' . . they're both 'participating players' and there's nothing I can find in the LoG which supports Morrison's next sentence, which even contradicts these two interchangable positions.

Our present interpretation clearly states the direct opponent of the player throwing the ball into the line has to remain in a position close to line of touch.

Hence my original query which, perhaps, I didn't phrase too well.

Deeps
09-11-08, 19:11
Deeps, this is before the ball is thrown in.

I state this because as soon as the ball is thrown in the 'trammer' can move out and act as 'receiver' . . they're both 'participating players' and there's nothing I can find in the LoG which supports Morrison's next sentence, which even contradicts these two interchangable positions.

Our present interpretation clearly states the direct opponent of the player throwing the ball into the line has to remain in a position close to line of touch.

Hence my original query which, perhaps, I didn't phrase too well.

What Mr Morrison is saying in his sentence beginning 'Our present interpretation clearly states ...' is that up until this earth shattering news as to where the iRB now say the player in opposition may stand, our advise was ... In other words, we are gobsmacked and apologise for the volte face which is not our fault.

As to your original query. At a lineout, the entire team is split into two types of players,viz participating players (most of whom are lineout players) and 'players not taking part in the lineout'. The former have their offside lines at the lineout and at the subsequent line out maul while the 'players not taking part in the lineout' must remain at least 10 metres from the line of touch until the lineout/lineout maul is over or the lineout maul has moved away from the line of touch.

If you have decided to use your #9 as the 'trammer' so as to keep a scrum player in the lineout then that is your choice. If he then feels he is needed at the lineout maul he is free to move accordingly (back foot and 15 metres prevailing of course). If he needs to be replaced where he was, and I cannot think why he might need to be as there is no longer any requirement to have a 'trammer' as the ball has been thrown in, then any of the participating players may do so. Remember, it was your choice to put him in the tramlines, you could just as easily put in a flanker, second row or prop. However, for all those 'players not taking part in the lineout', the lineout is still in play so the answer is still 'no'.

Dixie
09-11-08, 19:11
Their offside line is also the back foot of their respective lineout mauls but this line can extend from 0 - 15 metres.Is Deeps correct about this? I looked, and failed to findd anything to support my original view that the offside line for participating players is of limited length.

My assumption was that the maul occurred within the lineout, and therefore the participating players has to remain within the lineout. Going back to absolute basics, does the lineout extend from the 0-15m, from the 5-15m or is it technically unlimited? The more I look at this, the more confused I get.

The lineout ends when the ball or a player carrying it moves beyond the 5m or 15m lines [19.8(b)]. This suggests to me that these are the physical extremities of the lineout. But does this also mean that the offside line for lineout players not taking part in a maul is also limited? If so, why would the offside line extend into the tramline as Deeps asserts?

The hooker and his immediate opponent are given licence to stay within the 5m channel by 19.14(a). This provision appears to give the thrower and the trammer a standing permission to stay within the 5m channel ahead of the offside line for the non-participating players. It's not clear whether this standing permission is affected by the formation of a maul, but there seems no good reason to suggest it does.

Can anyone give a good reason why the offside line for the participating players should be limited in length at all? Do we need to fall back on the prohibition against leaving the lineout once it has been joined? I'm beginning to doubt my sanity.

Deeps
09-11-08, 19:11
Can anyone give a good reason why the offside line for the participating players should be limited in length at all? Do we need to fall back on the prohibition against leaving the lineout once it has been joined? I'm beginning to doubt my sanity.


Let me try and preserve your sanity Dixie. Of course much of this would not be seen in reality but you have the line of touch and the 15 metres marks as absolute offside constraints and of course the lineout extends from the 5 - 15 metres marks.

In theory of course the trammers can stay in the tramlines, although why is another matter! Yet if they are not part of the forming/formed lineout maul then, along with all other participating players who choose not to join the lineout maul (usually the flankers), they must be behind the rear foot of the maul.

That is their new offside line but, and heaven only knows why, they are taking a break in the tramlines and are therefore going to be at less than the 5 metre mark. So the trammers only, in theory, have the maul's back foot and the 15 metre lines as their offside lines whereas all other participating e.g. lineout players not participating in the maul are restricted to 5 -15 metres and the back foot. I would think that once the trammers have had their break and come to join in then they too theoretically have to respect the 5 - 15 metres and back foot.

Then of course, the lineout maul could move into the tramlines too with the lineout still in play as it would if it crossed the 15 metre line laterally. Interestingly enough, Law 19 only defines the lineout as being over if all the feet of the participants in the maul are clear of the line of touch. If the maul moves sideways outside the 5 - 15 metre marks but is still on the line of touch then the lineout is still in play until the referee decides the maul has become static.

In practice, if a maul forms at the lineout, keep all lineout players not in the maul behind the back foot and inside the 15 metre line unless they want to retire to the 10 metre line.

OB..
09-11-08, 23:11
Law 19.8 (b) says that the lineout ends when the ball or a player carrying it crosses the 5m or 15 m line. That therefore applies even if the ball is in a maul at the time.

I am going to resist the words "tramsman" and "trammer". They are jargon unique to this forum that IMHO would puzzle anybody else. Even the term "tramlines" is not standard usage.

When checking the lineout you could say "Blue - you need a man in the 5m area", or simply "Blue - who is your 5m man?"

chopper15
10-11-08, 00:11
I am going to resist the words "tramsman" and "trammer". They are jargon unique to this forum that IMHO would puzzle anybody else. Even the term "tramlines" is not standard usage.

When checking the lineout you could say "Blue - you need a man in the 5m area", or simply "Blue - who is your 5m man?"



I think it was in Friday's Telegraph, OB, a rugby correspondent referred to a 'run down the tramlines'. I think we all accept where that might be . . I've used it for years.

I suggested 'trammer' (tramsman being sexist) for that reason; a convenient identity for 'the direct opponent of the player throwing the ball into the lineout' and sympathetically associated with the tramlines.

Of course your suggestion, "Blue - who is your 5m man?" is OK, but it does sound a bit like an enquiry after a specialist sprinter?

Sooner or later someone, somewhere is going to coin a phrase for it, OB, so why not originate it from here . . . . 'Five-meter-man', 'trammer' or 'what'?

Dickie E
10-11-08, 01:11
The term 'tramlines' is widely accepted where I am but we still have functioning trams (sometimes they even fly!).

You can't have trams or tram lines without 'conductors' so maybe we could use that term? :wait: :D

chopper15
10-11-08, 01:11
The term 'tramlines' is widely accepted where I am but we still have functioning trams (sometimes they even fly!).

You can't have trams or tram lines without 'conductors' so maybe we could use that term? :wait: :D

. . . or 'sleeper'?

OB..
10-11-08, 01:11
chopper15 - see my little story at http://www.rugbyrefs.com/forums/showthread.php?p=54052 #91.

Basically players do not need a term. It may be convenient for referees who want to discuss the ELV, but I doubt if that is enough to get it into common currency.

chopper15
10-11-08, 02:11
chopper15 - see my little story at http://www.rugbyrefs.com/forums/showthread.php?p=54052 #91.

Basically players do not need a term. It may be convenient for referees who want to discuss the ELV, but I doubt if that is enough to get it into common currency.


Ref. OB; Your invention therefore is derived from a term that people would have to guess at

I suggested it primarily for convenient use in this forum instead of, 'the direct opponent of the player throwing the ball into the lineout', as you recognise, OB.

So why the continued put-downs? :sad: And I see no problems even if it did spread and got recognised beyond this forum.

David J.
10-11-08, 02:11
No jargon ever starts out commonly accepted.


PS I like "tramsman" better despite its un-PC implications.

chopper15
10-11-08, 02:11
No jargon ever starts out commonly accepted.


PS I like "tramsman" better despite its un-PC implications.

But besides being un-PC, David, wouldn't it have to be Tramlines' Man?

Dixie
10-11-08, 09:11
you have the line of touch and the 15 metres marks as absolute offside constraints and of course the lineout extends from the 5 - 15 metres marks. Deeps - where is the justification for saying that the 15m mark is an absolute offside constraint?


Then of course, the lineout maul could move into the tramlines too with the lineout still in play as it would if it crossed the 15 metre line laterally. Interestingly enough, Law 19 only defines the lineout as being over if all the feet of the participants in the maul are clear of the line of touch. If the maul moves sideways outside the 5 - 15 metre marks but is still on the line of touch then the lineout is still in play until the referee decides the maul has become static. Law 19.8(b) - The lineout ends when the ball or a player carrying it leaves the lineout. This includes: ... when the ball or a player carrying the ball moves into the area between the 5m line and the touchline, the lineout ends.


In practice, if a maul forms at the lineout, keep all lineout players not in the maul behind the back foot and inside the 15 metre line unless they want to retire to the 10 metre line.Again, where is the justification for keeping them to this limit? Is there anything other than the prohibition against leaving the lineout before it has finished?

Dixie
10-11-08, 09:11
But besides being un-PC, David, wouldn't it have to be Tramlines' Man?
Tramliner?

OB..
10-11-08, 09:11
chopper15 - I am not trying to put you down, just using my experience in linguistics and noting the need to be able to communicate. Jargon has a purpose within a technical community. I fear this one is too small.

Deeps
10-11-08, 10:11
Deeps - where is the justification for saying that the 15m mark is an absolute offside constraint?

Because the lineout is not over and occurs between the 5 - 15 metre marks.


Law 19.8(b) - The lineout ends when the ball or a player carrying it leaves the lineout. This includes: ... when the ball or a player carrying the ball moves into the area between the 5m line and the touchline, the lineout ends.

Yes, concur but when a ruck or a maul forms at the lineout then this is superceeded by Law 19.8(b) ' When a ruck or a maul develops in a lineout, and all the feet of all the players in the ruck or maul move beyond the line of touch, the lineout ends.'

It's probably hair splitting and nothing to be too pedantic about but the interesting thing is that with the ruck or maul, the definition of when the lineout is over only covers movement up and down the field of play. There is no prescribed end to the ruck/maul if it moves sideways, either to the tramlines or in field beyond the 15 metre mark where presumably the referee resorts to deciding when it has become static, e.g. 'Use it or lose it' time. What happens to the participating players not part of the maul in this situation is beyond my powers of interpretation and I would probably call the lineout over at this point for no other reason than it is now getting all too difficult.


Again, where is the justification for keeping them to this limit? Is there anything other than the prohibition against leaving the lineout before it has finished? No, I don't think so.

Dixie
10-11-08, 12:11
Deeps - where is the justification for saying that the 15m mark is an absolute offside constraint? ... Is there anything other than the prohibition against leaving the lineout before it has finished?



No, I don't think so. So moving beyond the 15m line is not an offside offence, it is a "leaving the lineout before it ends" offence, subject to a Free Kick rather than a PK - that's interesting.

As regards a lineout player moving into the tramlines, remember 19.9(n):


When the ball has been thrown beyond a player in the lineout, that player may move to the space between the touchline and the 5-metre line. If the player moves into that space the player must not move towards that player’s goal line before the lineout ends, except in a peeling off movement.
Penalty: Free Kick on the 15-metre line

this suggests pretty strongly that incorrectly moving beyond either the 5m or 15m lines during a maul within a lineout is a FK offence.

OB..
10-11-08, 12:11
It's probably hair splitting and nothing to be too pedantic about but the interesting thing is that with the ruck or maul, the definition of when the lineout is over only covers movement up and down the field of play. There is no prescribed end to the ruck/maul if it moves sideways, either to the tramlines or in field beyond the 15 metre mark where presumably the referee resorts to deciding when it has become static, e.g. 'Use it or lose it' time. What happens to the participating players not part of the maul in this situation is beyond my powers of interpretation and I would probably call the lineout over at this point for no other reason than it is now getting all too difficult.

from Law 19.8 (b)
When the ball or a player carrying the ball moves into the area between the 5-metre line and the touchline, the lineout ends.
When the ball is thrown beyond the 15-metre line, or when a player takes or puts it beyond that line, the lineout ends.

This applies to the ball in a maul. The lineout is over, though the maul may not be.

It is also possible for the maul to be over before the lineout is eg ball unplayable, maul has not moved.

chopper15
10-11-08, 13:11
Tramliner?

Best so far, Dixie! I go along with that one.:clap:

PS. Regarding OB's point on jargon, perhaps 'thrower' and 'non-thrower' would be more acceptable?

Deeps
10-11-08, 14:11
So moving beyond the 15m line is not an offside offence, it is a "leaving the lineout before it ends" offence, subject to a Free Kick rather than a PK - that's interesting.

As regards a lineout player moving into the tramlines, remember 19.9(n):

this suggests pretty strongly that incorrectly moving beyond either the 5m or 15m lines during a maul within a lineout is a FK offence.

I think you will find this is trumped by '19.15 (b) Exception: Long throw in. There is an exception to the Law of offside at the lineout....However [para 3], 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.'

I think this establishes that it is possible to be offside by going infield of the 15 metre line at the lineout. Certainly, if a flanker takes a metre or two liberty to have a better chance at say the ball winning side's #10 then I would certainly ping him for offside even though he had not crossed the line of touch. The same would therefore not be inappropriate in your original scenario of the #9 going wide.

Deeps
10-11-08, 14:11
from Law 19.8 (b)
When the ball or a player carrying the ball moves into the area between the 5-metre line and the touchline, the lineout ends.
When the ball is thrown beyond the 15-metre line, or when a player takes or puts it beyond that line, the lineout ends.

This applies to the ball in a maul. The lineout is over, though the maul may not be.

It is also possible for the maul to be over before the lineout is eg ball unplayable, maul has not moved.


This makes absolute sense of course in the grander scheme because by the time a maul has moved this far, the notion of keeping the backs 20 metres apart to give them an opportunity to do something with quick ball has probably passed and we are in a different phase of play from the lineout. Mind you, if the maul is still within the 5 - 15 metre zone I think all other lineout participating players not in the maul need to be so too and behind the back foot.