Page 1 of 16 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 157

Thread: Query 2. Should We Consider Materiality?

      
  1. #1

    Referees in Wales
    Taff's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Llanelli District
    Grade
    WRU Level 2
    Join Date
    23 Aug 09
    Posts
    6,275
    Thanks (Received)
    24
    Likes (Received)
    187

    Default Query 2. Should We Consider Materiality?

    19.6 How the throw-in is taken/
    The player taking the throw-in must stand at the correct place. The player must not step into the field of play when the ball is thrown. The ball must be thrown straight, so that it travels at least 5 metres along the line of touch before it first touches the ground or touches or is touched by a player.

    A query came up during my game yesterday, so to keep it simple it's a straight question:

    At a LO if the ball is thrown in slightly squiff (say directly over one of the rows instead of straight down the LoT) but the opposition didn't compete, should we be blowing for a LO / Scrum option or play on?

    I suppose the real question is, should we take "materiality" into account or not?
    Last edited by Taff; 16-04-17 at 12:04.

  2. #2
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Level 3
    Join Date
    03 Sep 14
    Posts
    3,007
    Thanks (Received)
    24
    Likes (Received)
    433

    Default Re: Query 2. Should We Consider Materiality?

    Yes material effect should be considered. But, ask: "why did they not contest?" Was it because you'd missed / ignored (not saying you did mind) 15 crooked feeds already and they knew it was no point in jumping? That too would be material to the outcome.

  3. #3

    Referees in America
    Rank Bajin!
    SimonSmith's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Virginia (USA)
    Grade
    B3
    Join Date
    27 Jan 04
    Posts
    7,732
    Thanks (Received)
    22
    Likes (Received)
    437

    Default Re: Query 2. Should We Consider Materiality?

    If the ball is going down the shoulders of the opposition, why would I compete for it?

    Be careful of cause and effect
    The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.
    Marcus Aurelius

    Man may do as he will; he may not will what he wills
    Arthur Schopenhauer

    Tullamore Dew, the Afghan Wigs, and many, many strippers - how to get over your ex. How true.

  4. #4

    Referees in Wales
    Taff's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Llanelli District
    Grade
    WRU Level 2
    Join Date
    23 Aug 09
    Posts
    6,275
    Thanks (Received)
    24
    Likes (Received)
    187

    Default Re: Query 2. Should We Consider Materiality?

    Quote Originally Posted by SimonSmith View Post
    If the ball is going down the shoulders of the opposition, why would I compete for it?
    Depends on whether it was the inside or outside shoulder surely.

    You have a chance with an inside shoulder - and no chance with an outside shoulder.

  5. #5

    Advises in England
    OB..'s Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Glos & District
    Grade
    Adviser (grass roots)
    Join Date
    07 Oct 04
    Posts
    21,515
    Thanks (Received)
    81
    Likes (Received)
    991

    Default Re: Query 2. Should We Consider Materiality?

    If you allow a team to do it, then their opponents will be surprised if they are not allowed to. Pointing out that one defending team did not contest and the other did is not something players will be used to. Best not to go there.
    He trudg’d along unknowing what he sought,
    And whistled as he went, for want of thought.
    The Referee by John Dryden

  6. #6

    Referees in England
    beckett50's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    East Midlands
    Grade
    Level 6
    Join Date
    31 Jan 04
    Posts
    1,979
    Thanks (Received)
    9
    Likes (Received)
    74

    Default Re: Query 2. Should We Consider Materiality?

    Yes you should consider materiality. However, one should also bear in mind that the throw should be (sort of) legal and credible.

    If the opportunity choose not to contest and the throw is over the (inside) shoulders of the throwing-in team then, IMO, let it go.
    --------------------

    https://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=691560798


    "Listen, or your tongue will make you deaf" Native American Proverb

    Vanillaisforicecream

  7. #7

    Referees in Wales
    Taff's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Llanelli District
    Grade
    WRU Level 2
    Join Date
    23 Aug 09
    Posts
    6,275
    Thanks (Received)
    24
    Likes (Received)
    187

    Default Re: Query 2. Should We Consider Materiality?

    Quote Originally Posted by beckett50 View Post
    Yes you should consider materiality. However, one should also bear in mind that the throw should be (sort of) legal and credible. If the [opposition] choose not to contest and the throw is over the (inside) shoulders of the throwing-in team then, IMO, let it go.
    I'm glad you said it, because that's what I did- which ties in with how other coaches and Refs have told me they expect it to be. I was just looking for reassurance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pegleg View Post
    Yes material effect should be considered. But, ask: "why did they not contest?" Was it because you'd missed / ignored (not saying you did mind) 15 crooked feeds already and they knew it was no point in jumping? That too would be material to the outcome.
    Fair point. To be clear, most of yesterdays throws were down the middle and most were contested; I would guess that about 2-3 from each side were marginally "squiffy" and over their team mates inside shoulder, but not so "squiffy" that the opposition couldn't have won it if they tried. If the opposition had jumped for the ball, with the squiffy ones I would probably have given them the options, but where they made no attempt to jump at all, I wasn't concerned about the ball being about a foot off the LoT.

    Quote Originally Posted by OB.. View Post
    If you allow a team to do it, then their opponents will be surprised if they are not allowed to. Pointing out that one defending team did not contest and the other did is not something players will be used to. Best not to go there.
    It's a good point; but I guess both teams benefited roughly equally.

  8. #8
    Player or Coach

    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Select Grade
    Join Date
    07 Mar 17
    Posts
    250
    Thanks (Received)
    1
    Likes (Received)
    46

    Default Re: Query 2. Should We Consider Materiality?

    Quote Originally Posted by Taff View Post
    19.6 How the throw-in is taken/
    The player taking the throw-in must stand at the correct place. The player must not step into the field of play when the ball is thrown. The ball must be thrown straight, so that it travels at least 5 metres along the line of touch before it first touches the ground or touches or is touched by a player.

    A query came up during my game yesterday, so to keep it simple it's a straight question:

    At a LO if the ball is thrown in slightly squiff (say directly over one of the rows instead of straight down the LoT) but the opposition didn't compete, should we be blowing for a LO / Scrum option or play on?

    I suppose the real question is, should we take "materiality" into account or not?
    A Lineout restarts the game when the ball has left the playing area, and therefore it is supposed to be 'a contest' to gain possession. Accordingly a fair/straight throw gives equal chance of catching it at the point where it lands in the lineout [which might be up in the sky or down on the ground.


    Taff, I referee in the following way every week;
    During my briefing I tell both teams that if one team decide not to go up & contest for possession then their opponents catcher can catch it wherever it arrives, because if the grounded team have conceded the contest then i'm no longer interested in penalising an unstraight throw.

    if the throw goes over the jumper/lifted player then it needs to land straight for a fair contest to happen between any non jumping participant or over the 15m throws. i tell them - if you want a not straight throw awarded to you , then be up there competing for possession.

    If & when it happens I shout "no contest, play on", or if it's not straight when there is a contest a say "not straight - contested possession" even the supporters soon get the idea!

    In my mind it's consistent with the principals being applied to 'uncontested rucks or mauls' currently.

    During the briefing the players are often nodding to indicate they agree with the suggestion, coaches are always happy & agree it makes no sense to be stopping the game.

    Assessors seem happy that provided everyone is on message pre-kick off then it makes for a less whistling game.

    Call it my quirk if you wish, but i suspect its the way forward as long as one team stay rooted to the turf. In my head i invented this interpretation based on seeing 'uncontested' develop in other area's, because i haven't knowingly copied it from watching anyone.

    I'm very Interested to hear the idea is being shared/copied across in wales, I wonder where they heard about it , or who started such thinking ?



  9. #9
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Level 3
    Join Date
    03 Sep 14
    Posts
    3,007
    Thanks (Received)
    24
    Likes (Received)
    433

    Default Re: Query 2. Should We Consider Materiality?

    As long as they are not contesting the line out for the right reason and not because the referee has ignored not straights earlier in the game.

    Nodding heads do not always mean agreement. It can be "Come on let's get on with the game".

  10. #10
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Select Grade
    Join Date
    28 Feb 17
    Posts
    752
    Thanks (Received)
    3
    Likes (Received)
    71

    Default Re: Query 2. Should We Consider Materiality?

    Age grade rugby u15 and uncontested lineouts. Still required to develop skills to throw the ball in straight. It is not a get out to stack the odds additionally in your favour.

    Hardly acceptable in the full regs game, in my view.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •