Refereeing decisions

[Brumby Runner]

Could somebody with a good head for the laws clarify the ins and outs of a quick throw in? In the brumbies/Chiefs game, the Chiefs on a few occasions took a quick throw in even though thr Brumbies had set their line out at the spot the ball crossed the touch line. Walshe was heard to say that both teams had to have at least two players in the line out to nullify the quick throw. Is this correct? Certainly not my understanding of how line outs should operate but I don't know what the relevant law states.

Also, the Tahs (I think) had a quick throw ruled against when the thrower had one foot in the field of play. Was that in accordance with the law or just the Touchie being especially pedantic?

 

[yourmatesam]

Walsh was heard to say that both teams had to have at least two players in the line out to nullify the quick throw. Is this correct?

I believe Walsh was correct.

 

[Eyes and Ears]

Could somebody with a good head for the laws clarify the ins and outs of a quick throw in? In the brumbies/Chiefs game, the Chiefs on a few occasions took a quick throw in even though thr Brumbies had set their line out at the spot the ball crossed the touch line. Walshe was heard to say that both teams had to have at least two players in the line out to nullify the quick throw. Is this correct? Certainly not my understanding of how line outs should operate but I don't know what the relevant law states.

Also, the Tahs (I think) had a quick throw ruled against when the thrower had one foot in the field of play. Was that in accordance with the law or just the Touchie being especially pedantic?

A quick Lineout can occur until the normal Lineout is formed. A Lineout is formed by 2 players from each side. So yes this is correct.

The ARs have been instructed to be pedantic on the quick throw ins.

 

[Pusser]

I believe Walsh was correct.

He was as far as the forming of the line out but I believe he erred in at least one instance when he allowed a quick throw in after Nick White had handled the ball when it had bounced into touch. As White had not carried the ball into touch his handling of the ball cancels the option.
Law 19.2 (d)
"For a quick throw-in, the player must use the ball that went into touch. A quick throw-in is not permitted if another person has touched the ball apart from the player throwing it in and an opponent who carried it into touch. The same team throws into the lineout."


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[yourmatesam]

He was as far as the forming of the line out but I believe he erred in at least one instance when he allowed a quick throw in after Nick White had handled the ball when it had bounced into touch. As White had not carried the ball into touch his handling of the ball cancels the option.
Law 19.2 (d)
"For a quick throw-in, the player must use the ball that went into touch. A quick throw-in is not permitted if another person has touched the ball apart from the player throwing it in and an opponent who carried it into touch. The same team throws into the lineout."


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

If that's the biggest mistake that the Team of Three make in a game with roughly 600 decisions to make over the course of the match, he's had a good game IMO.

 

[terry j]

and just on the quick throw in, it is no longer required that the throw in be straight?

 

[Braveheart81]

and just on the quick throw in, it is no longer required that the throw in be straight?

It doesn't need to be straight. The throw just has to go passed the 5m line and can't travel towards the opposition goal line.

 

[boyo]

and just on the quick throw in, it is no longer required that the throw in be straight?

Yes

 

[AFL_Converted]

Apologies if this has already been mentioned in this thread already but what is the story with entering the ruck this year. I have only seen rebels games with the odd oth Australia or New Zealand match but it seems that you have to be almost facing your own goal line before they call it entering from the side. Most cleanouts seem to come sideways rather than "through the gate"

Not calling any bad decisions here because it has been consistent but had there been a directive to let this go?

 

[Bullrush]

Apologies if this has already been mentioned in this thread already but what is the story with entering the ruck this year. I have only seen rebels games with the odd oth Australia or New Zealand match but it seems that you have to be almost facing your own goal line before they call it entering from the side. Most cleanouts seem to come sideways rather than "through the gate"

Not calling any bad decisions here because it has been consistent but had there been a directive to let this go?

In the first few games this year the refs seemed to be very tough on this but yeah....coming in from the side has to be pretty blatant for it to be called from what I've seen in recent weeks.

 

[cyclopath]

In the first few games this year the refs seemed to be very tough on this but yeah..coming in from the side has to be pretty blatant for it to be called from what I've seen in recent weeks.

There also seems to be growing tolerance of players loitering beyond the ruck a bit too much, which was all the rage a year or two ago. "Taking up the space".
Solution? Clean them out, but then they take the risk of running foul of the refs for cleaning out a player not in the breakdown.
Also noticed the Sharks last night (and other teams of late too - Sharks just stood out in those white jerseys ) using the hit / roll / flop onto the wrong side a bit and the ref did not seem too interested in doing much about it.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Kiwi commentators getting very excited about the obstruction call against the Chiefs 3.
Not sure about obstruction but he was in front of the hind most foot: so maybe they're going to deal with the players getting beyond the ruck and basically annoying defences.
I doubt it.

 

[Quick Hands]

There also seems to be growing tolerance of players loitering beyond the ruck a bit too much, which was all the rage a year or two ago. "Taking up the space".
Solution? Clean them out, but then they take the risk of running foul of the refs for cleaning out a player not in the breakdown.
Also noticed the Sharks last night (and other teams of late too - Sharks just stood out in those white jerseys ) using the hit / roll / flop onto the wrong side a bit and the ref did not seem too interested in doing much about it.

If the players from the team in possession are in front of the last foot and not bound, they are just as offside as players from the defending team. They should be treated exactly the same, ; i.e. warning and/or penalty

 

[Dan54]

Unfortunately they never seem to be IS.

 

[ACT Crusader]

Kiwi commentators getting very excited about the obstruction call against the Chiefs 3.
Not sure about obstruction but he was in front of the hind most foot: so maybe they're going to deal with the players getting beyond the ruck and basically annoying defences.
I doubt it.

I think the problem with that at was that TKB ran behind his prop and there were tacklers right there. Thought the commentary was borderline embarrassing during that passage. It doesn't matter if they weren't going to get TKB, because the proximity was too close to just allow it to happen.

When watching it live I thought they would look at it.

Thought it was the right call.

 

[yourmatesam]

Did anyone see the Highlanders v Lions Match? Thoughts on the final kick of the match?

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

Did anyone see the Highlanders v Lions Match? Thoughts on the final kick of the match?

Clan went early & got waved back by the ref. Kicker hadn't started his run up so wasn't entitled to another shot - unlike AB v Ireland last year where the Paddys went early & our kicker bailed. Inexperience on the part of the Lions kicker, or maybe he just backed himself to nail it regardless.

 

[yourmatesam]

Clan went early & got waved back by the ref. Kicker hadn't started his run up so wasn't entitled to another shot - unlike AB v Ireland last year where the Paddys went early & our kicker bailed. Inexperience on the part of the Lions kicker, or maybe he just backed himself to nail it regardless.

I think the Lion's kicker thought he was guaranteed another shot. Justin Marshall was definitely talking it up on the telly.

I think Angus Gardner made the right call.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

I think the Lion's kicker thought he was guaranteed another shot. Justin Marshall was definitely talking it up on the telly.

I think Angus Gardner made the right call.

Me too. Typo in my original post, meant to say our kicker failed (hence got another shot) as opposed to bailing out on taking the shot.

 

[ruckhudson]

Sorry to change the subject but if there is any other referees out there has anyone got any whistle blowing techniques for a newbie???
I not too bad but cant seem to get the pro sounding whistle come out. As in my experience the better the whistle the better people think the ref is.