[Line out] Law 18.12. Teams form the lineout without delay. Sanction: Free-kick. How Long, How f

[Ciaran Trainor]

Came up in a preseason game and in hindsight I think I allowed home team too long.
Virtually every Line out there was a huddle at least 10 M back, they clearly called numbers so that was never an issue but in retrospect it seemed to take and age.
Team walked up while hooker ran up to mark, stopped about 2 M off mark, Team walk in, Line set and away we go

How long is without Delay?
In general I don't have a problem with the pre huddle but where should it occur and how long.
What strategies do others use to hurry it up?
Would be interested in hearing thoughts.
quite frankly it was boring for me, the opposition and spectators.

 

[CrouchTPEngage]

Yep. Seen this a lot when a team is ahead with only a few minutes left.
If it really feels like taking the p, then I usually shout out loud "without undue delay, fellas !" which usually speeds them up a bit.
Next , I escalate to a warning "You're taking too long, chaps. Next time, you are risking a FK against you".
If that really has no effect, then they cannot really complain when you FK them for "undue delay" right ?

 

[Camquin]

I saw the opposite last season whenever Black took a penalty to touch the black hooker would be in touch in front of the hooker. he woudl ten collect a ball from the ball boy and trot to the line of touch. Yes he was offside, but he was speeding up the game. Fortunately none of the kicks missed touch.

 

[crossref]

I saw the opposite last season whenever Black took a penalty to touch the black hooker would be in touch in front of the hooker. he woudl ten collect a ball from the ball boy and trot to the line of touch. Yes he was offside, but he was speeding up the game. Fortunately none of the kicks missed touch.

Would you let him take a QTI ?

 

[crossref]

Yep. Seen this a lot when a team is ahead with only a few minutes left.
If it really feels like taking the p, then I usually shout out loud "without undue delay, fellas !" which usually speeds them up a bit.
Next , I escalate to a warning "You're taking too long, chaps. Next time, you are risking a FK against you".
If that really has no effect, then they cannot really complain when you FK them for "undue delay" right ?

Another tool is to stop the clock, so that the tactic doesn't work .. no time is wasted (as well asking telling FK them)

 

[SimonSmith]

If the defence have enough time to form their line, then the offence are at risk of pissing about and getting warned.

 

[Jolly Roger]

If a team creates a huddle before forming the lineout they are by definition of creating a huddle delaying forming the lineout. It may be unreasonable to take that pedantic approach to law interpretation but it does give referees the authority to intervene as soon as a huddle is formed.

I am not a fan of the huddle and if I am getting irritated and the opposition is getting irritated then that is delaying formation of the lineout. All the players need to do is communicate a couple of codes which can just as easily be called whilst walking up to the LOT.

In a game with a large and vocal crowd then perhaps it is necessary to communicate the call in a huddle rather than in a line (not the case many of my matches).

I agree with CTPE and Crossref but would add that I also don’t tolerate defending teams in the linout calling out crap to disguise the linout call. I have on a number of occasions stopped the game and threatened to penalise the defending team for conduct against the spirit of good sportsmanship. (Law 9.26). Followed by 7 bemused faces but invariably results in silence.

 

[crossref]

As a rule of thumb I wouldn't recommend a referee references 9.26 on the pitch , unless for something very serious for which there really is no alternative. (I struggle to think of a realistic example)

Bad sportsmanship is too subjective. I wouldn't want to quote it unless in a situation where I really knew that all the players would agree



Quoting 9.26

 

[Phil E]

quite frankly it was boring for me, the opposition and spectators.

If you are getting bored then its clearly too long.

Ask...hurry it up please fellas
Tell...Guys you need to form the line now!
Penalise...Peep, too slow..you've been warned

 

[Wedgie]

Would you let him take a QTI ?

Last year I played in between Christmas and New Year within-club friendly. After about 50 minutes, when the initial enthusiasm had worn off, we had a penalty and kicked to touch. I managed to get there first (OK, all enthusiasm had worn off with the opposition) and I took a QTI (with the same ball) to an unopposed team mate who cantered in under the posts. Reffed called us back disallowing the QTI. Much disgruntlement and under breath harrumphing from me and explicit outrage in the bar afterwards (it was a club ref and a mate) as the team mate who 'scored' was my boy!

 

[crossref]

That feels right for the game.
But if it was a competitive game it would be interesting. I have never seen a qti after a PK . My feeling is that it's legal, but probably accidentally legal , in the sense they never thought of it. If we ever see teams using it as a ploy they'd probably ban it

 

[Rich_NL]

I certainly wouldn't disallow it as is. There's nothing in the law book to say to do so, it keeps the game moving, and it's hardly unfair - the defenders start at the very least 10m closer to the line of touch than the kicker's team!

Besides the obvious time to reset the defence, there may be an advantage to trundling back slowly to a mandatory lineout for defenders, if they're either in the lead or waiting for the sin bin clock to expire. The trend is not to favour the defending team, or breaking continuity...

 

[crossref]

Well, if I was doing it as a ploy it would close to the oppo goal line and I would kick it directly into touch in line with the PK , where a team mate would be ready with a qti

 

[didds]

That feels right for the game.
But if it was a competitive game it would be interesting. I have never seen a qti after a PK . My feeling is that it's legal, but probably accidentally legal , in the sense they never thought of it. If we ever see teams using it as a ploy they'd probably ban it

didn;t we have a discussion about sopmethig similar in the Maoris v BL match a couple of years ago ? I cant recall the specifics now?

didds

 

[ChrisR]

The only problem with this is:

[LAWS]Law 20 Penalty and Free Kicks

10. Other than the placer at a place-kick, the kicker’s team must remain behind the ball until it has been kicked.
[/LAWS]

 

[Rich_NL]

Well, if I was doing it as a ploy it would close to the oppo goal line and I would kick it directly into touch in line with the PK , where a team mate would be ready with a qti

So it's like a quick tap and go... except less quick, you have one teammate out of the FoP throwing in, and the opposition have time to move up?

 

[crossref]

So it's like a quick tap and go... except less quick, you have one teammate out of the FoP throwing in, and the opposition have time to move up?

But unlike a tap and go

1 the opposition think you have kicked it out for a lineout so aren't paying attention, and are taken by surprise and
2 the QTI can be thrown to some moving at considerable speed

 

[Rich_NL]

So can a quick tap, now that "cavalry charge" has been clarified I can see point 1 is an advantage, but point 2 is more than cancelled out by the defence moving up, IMO.

So should we protect teams from not paying attention to the opponent's options, then?

 

[crossref]

No!
I think in the right circumstances (<10m from oppo line , everyone is expecting a kick to touch for an attacking lineout) it would work like a dream and you would have a try.

(Simple tap and go doesn't 'work in that situation as oppo are always alert to that possibility)

I think that WR would ban it though

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Last year I played in between Christmas and New Year within-club friendly. After about 50 minutes, when the initial enthusiasm had worn off, we had a penalty and kicked to touch. I managed to get there first (OK, all enthusiasm had worn off with the opposition) and I took a QTI (with the same ball) to an unopposed team mate who cantered in under the posts. Reffed called us back disallowing the QTI. Much disgruntlement and under breath harrumphing from me and explicit outrage in the bar afterwards (it was a club ref and a mate) as the team mate who 'scored' was my boy!

Internal “Club friendly” = Spot on call
Proper match? Only questions are: “Were all the requirements for a QTI met? And: “Was the thrower-in behind the kicker and thus compliant wit the PK law?”) I can’t see from the OP that they were not so play on!

The only problem with this is:

[LAWS]Law 20 Penalty and Free Kicks

10. Other than the placer at a place-kick, the kicker’s team must remain behind the ball until it has been kicked.
[/LAWS]

Nothting to say that he was not in the OP so it would appeat a moot point here.

So it's like a quick tap and go... except less quick, you have one teammate out of the FoP throwing in, and the opposition have time to move up?

But unlike a tap and go

1 the opposition think you have kicked it out for a lineout so aren't paying attention, and are taken by surprise and
2 the QTI can be thrown to some moving at considerable speed

Tough! Let the offender be aware!

So can a quick tap, now that "cavalry charge" has been clarified

I can see point 1 is an advantage, but point 2 is more than cancelled out by the defence moving up, IMO.

So should we protect teams from not paying attention to the opponent's options, then?

No way!

No!
I think in the right circumstances (<10m from oppo line , everyone is expecting a kick to touch for an attacking lineout) it would work like a dream and you would have a try.

(Simple tap and go doesn't 'work in that situation as oppo are always alert to that possibility)

I think that WR would ban it though

If WR ban it in future THEN we change. Until then, it matters not what they may do next year or whenever.