Next season's trials..

[crossref]

What's coming round the corner ..

https://www.world.rugby/news/432632?lang=en

Anyone know what these two are ? Are they to enforce the existing Law ... Or a change ?

Off feet at the ruck/players must leave the ball: creating greater contest at the ruck to speed up ball availability

Delaying the movement of the ruck defensive line: reduce defensive line speed

 

[Dickie E]

so the changes are to reduce injuries noting that most injuries occur to the tackler in a tackle. Which of these changes achieves that?

 

[tewdric]

I can see the off feet at ruck amendment being difficult to ref at grassroots level. 50:22 without ARs will be a nest of vipers too..

I think the delay in allowing the defence to rush up at the breakdown and, to a lesser extent, the 50:22 changes will weaken defences at the top level and lead to more tries, and could lead to more space and a better spectacle in community rugby. I'm fairly open minded about it.

 

[tewdric]

so the changes are to reduce injuries noting that most injuries occur to the tackler in a tackle. Which of these changes achieves that?

The idea seens to be to create more space and to create gaps in the defence which *might* lead to more running moves and less collisions, making it less RL-like..

 

[Dickie E]

The idea seens to be to create more space and to create gaps in the defence which *might* lead to more running moves and less collisions, making it less RL-like..

but something like 50:22 will take defenders out of the line, meaning more 1 on 1 tackles which means more force on the tackler

 

[didds]

what happened to no law changes in RWC year?

 

[tewdric]

Dickie they are finding most injuries occur in the defensive line so creating gaps might work. It will also encourage the return to a game for all shapes and sizes as smaller, faster backs will be more able to exploit the space created.

Didds this is for next year after the WC

 

[tewdric]

At community second team level I think there might be merit in trialling reduced team sizes too - maybe 12 a side with one centre and no flankers, just 8 in the back row. Better spectacle for the crowd, easier to get a team together and more space, so less time spent on the deck.

 

[Dickie E]

Dickie they are finding most injuries occur in the defensive line so creating gaps might work.

IMO that's nonsensical. A 2 on 1 tackle would have to be safer to the tacklers, surely. Maybe ban tackling alltogether - then there'd be no tackler injuries.

 

[Dickie E]

At community second team level I think there might be merit in trialling reduced team sizes too - maybe 12 a side with one centre and no flankers, just 8 in the back row. Better spectacle for the crowd, easier to get a team together and more space, so less time spent on the deck.

I've reffed many 10 per side tournaments and they work really well. Fast & open like 7s but structured like 15s

 

[crossref]

So what does this mean ?

Delaying the movement of the ruck defensive line: reduce defensive line speed

Does it mean enforcing existing Law .. or something new ?

 

[Rich_NL]

I think it depends on the type of tackle most likely to cause concussions. I suspect that the most problems arise in open play where players are 1 on 1 at high speeds, so this may make it worse (or at least not help).

I'm also wary of the main aim of World Rugby being law change "for the sole purpose of injury prevention". Changing rugby into chess would reduce injury, but it wouldn't be rugby any more. Reducing concussion, I'm fine with.

 

[Arabcheif]

Did we not trial lowering the tackle height last year. This saw an increase of concussion to the tackler, so the trial was ended early. What's going to be the difference now? How are we going to safe guard the tackler and the tackled player?

 

[Arabcheif]

So what does this mean ?

Delaying the movement of the ruck defensive line: reduce defensive line speed

Does it mean enforcing existing Law .. or something new ?

I don't know cr, but surely this will just make the top defences move up even faster and uncontrolled to make up for having to wait. I can't think of anything that would benefit the game. If you hold the defensive line till either the 9 runs or kicks or makes the pass to the 10 then we as refs will have a hard job deciding when the defensive line can come up.

 

[Elpablo73]

Why don't we enforce a clear gap / daylight between the defensive line and the offside line. It will have a similar effect to delaying their movement and might be easier to see infringements.

 

[crossref]

Why don't we enforce a clear gap / daylight between the defensive line and the offside line. It will have a similar effect to delaying their movement and might be easier to see infringements.

Offside line at 1m rather than back foot body part

 

[Rich_NL]

Or 10, after every tackle?

1m is much harder to judge than in front/behind. Gameplay will evolve, and there will be more controversies rather than fewer. Perhaps they should start by enforcing the current offside laws (and maybe put the C&O onus on being behind, instead of not-in-front) and see how well that works.

 

[Elpablo73]

Or 10, after every tackle?

1m is much harder to judge than in front/behind. Gameplay will evolve, and there will be more controversies rather than fewer. Perhaps they should start by enforcing the current offside laws (and maybe put the C&O onus on being behind, instead of not-in-front) and see how well that works.

I think this out of our LEAGUE :biggrin:

 

[buff]

So what does this mean ?

Delaying the movement of the ruck defensive line: reduce defensive line speed

Does it mean enforcing existing Law .. or something new ?

Not approved for trial.

https://www.world.rugby/news/433602

 

[crossref]

This one sounds like hard work for the referee

The introduction of an infringement (penalty and free-kick) limit for teams. Once a team has reached the limit, a mandatory yellow card is given to the last offending player as a team sanction. RATIONALE: To encourage teams to offend less. RECOMMENDATION: To approve for closed trials at NRC in Australia.

I think that would mean
.. you have to get your scorecard out after every PK or FK in order to keep count
.. so no more quick taps ?
.. disputes about how many PK there have been

If you play adv from a pK offence and subsequently adv is gained does that still count as ?
If you play adv and they commit a second offence does that count as two ?
.. when the team are on a YC , and both teams know , it puts a lot of pressure on the ref about to award the next one