Rugby Laws to become Clearer

[Guyseep]

https://www.rugby.com.au/news/2017/12/06/rugby-law-book-change

Even without seeing it yet, all I have to say is, "Finally!"

I am going to be optimistic that the large majority of issues and questions we have toiled over on this forum will be resolved, and we won't have to debate the minutia of every law to get a clear answer.

 

[Taff]

I'm all for simplifying but what are they going to be leaving out? Forgive me, but I'm getting a bit twitchy? :sad:

Is the lawbook REALLY that bad anyway? Personally, I would make it longer by adding in more examples of the relevant law in action. Eg

14.2 Players on their feet
(a) Falling over the player on the ground with the ball. A player must not intentionally fall on or over a player with the ball who is lying on the ground.
Sanction: Penalty kick

NOTE: This does NOT mean an opponent must let up a player with the ball who is lying on the ground.

 

[crossref]

so at the very least it's a great quiz question --- name the two referees pictured

 

[SimonSmith]

There already gaps in the book. Shortening and simplifying is unlikely to help that.

I read the article, and I was filled with foreboding. This will not end well - mark my words!

 

[Wedgie]

So the current law book was actually written by a 10.6yr old, not a 12 Yr old as we thought...

 

[Dickie E]

so at the very least it's a great quiz question --- name the two referees pictured

Marius van der Westhuizen and Angus Gardner

 

[Dickie E]

There already gaps in the book. Shortening and simplifying is unlikely to help that.

I read the article, and I was filled with foreboding. This will not end well - mark my words!

at the risk of sounding glass half-empty - I have to agree with SS.

And we thought the leggings thread was long. Wait for the "simplified law book" thread!

 

[didds]

1) Kick off
2) do stuff
3) full time

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

There already gaps in the book. Shortening and simplifying is unlikely to help that.

I read the article, and I was filled with foreboding. This will not end well - mark my words!

As much as I enjoy disagreeing with Simon, nothing could be more accurate than his prediction.

 

[Pegleg]

This was announced a while ago. Don't you think it is time that referees saw the proposed new law book. That is if is it coming in so soon?

 

[Dickie E]

This was announced a while ago. Don't you think it is time that referees saw the proposed new law book. That is if is it coming in so soon?

I understand it will be available 1st January

 

[menace]

So the current law book was actually written by a 10.6yr old, not a 12 Yr old as we thought...

Nice try but it said years of formal study. So presumbly you need to have got to year 11 (16/17 yo) to understand the book...now you need to be in year 8...(13/14yo)...so it's more closely now written by a 12yo!!! We've regressed!!!

 

[Ian_Cook]

Rather than make wholesale changes, I would at least be happy if they made a start on this

"with referee interpretation and regional emphasis making it sometimes seem like a different game is being played from one match to the next."

Its high time WR stopped individual unions making up their own stuff, and for ALL law interpretations and protocols to come from WR. Tell the RFU, the NZRU the ARU etc that they WILL use WR's interpretations and not their own.

 

[crossref]

A completely rewritten Law book is quite an undertaking. No matter how carefully it's done , it's bound to have a whole new set of gaps ambiguities.
What fun for refs and coaches

 

[Pegleg]

Rather than make wholesale changes, I would at least be happy if they made a start on this

"with referee interpretation and regional emphasis making it sometimes seem like a different game is being played from one match to the next."

Its high time WR stopped individual unions making up their own stuff, and for ALL law interpretations and protocols to come from WR. Tell the RFU, the NZRU the ARU etc that they WILL use WR's interpretations and not their own.

Oh that it would happen! You are, of course, spot on!

- - - Updated - - -

I understand it will be available 1st January

So my point stands. Why have we not een it if it comes in in less than a month?

 

[Dickie E]

So my point stands. Why have we not een it if it comes in in less than a month?

I would expect that someone up your totem pole has seen it

 

[didds]

So my point stands. Why have we not een it if it comes in in less than a month?

I've just had a thought... Is David Davies involved with all of this?

didds

 

[Rich_NL]

I'm cautiously optimistic; there's certainly room for improvement and clarity. We'll see...

My question: is the new law book coming into force as of 1 January and superceding the existing one in cases of ambiguity/conflict, or will it be starting next season? It'll be a busy new year...

 

[didds]

I comfortably predict that IF its true and DOES happen, it will make a few things clearer. Whilst muddying the waters of other areas that until then have been perfectly clear.

As is oft suggested here, the laws as they are do not in themselves need a total re-write and overly simplifying BUT do need a proper read through, areas of anomalies cleared up definitively (mark from a kick off and restart etc ) and ambiguities cleared up.

Then a serious look at the new laws by a body that did not write them to see they make sense. By representatives of all areas of the game - elite, grass roots, female, youth, child, deaf, etc etc etc.

Then the translations from English (presumed language written in?) can occur and a repeat of the reviews done for the draft other language versions!

didds







didds

 

[Phil E]

So the new book will be roughly half as long, but there are no changes in law?
I predict there will be more holes in it than in a Swiss Cheese Factory!


And rugby.com.au start their article with...

Probably the most complicated rule book in world sport........

Lazy uninformed journalism.