PDA

View Full Version : Italy not engaging at Lineout



gillburt
15-01-09, 15:01
I've been watching some archive footage of the Italian scrum not engaging with the opposition at the lineout.

White throw-in, white catch ball, Blue do not even jump.
As soon as White bind together, Blue keep backing off (being very careful not to touch any white players)
Eventually a blue player nips round the back of the white players and grabs the white player with the ball (not a tackle)
Ref pings White, but I cannot make out what it is for.

My understanding from a law pov is that by not engaging, a ruck is not formed from the lineout.
Blue wait until the hindmost foot of the white team is past LoT, therefore lineout over.
As there is no ruck, there is no offside, so blue player can then come round the back and grab the white player with the ball (doesn't tackle him)
What I don't understand at that point is why white get pinged?

Hopefully some of you have seen this tactic by Italy and can explain what the penalty is actually for?

Thanks

chesref
15-01-09, 16:01
They get pinged for offside as once they have all crossed lot there are players in front of the ball carrier.

Rawling
15-01-09, 17:01
Even before they cross LoT, aren't the majority of white players offside by virtue of being in front of the ball?

OB..
15-01-09, 19:01
At what point is the lineout over? The basic law is "when the ball or a player carrying it leaves the lineout." Normally the ball is fed back from a lineout, but if a player charges forward through it, then after a metre or so (at most?) he has clearly left the lineout.

However if the White team form up for a maul with the ball NOT in the hands of the leading player, they are obstructing.

Dixie
15-01-09, 20:01
Italy were in the vanguard introducing this tactic. IIRC, they were unfairly penalised in the early days because refs had not got their heads around it and it looked wrong.

Donal1988
15-01-09, 20:01
I was furious - team I coach in Germany gave away a last minute try due to referee not understanding this rule. I was LIVID with him.

gillburt
15-01-09, 20:01
I thought it might be offside, but what is vexing my brain is that the ref did not ping until the blue player touched the white player....

If White is offside, then surely they are offside irrespective of Blue actions once the lineout is over? Or is this just a case of refs taking a while to get their head around this tactic?

Donal1988
15-01-09, 20:01
Could just be waiting to see how it plays out - important thing is he calls it.

OB..
15-01-09, 21:01
You don't get penalised merely for being offside.

Are you sure the penalty was for offside, and not for obstruction?

Was the referee playing advantage?

didds
15-01-09, 23:01
Italy were in the vanguard introducing this tactic. IIRC, they were unfairly penalised in the early days because refs had not got their heads around it and it looked wrong.

I think it was on the RFU forums I proposed this tactic some time before Italy used it.

I was basically told I was a nutter (politely mind).

;-)

didds

stuart3826
16-01-09, 00:01
I think we first need to clarify - are we talking about a ruck - when the ball is on the floor, or maul where the ball is held? I suspect Maul. This being the case, we could be talking about obstruction or truck & trailer - there are players in front of the ball carrier, thereby preventing a tackle being made?

OB..
16-01-09, 00:01
If there are no opponents involved, we never get a ruck or a maul.

truck'n'trailor
16-01-09, 08:01
I would suggest that by backing away from the group of players with the ball (ie white), blue would have stepped away from the lineout prior to the lineout ending (technically) and thus blue ought to have been penalized for this. End of problem, I would suggest.

Donal1988
16-01-09, 08:01
Very interesting approach by truck'n'trailor - Food for thought!! :wow:

OB..
16-01-09, 11:01
I would suggest that by backing away from the group of players with the ball (ie white), blue would have stepped away from the lineout prior to the lineout ending (technically) and thus blue ought to have been penalized for this. End of problem, I would suggest.
The crucial question is "how far?" http://jp.youtube.com/watch?v=DH-jWfm8z1c

They seem to move just far enough to avoid contact, until it is clear the lineout is over. Then the hooker charges round.

In the England case the referee penalised England because the tackled player regained his feet without releasing. However he was at the back of the not-a-maul - a clear case of obstruction.

ctrainor
16-01-09, 15:01
I'm with truckck and trailor if they step backwards and out of the line, they are offside in the line out, you can only have one scrum half not seven.
If this happens in my games I would warn them first time it happened, explain my position and reset the line so we are clear next time.

truck'n'trailor
16-01-09, 16:01
Certainly in the case of the England clip, I would say that they had backed away from the line of touch, to the point that they might expect to be penalized.

However, in all clips the defenders were able to attack the ball/ball carrier and thus there was no material obstruction. The penalty against England came as a result of a tackled player not releasing the ball.

I would love to see them have the balls to pull that particular move on their own 5m line....!

OB..
16-01-09, 17:01
I'm with truckck and trailor if they step backwards and out of the line, they are offside in the line out, you can only have one scrum half not seven.
If this happens in my games I would warn them first time it happened, explain my position and reset the line so we are clear next time.
I don't see why they should be forced to collude with the opposition's plan. They are allowed to change places in the lineout, so half a metre or so is no problem, and that is all that is required to avoid contact.

OB..
16-01-09, 17:01
However, in all clips the defenders were able to attack the ball/ball carrier and thus there was no material obstruction.
No. The defenders had to run round players in front of the ball. That is obstruction.


The penalty against England came as a result of a tackled player not releasing the ball.
That is what the referee said. However if the tackle attempt had failed, would he have penalised the obstruction? IMHO he should have.

The umpire
16-01-09, 17:01
November 2006
FFR question
During a lineout, the players who won the ball form a maul but no
opponent goes to join this group of players.
a. Does this group of players constitute a maul?
b. Can an opponent tackle the ball carrier?
c. Does the ball carrier have to be the lead player?
DM ruling
a. It is not a maul by definition.
b. Yes
c. Yes otherwise it is obstruction.

Pretty much covers it - for once!

ctrainor
16-01-09, 17:01
~The oppsition Wre trying to play the game, Itally were not, i always thought it was a contact sport~!!

How about this then, Engalnd Catch the ball, Itally step back but don't engage, England don't move an inch, how long would you let it go on??

gillburt
16-01-09, 18:01
Given current form, an England supporter would surely want that to last the rest of the half? :D :D

OB..
16-01-09, 19:01
How about this then, Engalnd Catch the ball, Itally step back but don't engage, England don't move an inch, how long would you let it go on??
If England formed their half of a maul with the ball at the back, I would penalise them for obstruction.

If they just waited for contact, then an Italian could simply tackle the ball carrier.

We can devise lots of unrealistic scenarios, but I do not see that they help.

didds
16-01-09, 21:01
I would suggest that by backing away from the group of players with the ball (ie white), blue would have stepped away from the lineout prior to the lineout ending (technically) and thus blue ought to have been penalized for this. End of problem, I would suggest.


could they have just stepped to the side of the "not-maul" and not retreated from the l/o?

didds

Dixie
17-01-09, 08:01
easily

ctrainor
17-01-09, 10:01
My point guys is that in some of the scenarios the Itallians have stepped out of the line.
If England catcher keeps the ball and his supporters stay bound and move a metre to engage the Italians and they have moved backwards which in most of the clips they do, they must be offside. I accept if they move sideways and stay withing 5 and 15m lines then they are ok

tim White
17-01-09, 10:01
Ciaron, is it not just that they must remain 'close to the lineout' as if peeling/dancing about? Once the ball carrier crosses the line of touch then the ball must be 'out'.
Best to discuss with ref beforehand as distances can be very small to remain within the laws.