Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 43

Thread: Another Line Out Question..

      
  1. #11
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    Cambridge and St Neots
    Grade
    I am a Fan
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Posts
    1,321
    Thanks (Received)
    18
    Likes (Received)
    203

    Default Re: Another Line Out Question..

    Blue set the line out and for some reason unbeknown to us decided not to have a receiver.
    Red initially think we have to match - but finally twig and then take advantage.
    Blue trying to be too clever and get caught out.

  2. #12

    Resident Club Coach
    didds's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    N/A
    Grade
    Club Coach
    Join Date
    27 Jan 04
    Posts
    9,490
    Thanks (Received)
    56
    Likes (Received)
    876

    Default Re: Another Line Out Question..

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisR View Post
    Play on. 'Matching numbers' only applies to the players in the lineout, not 'participating players'.

    What 'unfair advantage' have Red concocted by the receiver joining just before the ball is thrown in? None. Move along folks, nothing to see here.
    well... ref the other recent thread when he arrives as the ball is thrown in and takes the ball on the move with momentum.

    Though personally Im still "unsure" about that being "wrong" nonetheless i'm not rock solid on it not being illegal either.

    didds

  3. #13

    Referees in Australia
    Dickie E's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    VRRA
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    19 Jan 07
    Posts
    12,213
    Thanks (Received)
    103
    Likes (Received)
    1236

    Default Re: Another Line Out Question..

    Play on for me. Can't see any reason to blow the whistle.

    Ref: "Blue, do you want to put in a receiver?"

    Blue: "Are your eyes painted on, ref? If we wanted a receiver we would have put one in"
    I, for one, like Roman numerals

  4. #14

    Referees in Wales
    tewdric's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Gwent
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    18 Sep 18
    Posts
    119
    Thanks (Received)
    4
    Likes (Received)
    20

    Default Re: Another Line Out Question..

    I'm just trying to navigate myself through the fog of the revised lineout law here. I used to think I understood it as a player!

    As far as the receiver binding on to the maul goes - can he or she do this given the lineout is not yet over? I think there's got to be a distinction between the lineout when it's a line and when the lineouty bit has finished but before it's "over" for offside line purposes, but the law doesn't make this clear.

  5. #15

    Referees in England
    Phil E's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Staffordshire and Royal Navy
    Grade
    8
    Join Date
    22 Jan 08
    Posts
    14,766
    Thanks (Received)
    135
    Likes (Received)
    1188
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Another Line Out Question..

    Quote Originally Posted by Pinky View Post
    But Phil, you have just peeped when you didn't need to! Play on for me - there is nothing to limit numbers in a maul. But they might be in a bit of difficulty if the maul does not get moved off the line of touch and the ref says "use it"
    Better one quick whistle early on if it saves several later in the game.

    Follow my Award Winning blog The Rugby Ref


  6. #16

    Referees in Australia
    Dickie E's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    VRRA
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    19 Jan 07
    Posts
    12,213
    Thanks (Received)
    103
    Likes (Received)
    1236

    Default Re: Another Line Out Question..

    Quote Originally Posted by tewdric View Post
    I'm just trying to navigate myself through the fog of the revised lineout law here. I used to think I understood it as a player!

    As far as the receiver binding on to the maul goes - can he or she do this given the lineout is not yet over? I think there's got to be a distinction between the lineout when it's a line and when the lineouty bit has finished but before it's "over" for offside line purposes, but the law doesn't make this clear.
    once the ball is thrown the receiver is free to join the lineout without swapping positions with a team mate. Ergo, he/she is free to join the ensuing maul even if it hasn't crossed line of touch.
    I, for one, like Roman numerals

  7. #17
    Player or Coach

    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Level 1
    Join Date
    02 Nov 18
    Posts
    293
    Thanks (Received)
    1
    Likes (Received)
    30

    Default Re: Another Line Out Question..

    Yeah, I see nothing wrong here. No need to peep anything. It's Blue's choice not to have a receiver. And once the ball is thrown, he can join the LO when the ball is thrown.

  8. #18

    Referees in Australia
    Dickie E's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    VRRA
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    19 Jan 07
    Posts
    12,213
    Thanks (Received)
    103
    Likes (Received)
    1236

    Default Re: Another Line Out Question..

    Quote Originally Posted by Arabcheif View Post
    And once the ball is thrown, he can join the LO when the ball is thrown.
    Yes, Red receiver can. All Blue non-lineout players have to stay 10 metres - even the bloke with #9 on his back.
    I, for one, like Roman numerals

  9. #19
    Player or Coach

    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Level 1
    Join Date
    02 Nov 18
    Posts
    293
    Thanks (Received)
    1
    Likes (Received)
    30

    Default Re: Another Line Out Question..

    Quote Originally Posted by Dickie E View Post
    Yes, Red receiver can. All Blue non-lineout players have to stay 10 metres - even the bloke with #9 on his back.

    Ok, so based on the information that we've been given that there hasn't been any fundamental Law changes from the 2017 Laws ( as has been mentioned by numerous people previously). These state that all participating players (and it defines that throwers and receivers are participating player) can compete for the ball. Therefore both receivers can enter the line. Seems a bit daft to allow one and not the other.

  10. #20

    Referees in England


    Soc/Assoc
    --
    Grade
    Grassroots
    Join Date
    14 Sep 09
    Posts
    16,823
    Thanks (Received)
    127
    Likes (Received)
    1615

    Default Re: Another Line Out Question..

    Quote Originally Posted by Arabcheif View Post
    Ok, so based on the information that we've been given that there hasn't been any fundamental Law changes from the 2017 Laws ( as has been mentioned by numerous people previously). These state that all participating players (and it defines that throwers and receivers are participating player) can compete for the ball. Therefore both receivers can enter the line. Seems a bit daft to allow one and not the other.
    If he is not in the receiver position he is not a participating player

    Of course he might well have stood in the receiving ver position had he realised red had a receiver.

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
  •