The questions keep coming and Jonathan Kaplan is again answering readers' questions.

1. Name: David Jameson 

Question: Can a player who is defending a quick throw be offside?  Example:  kicking duel; Red to Blue, back to Blue, back to Red, then Blue kicks into Red's 22.  Red 10 finds touch near half-way line.  Blue 15 gathers ball and attempts to play a quick throw but Red 3 (who was retreating, but was in front of his kicker) runs towards half-way and between Blue 15 and Blue 11 and successfully "defends" the quick throw.  Was Red 3 offside?  

Thank you and hello from the States.

Jamo

Jonathan Kaplan: All those players ahead of the kicker may approach the line-of-touch to ‘defend’ as you put it. They may not enter the 5m area to prevent a quick throw from taking place.

2. Name: Peter Shortell

Question: My view on referees and languages is very simple:  all referees in internationals should use a fixed set of English phrases during play.  This would then also be done just below top level so everybody involved would be used to the system.

Remember: BOTH sides are entitled to know what the referee is saying. You cannot referee in two languages.

In the pool stages of the last World Cup, there were six games in which neither side was English speaking, and 16 games in which only one was. 13 countries spoke English, the others spoke Japanese, Italian, Portuguese, Romanian, Spanish, French, and Georgian. 

There is no way you could get top referees sufficiently qualified linguistically to cover all the unpredictable language requirements.

Using even a small number of foreign phrases under pressure requires practice. Air traffic control long ago accepted that English should be the only language used internationally and rugby has no practical option but to follow suit.

Jonathan Kaplan: Agree.

3. Name: Mark Kruger

Question: Could you please tell us why the straightness of a line-out put-in is more strictly blown than scrum puts-in or is it just my perception?

Jonathan Kaplan: Both should be refereed fairly. The scrum feed needs more attention and we are attempting to address the problem.

4. Name: Hennie
E-mail: hgriessel@vodamail.co.za

Question: Hi, duty ref.

I just want to find out about playing the ball after a tackle is made. Heinrich Brüssow usually plays the ball after a tackle no matter from which side (on his feet) because he was the tackler. If another player also tackled the same player with Brüssow may he also play the ball from the opponents' side (while legally on his feet).

Second question: if your own player is lying on the ground and your one knee touches him while playing for the ball is that player legally on his feet or not?

Thanks.

Jonathan Kaplan: As long as those players are legally defined as the tacklers, they may play the ball from the ‘wrong’ side.

The answer to your second question is that it would be virtually impossible for any contest to take place if the ‘stealer’ was concerned if he was touching anyone. He must support his own body weight.

5. Name: JP Fleming

Question: Hi, duty ref.

Firstly I think refereeing is the most difficult position on a rugby field, and they all must be commended.

It seems to me that the laws are set up in a way that your average layman can never understand and, can't use logic to come to a decision, without reading the law book, e.g. kick at goal into wind and blows back from over the crossbar goal stands. Conversely kick for touch blows back into field of play it's play on. Similarly when dealing with plane of touch, with any number of different outcomes for what looks to Joe Bloggs as being similar. Then after two knock-ons the first one is blown. If there are two penalties it is invariably the second penalty which is blown (retaliation). I won't even begin about tackle/ruck and scrum

Is it the case that referees prefer spectators not knowing the laws and are therefore unable to question decisions as much as say soccer whose rules could be written on a postage stamp and we all know how much abuse soccer ref's get?

Jonathan Kaplan: Rugby is a more complex game. For a start the ball is not round. and it snowballs from there. The IRB has in recent times tried to make the laws simpler for the public to understand, but there are still some laws which rely on interpretation. This process is ongoing.

From a referee perspective, I find it really frustrating when commentators/pressmen  often serve their parochial audiences, rather than presenting a balanced appraisal of the matches they have just seen. It is often these views which are not factual which serve to confuse the public.