[Law] More new Laws?

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,811
Post Likes
3,149
Re: Law changes made easy for the 2017/18 season (RFU land)

great summary, but this..

A defending player in the 22 meter area who catches or picks up a ball that has not reached the 22 meter-line has
carried the ball into the 22 meter area. It does not apply to make a successful mark.

does it mean that I can stand inside the 22m, and catch the ball that hasn't crossed the plane I can still call for the mark, even though under the new Law I have taken it back in
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,067
Post Likes
1,797
Re: Law changes made easy for the 2017/18 season (RFU land)

great summary, but this..



does it mean that I can stand inside the 22m, and catch the ball that hasn't crossed the plane I can still call for the mark, even though under the new Law I have taken it back in


I read that to mean NO.

Because you are in the 22 and the ball isn't.

ISTR the "extendable" Mark (eg jump from 22 to catch the ball = OK) was done to suppress endless/hopeful kicking?

didds

didds
 

ChuckieB

Rugby Expert
Joined
Feb 28, 2017
Messages
1,057
Post Likes
115
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
Re: Law changes made easy for the 2017/18 season (RFU land)

I read that to mean NO.

Because you are in the 22 and the ball isn't.

ISTR the "extendable" Mark (eg jump from 22 to catch the ball = OK) was done to suppress endless/hopeful kicking?

didds

didds

I believe it relates to whether you are deemed to have taken it back in or not.

A mark is still a mark.

While the ruling relates to touch, they then had extricate themselves and clarify then that their intent was to ensure that a defender couldn't "force" a ball dead or in goal or back into the 22 without disadvantaging himself in the process.
 
Last edited:

Dickie E


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
14,132
Post Likes
2,154
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
Re: Law changes made easy for the 2017/18 season (RFU land)

great summary, but this..



does it mean that I can stand inside the 22m, and catch the ball that hasn't crossed the plane I can still call for the mark, even though under the new Law I have taken it back in

it mean that taking a successful mark with one foot in 22 and ball outside 22 is the one exception to defender carrying ball back over 22. The only practical purpose of this is that a kick to touch from the resulting FK has gain of ground.
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,811
Post Likes
3,149
Re: Law changes made easy for the 2017/18 season (RFU land)

I believe it relates to whether you are deemed to have taken it back in or not.

A mark is still a mark.

While the ruling relates to touch, they then had extricate themselves and clarify then that their intent was to ensure that a defender couldn't "force" a ball dead or in goal or back into the 22 without disadvantaging himself in the process.

unless it's to catch a mark, in which case he can..
 

TheBFG


Referees in England
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
4,392
Post Likes
237
Current Referee grade:
Level 6
20 July 2017, 14:55

World Rugby introduce six law changes

Implemented from 1 August in northern hemisphere

Relate to scrum, tackle and ruck areas*

The World Rugby Executive Committee has approved the addition of six law amendments to the programme of global law trials.

The amendments, which have been tried in specific international competitions this year, relate to the scrum (Law 20) and tackle/ruck (Laws 15 and 16), and are aimed at making the game simpler to play and referee, as well as further protecting player welfare.

The six law amendments will debut in full from 1 August 2017 in the northern hemisphere, and from 1 January 2018 in the southern hemisphere, and are as follows...

Throwing the ball into the scrum

Law 20.5 & 20.5 (d) 5
No signal from referee. The scrum-half must throw the ball in straight, but is allowed to align their shoulder on the middle line of the scrum, therefore allowing them to stand a shoulder width towards their own side of the middle line.
Rationale: To promote scrum stability, a fair contest for possession while also giving the advantage to the team throwing in.

Handling in the scrum – exception
Law 20.9 (b)
The number eight shall be allowed to pick the ball from the feet of the second-rows.
Rationale: To promote continuity.

Striking after the throw-in
Law 20
Once the ball touches the ground in the tunnel, any front-row player may use either foot to try to win possession of the ball. One player from the team who put the ball in must strike for the ball.
Rationale: To promote a fair contest for possession.
Sanction: Free-kick

Law 15.4 (c)
The tackler must get up before playing the ball and then can only play from their own side of the tackle “gate”.
Rationale: To make the tackle/ruck simpler for players and referees and more consistent with the rest of that law.

Ruck
Law 16
A ruck commences when at least one player is on their feet and over the ball which is on the ground (tackled player, tackler). At this point the offside lines are created. Players on their feet may use their hands to pick up the ball as long as this is immediate. As soon as an opposition player arrives, no hands can be used.
Rationale: To make the ruck simpler for players and referees.

Other ruck offences
Law 16.4
A player must not kick the ball out of a ruck. The player can only hook it in a backwards motion.
Rationale: To promote player welfare and to make it consistent with scrum law.
Sanction: Penalty

*The November 2017 Tests will operate under the full global law trials, while Women’s Rugby World Cup 2017 will operate under the package of five global law trials that has been operational in the southern hemisphere since January and was operational during the June test window.
 
Last edited:

DocY


Referees in England
Joined
Dec 10, 2015
Messages
1,809
Post Likes
421
Re: Law changes made easy for the 2017/18 season (RFU land)

So they've finally given up on straight feeds?

Though in the most complicated way they could contrive! :shrug:
 

DocY


Referees in England
Joined
Dec 10, 2015
Messages
1,809
Post Likes
421
Re: Law changes

This is in addition to those discussed in earlier thread.
Ruck change the biggest change? No longer defined as 2 people on their feet over the ball? Thoughts?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-un...s-crooked-scrum-feeds-part-six-confirmed-law/

There aren't many problems with the rucks at the moment, and these laws won't fix any of them.

Call me cynical, but the change to say a ruck is formed when only one player is over the ball has RFU written all over it.
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,067
Post Likes
1,797
Re: Law changes

I'm not convinced either - its little more than the abandoned/rejected offside-line-at-a-tackle trial. I get the "its your fault if you suffer a line break" argument of course... I'm just not convinced this solves any problems and is potentially a be-careful-what-you-wish-for and unintended-consequences idea.

didds
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,067
Post Likes
1,797
Re: Law changes made easy for the 2017/18 season (RFU land)

Yup. Good innit.

I suppose the argument is "its still a STRAIGHT feed"... just basically in line with the hookers foot .

didds
 

DocY


Referees in England
Joined
Dec 10, 2015
Messages
1,809
Post Likes
421
Re: Law changes made easy for the 2017/18 season (RFU land)

Yup. Good innit.

I suppose the argument is "its still a STRAIGHT feed"... just basically in line with the hookers foot .

didds

Hooker's foot? I don't see it going past the loosehead! You know - so we have a fair contest and all that.
 
Last edited:

DocY


Referees in England
Joined
Dec 10, 2015
Messages
1,809
Post Likes
421
Re: Law changes

I'm not convinced either - its little more than the abandoned/rejected offside-line-at-a-tackle trial. I get the "its your fault if you suffer a line break" argument of course... I'm just not convinced this solves any problems and is potentially a be-careful-what-you-wish-for and unintended-consequences idea.

didds

Precisely. I'm really not looking forward to penalising this situation. I'm fully expecting a response of "what the **** was I supposed to do?!"
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,067
Post Likes
1,797
Re: Law changes

Precisely. I'm really not looking forward to penalising this situation. I'm fully expecting a response of "what the **** was I supposed to do?!"

to which you as ref reply "I am not your coach" ;-) In a hugely OUTRAGEOUS French accent of course :D

didds
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,811
Post Likes
3,149
Re: Law changes

Call me cynical, but the change to say a ruck is formed when only one player is over the ball has RFU written all over it.

you are too cynical !

Under the new laws, one attacker or defender on his or her feet over the ball create a ruck (instead of the current requirement for both), and therefore the offside line.

It's understood England were opposed to putting this set of laws put through for trial, which is ironic considering they were the ones done over by Italy's shock tactic in this year's Six Nations, where players stood in what seemed offside positions but which weren't, because of tackle-only situations.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/...erstand?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
 

Rushforth


Referees in Holland
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
1,300
Post Likes
92
Although not quite new - one #9/ref told me about the "straight put in with the shoulder at the middle of the scrum" about twenty years ago - I like the suggested changes to the scrum. It allows hookers to tap for the ball to come in again, gives them an extra bit of space to hook the ball, but it does require them to actually do so and lift a foot off the ground, which the side not putting the ball in don't have to do. The wording doesn't give any leeway to RL style feeding, let us hope the example is set from the beginning this time around.

I must confess that least season I penalised a player for kicking the ball out of the ruck, for dangerous play, and although he was probably offside I got the reason wrong. Not a howler at my level, and my decision wasn't argued with, but I did look it up and found that I was wrong. Or perhaps prescient!

As to the #8 picking up, that has been "allowed" for a while now, even if not by the letter of the law.

And last but not least, anything that makes the ruck simpler is good. Of course, whether it actually makes it simpler is a different matter entirely, but that is what law trials are for.
 
Top