Line out strategies

[mark_s]

I noticed in a couple of line outs on the weekend that the reds jumper took a small step backwards his tryline and then jumped towards the opposition line. The result was that the jumper looked to be reaching towards the opposition try line in order to secure the ball but in fact was catching the ball directly above where the reds had formed their line out. Seems like a clever strategy especially given the touchies will often judge “straight” by whether the catcher has had to reach towards the opposition try line to grab the ball.

Has it been going on for a while and I just haven’t been paying attention?

 

[MrTimms]

Was it defensive or attacking lineouts? Assuming attacking.

 

[mark_s]

yep attacking

 

[MrTimms]

I will take a look, I haven't seen (noticed) it.

 

[mark_s]

The two that caught my eye were the line out in the second half when higgenbottom went down before recovering quickly and one in the first half near the half way line.

 

[Hawko]

Certainly the one where Higgers went down and Mumm was penalised the ball went straight down the Reds line of jumpers, ie not straight. I wasn't happy when Mumm dived over but realistically what else could he do to have a chance to compete for the ball?

 

[Schadenfreude]

Certainly the one where Higgers went down and Mumm was penalised the ball went straight down the Reds line of jumpers, ie not straight. I wasn't happy when Mumm dived over but realistically what else could he do to have a chance to compete for the ball?

So illegal play is OK to compete for the ball?

 

[mark_s]

At first I thought it was just another not straight, but I still think there was something more to it. Normally the jumper jumps up and across. Taking the Higgenbottom one as an example, his torso ends up behind his two pillars (and all three of them where in a horizontal line as the ball is released, and the pillars haven't moved at all) and then it appears as though he is reaching towards the tahs to catch the ball. It gives the appears of the throw being straight even though its crooked as buggery.

Maybe I am just being paranoid.

 

[suckerforred]

At first I thought it was just another not straight, but I still think there was something more to it. Normally the jumper jumps up and across. Taking the Higgenbottom one as an example, his torso ends up behind his two pillars (and all three of them where in a horizontal line as the ball is released, and the pillars haven't moved at all) and then it appears as though he is reaching towards the tahs to catch the ball. It gives the appears of the throw being straight even though its crooked as buggery.

Maybe I am just being paranoid.

Think you might be being paranoid. But having said that I can't really make a call as I have not studied the lineouts in particular. Didn't think they were that bad though.

 

[Hawko]

So illegal play is OK to compete for the ball?

You must have gone to the Kaplan school of refereeing. He was always quite happy to let the ball go down the opposition side but immediately penalised anyone who closed the gap so they could compete.

Yes it was a penalty, but only because the attempt was clumsy and hit the tackler while he was airborne. In my view it was done out of frustration at not being given a chance to compete. Why is it so hard for the assistant standing right in line with the thrower to immediately call "not straight" unless the ball goes dead-centre down the middle. It would stop all the nonsense we get now dead in its tracks (of which the latest Higginbotham sidestep is just another example).

 

[spooony]

It is funny. Look at the Reds players who won the line outs on their own throw
Genia
Daley
Higginbotham won 7 lost 1
Schatz
Horwill
Simons

The two locks won 5 between them

 

[Schadenfreude]

You must have gone to the Kaplan school of refereeing. He was always quite happy to let the ball go down the opposition side but immediately penalised anyone who closed the gap so they could compete.

No I think reckless play overrides an infringement...

For example: if you knock the ball on, and I punched you in the throat, would you think it's reasonable for me feed the scrum?

 

[Sandpit Fan]

Why is it so hard for the assistant standing right in line with the thrower to immediately call "not straight" unless the ball goes dead-centre down the middle. It would stop all the nonsense we get now dead in its tracks (of which the latest Higginbotham sidestep is just another example).

Great question Hawko, but I fear we will never get a straight answer..

 

[spooony]

What happens when its straight but the wind takes it sideways?

 

[qwerty51]

Mumm barely touched Higgers, Hawko is right in that the throw wasn't straight so Mumm had to move right over to the Reds side to compete. He collided with him but did not wrap his arms around him and play him in the air, Higgers landed on his two feet comfortably and then fell to the ground on his own accord, I'm guessing he milked it. If he wasn't injured or didn't fall the Reds would've been called up for a not straight.

 

[Jnor]

What happens when its straight but the wind takes it sideways?

Then it's not straight?

 

[spooony]

Ahaa! The ball must be thrown in straight but it only needs to look straight for 5 meters. Beyond that it can look as skew as a jimmy and it would still be according to the law. Also the middle space is determined when players are standing up only. I am sure the ref who was there saw it way better than any person watching it on a tv with a camera angle which leads to the fault of paralex if I am not mistaken.

 

[Ash]

Well, you can watch the video again as it's on the front page:

http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/the-off-white-card-first-edition/

I have watched it a few times, and guess what: that ball is never, ever going to be called "not straight". If you pause it at 1 sec, right before Higgers takes it, then the ball is still in the channel, only very slightly to the Reds side. Throws like that to number 2 in the lineout are never called not straight.

Secondly, it was a bad jump from Mumm. Having jumped in the lineout before, and yes, at 2, I have done the same thing - he jumped across too much, instead of springing mainly upwards. Mumm did the right thing initially: small step into the channel, but then he went too far across. His lifters never had a chance to get him up there. It is an easy thing to do when competing at 2 - trying to get too far forward and across to disrupt the ball.

Even if it was called immediately not straight (which it wasn't), Mumm would have hit the other jumper in the air.

This whole thing is a non-issue.

 

[Scott Allen]

In the following video I’ve slowed the footage down and frozen it at a couple of relevant points. I’ve also added a line down the centre of the lineout. I know lines and camera angles don’t work perfectly together but it gives you an idea.

The first point is the gap between the teams – the laws say each team must be half a metre either side of the centre line (hence the 1 metre gap we all hear referred to). The Reds appear set about half a metre off the centre line but the Tahs are set much further away. I’m not sure if this is due to an instruction earlier from the referee or whether the Tahs chose to set there. The only reason (apart from referee instructions) I can think of for any team setting that far away would be a tactic to make it look that the throw was too far on the throwing teams side but that doesn’t seem like a good tactic to me as being so far away you make it impossible to compete for the ball and are relying on the referee too much. Much better to compete in my opinion.

There is no step backwards by Higginbotham – look where his feet land before he jumps – right in the middle of his lifter’s legs.

The laws say the throw must be straight and referees generally interpret this as the ball must be thrown in the 1 metre channel and be on the inside shoulder of the team throwing. The throw in this case is in the channel and was on the inside shoulder. I’ve frozen the footage at the frame immediately before Higginbotham touches the ball. Is the throw straight down the middle of the channel? No, but only by a small margin and it’s very rare that you would see that called “not straight” in any game.

The lift was poor and Higginbotham had to reach across to make the take. The ball was taken where his inside shoulder would have been with a straight lift. I doubt anyone would deliberately use a poor lift like this to try and gain an advantage – in fact if the Tahs had got a jumper up in competition this lift would have made it harder for the Reds to win the ball.

The penalty against Mumm was correct on two fronts. First he does play the jumper in the air. He does wrap his arm around the jumper and whilst the arm may not have had much impact, if a referee sees an arm wrapped, you will be penalised. The second reason a penalty should have been awarded is that Mumm takes the lifter out. Looking at the wide shot you can see that Mumm was lifted into this position by Kepu. Watch Kepu turn sideways to throw Mumm across the line, not up to compete for the ball. From the front on shot you can see that the back lifter was late and hardly even got a hand on Mumm. The issue is that Mumm came across the line and took Simmons out who was the back lifter. It was that which caused Higginbotham to be dropped and that should have been a penalty for taking the lifter out.

Once he’s been dropped from full extension Higginbotham lands unaided and that places enormous strain on groins, knees and ankles. That he only stayed down for a short while is a credit to him.

 

[Scoey]

Yeah this sort of stuff really winds me up. Spending most of my Rugby life jumping at 2 in the lineout I've had my fair share of these sorts of experiences and worse. Interfering with a player in the air, or their lifters is something that should be treated extremely seriously.

If anyone caught the 6N game between WAL & ENG you would've seen Sam Warburton taken out in the air and land very awkwardly. The commentator makes a great point. If a tip tackle is an automatic Red Card, then surely this is far more dangerous play and warrants the same penalty. I'm not certain I agree with Red as an automatic rule. Certainly line out incidents are greyer than tip tackles. But on a case by case basis, this would be a good use of the White Card, without ruling out yellow, or even red if warranted.

I don't think there was intent in the Mumm case but it was certainly reckless. Yeah Higgers was fine, but that sort of stuff can go very pear shaped, very quickly.