[Law] More new Laws?

[Camquin]

Re: Law changes

Well it is missing 14,16,17,18 and 19 is a lot simpler as the restart is a scrum.
Which is a fair chunk.

 

[Ian_Cook]

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.

And about time too! It has taken WR far too long to realise that "yes 9/tap the SH" was a bad idea from the outset.

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

Half way there. They need to have BOTH sides strike for the ball, otherwise the opposing team have an 8-7 shoving advantage

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.

Looks like the Lawmakers have been reading this forum, again.

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.

This was expected, and answers Dixie's question in this post

http://www.rugbyrefs.com/showthread.php?20409-Law-Book-cut-in-half&p=333442&viewfull=1#post333442

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

And another "about time too". The Lawmakers really have been reading rugbyrefs.com

 

[beckett50]

Re: Law changes

I'm not entirely comfortable with the tackler not being allowed to play the ball from the 'wrong side'. To be it was positive play for him/her to get their feet and then attempt to win the ball before attacking team mates arrive. This change puts the advantage at the breakdown very much in the favour of the ball carrier's team.
As for the one person Ruck.....

 

[Rushforth]

Half way there. They need to have BOTH sides strike for the ball, otherwise the opposing team have an 8-7 shoving advantage

The shoving advantage is realistically all that they have to make it a fair contest, with the ball being fed in straight but at a full shoulderwidth difference between the sides.

My own shoulder-to-shoulder distance is about 46 cm, and I played most of my rugby at hooker (grassroots, but 500 games and an average of 5 against the head per game).

If the law is to allow the shoulder interpretation rather than the "one piece of the ball" interpretation - ball "length in line" 280-300 mm as per 2.2 - then the differential is still at least a foot (of the 12 inch kind) just in terms of being able to touch the ball.

Let us be honest, this is about making the scrum restart less ludicrous than it has been, even since before "the hit". It forces Australia to play a competent front row (although they have already improved that aspect of their game since their lowest point).

Last but not least, a competent hooker lifts his foot for less than a second when he taps. I haven't done any timings, but if the opponents are not allowed to push before the ball is in, then the tap is at t=0, the ball starts to be put in at t=0.25, lands around t=0.5 and is hooked less than 0.1 seconds later, and the foot is back in position to drive at t=1.0.

We used to have four calls, simply the names of the front row and the scrum half, back in the times when shoulders were allowed to go lower than they are now, for opposition ball, and although most of my front row's 2500 balls against the head (we probably gave away 250) were by my agility when I had it, the next most was from the "non-call" of 8-man push. The other calls were TH hook (never used early!) and LH ball (both Hooker and TH going low), in addition to the more speculative SH ball which was typically used only on their defending 5m and was a deliberate kick through (which I believed to be illegal at the time, I must admit).

I didn't keep a record of exactly how many games I played, and I was a crappy TH towards the end, but I've played in all three front row positions for about 100 games each, although perhaps less than 8000 minutes at TH, between 1984 and 2008. Just to be clear: 8000 minutes in a single position may sound like a lot, but 800 games in the front row only works out at a bit over 1000 hours, which is probably less than my late father spent on the golf course in the last three years of his life when he was already in his eighties. It is, however, also rather longer than the 40 minutes he played as a flanker once.

My point is that this compromise may well work, and deliver a fair contest as well as continuity of play in addition to player safety.

 

[Christy]

Re: Law changes

Surely its not going to be too bad .It will stop the deliberate ( or lack of knowledge of what is a ruck , in some cases ) from players standing menasingly in way of opposition scrum half playing ball from a ruck situation . ( like what new zealand have been doing for a few years & then the italian job )Will it make this area more competitive .Will lazy runners now get fit by running to get back on side . ( will there be lots of accidental off sides )

 

[Ian_Cook]

Last but not least, a competent hooker lifts his foot for less than a second when he taps. I haven't done any timings, but if the opponents are not allowed to push before the ball is in, then the tap is at t=0, the ball starts to be put in at t=0.25, lands around t=0.5 and is hooked less than 0.1 seconds later, and the foot is back in position to drive at t=1.0.

I agree to a point. It isn't just about the time taken to strike. You also have to consider the time taken to get your feet back and push after you strike. Bearing in mind that your opponent already has his feet back ready to push, so the moment you bring your foot forward to strike, he's already starting to push you back. It is very difficult to get your feet back when you are being pushed backwards.

The other thing to consider is that "fair" does not necessarily mean "equal". While a scrum is supposed to be a fair means of restarting the game, that doesn't mean it has to be an equal one. The reason for the scrum in the first place is that the team not throwing in have infringed, so why should they have 50/50 chance of winning the ball at a scrum?

 

[SimonSmith]

Re: Law changes

Will make it more competitive?

Sorry mate. That's bollocks. This tips the entire equation in favor of the ball carrying team.

 

[Dickie E]

I agree to a point. It isn't just about the time taken to strike. You also have to consider the time taken to get your feet back and push after you strike. Bearing in mind that your opponent already has his feet back ready to push, so the moment you bring your foot forward to strike, he's already starting to push you back. It is very difficult to get your feet back when you are being pushed backwards.

I'm guessing this new law is to prevent the rare occurrence where a scrum is stationary with the ball in the middle? If so, hardly a burning problem to solve. And I also guess that the strike by the feeding team doesn't have to be immediate.

 

[Dickie E]

Law 20.5 & 20.5 (d) 5
No signal from referee.
Rationale: To promote scrum stability,

[/I]

How does this promote stability? Unless the referee stands in the tunnel in the SH's way :shrug:

 

[_antipodean_]

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.

Good. The clown who thought a referee should dictate when a scrumhalf could place the ball in needs to be thrown from the Tarpeian Rock.

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.

Just reflects standard practice. Unfortunately, we'll still see pedants arguing about whether or not it was at the feet of the second row.

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

Needless. Let each scrum determine for themselves how they want to get it to the feet of their second row...

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.

Cue more Pocock style hinging to appear to come in from the gate... I'll reserve judgement on this, but in combination with the other laws, I see a reversion to Macqueen Ball.

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.

That's not a ruck, that's general play. This in combination with the change to 15.4 (c) effectively ensures retention for the attacking team who win the vast majority of rucks now anyway. As a coach I know how to take advantage of this already.

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

This is good if for no other reason than flying boots shouldn't be anywhere near other players' heads.

 

[Christy]

Re: Law changes

Hi simon .
The jackler can still compete for the ball as before , ( so no change there )
Most tacle situations usually become rucks any way , ( players can still counter ruck , so no change there )

I can see a possibility of team in possession being tackled , ruck forming quicker , ( team mate of team in posession being off side as he running back to get on side & a possibility of that player now possibly obstructing a deffender ) :chin:

 

[DocY]

Re: Law changes

Hi simon .
The jackler can still compete for the ball as before , ( so no change there )
Most tacle situations usually become rucks any way , ( players can still counter ruck , so no change there )

I can see a possibility of team in possession being tackled , ruck forming quicker , ( team mate of team in posession being off side as he running back to get on side & a possibility of that player now possibly obstructing a deffender ) :chin:

The tackler can't compete for the ball as freely as before, having to come through the gate, and when an opponent makes contact with the jackler he has to get his hands off the ball - two big changes hugely favouring the team in possession.

Most 'rucks' will likely be fine (though with jacklers so depowered will the defending team put anyone into them?), but after a clean break there's going to be big problems.
Fullback tackles a breaking player and if anyone from either team moves into a position over the ball nearly the whole (possibly even the whole) defending team will be offside.
The ball comes back quickly and a defender makes a tackle and we're going to have to dish out YCs and PTs.

 

[crossref]

Re: Law changes

The tackler can't compete for the ball as freely as before, having to come through the gate, and when an opponent makes contact with the jackler he has to get his hands off the ball - two big changes hugely favouring the team in possession.

I don't see this ? where you get that from ?

Isn't it slightly easier for the jackler, since the jackler on his own constitutes a ruck so offside lines have formed

 

[Rawling]

Re: Law changes

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.

Presumably offside lines don't help the jackler at all (until he gets the ball and sets off) because the tackle area was already protected by the pseudo-offside of the gate.

 

[DocY]

Re: Law changes

I don't see this ? where you get that from ?

Isn't it slightly easier for the jackler, since the jackler on his own constitutes a ruck so offside lines have formed

Rawling's post #15 - my reading of that is that the jackler has to let go and I believe that's the way the trials were conducted. No society guidance has come through yet, though, so they might be interpreting it differently.

 

[crossref]

Re: Law changes

ah - but isn't this
Pl

ayers 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.

already the case (in theory)

 

[DocY]

Re: Law changes

ah - but isn't this
Pl

already the case (in theory)

I don't think so - 16.4 (b) states otherwise:
[LAWS]
Players must not handle the ball in a ruck except after a tackle if they are on their feet and have their hands on the ball before the ruck is formed.
[/LAWS]

 

[Ian_Cook]

Re: Law changes

[LAWS]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.[/LAWS]

I am not reading this that way some are. I see it like this

The first arriving player gets hands on the ball (presumably latching on the ball being held by the tacked player), if an opponent then arrives, no other players may handle the ball, but 16.4 (b) would still apply to the original jackler and the player on the ground holding the ball should be PK for not releasing.

IMO, the "tackler through the gate" and the "one player to form a ruck" arrangements should combine to make the breakdown easier to manage and to put a stop that tactic employed by both the Chiefs and Italy of not forming a ruck so that they can lurk in opposition back-lines. I have heard arguments that taking away the tackler's rights to play from any direction will make pilfering the ball a lot harder. I completely disagree with that view!

Under current Law , how often do we actually see the tackler get to his feet quickly enough to play the ball from whatever direction he is in? Very rarely! Most times, he is cleaned out or the ruck forms before he has the chance to get hands on the ball anyway; its the arriving jackler who gets most of the turnovers (either by a straight pilfer or by a PK for the tackled player not releasing). Even worse, a tackler who tries to grab the ball from the opponent's side of the breakdown, and fails, is more likely to end up in the opponent's side of the ruck (through no fault of his own) and blocking quick ball. By having him need to roll away, you get him out of there and reduced his change of being PK for taking up the space the tackled player need to release the ball.

IMO, its the arriving players who seem to be completely unaffected by the changes... the first player to the tackle is still allowed hands on the ball as before - Law 16.4(b) - and opposing arriving players would have to go though the gate anyway - Law 15.6 (d) - regardless of the quicker appearance of the ruck offside lines. This offside line formation is only going to affect lazy runners and those who want to hang back and wait on the wrong side.

 

[crossref]

Re: Law changes

has this particular change - first player to arrive makes it a ruck - actually been trialled before anywhere?

Or is this global change the first time anyone has played with this Law.

 

[Phil E]

I have merged the three separate threads on the law changes to keep the discussion in one place.

This WR link gives a complete picture with some video examples.

http://laws.worldrugby.org/index.ph...mail&utm_campaign=170719+DR+Global+law+trials