Law trials and changes
-
@antipodean said in Law trials and changes set for 2017 and beyond:
I find it absurd that a ruck and hence offside lines can now constitute one person over the ball.
It will be an interesting one to watch that's for sure.
I get the reasons for it. It will clean up the tackle area decision making for the ref and give him space to judge other things. it will stop the wrong decisions like DuPlessis on Carter.
On the flip side it can create some unfair defensive situations where one linebreak and a series of quick offloads can result in the opposition having next to no chance of getting onside to take part. Good teams will play Sevens like continuity and have two support runners, one to stand over the tackle and set the offside line, the next to take a pass off the ground and keep things backpedalling.
It could be a great weapon against rush umbrella defences. Stack a narrow attack around the 10/12 channel until the outside defence is chasing back to get onside then transfer the ball wide. -
@Crucial If a tackled player immediately passes off the ground to a support player, all the rest of them need to do is pass before they run five metres and everyone behind them is out of the game.
@antipodean said in Law trials and changes set for 2017 and beyond:
@Crucial If a tackled player immediately passes off the ground to a support player, all the rest of them need to do is pass before they run five metres and everyone behind them is out of the game.
No. Passing the ball puts offside players onside again. You are correct if the ball carrier only runs 5m though. The aim would be to keep running the ball across to a new attacking pod and only moving forward 5 metres at a time, then make another line break to renew the offside.
-
@antipodean said in Law trials and changes set for 2017 and beyond:
@Crucial If a tackled player immediately passes off the ground to a support player, all the rest of them need to do is pass before they run five metres and everyone behind them is out of the game.
No. Passing the ball puts offside players onside again. You are correct if the ball carrier only runs 5m though. The aim would be to keep running the ball across to a new attacking pod and only moving forward 5 metres at a time, then make another line break to renew the offside.
@Crucial said in Law trials and changes set for 2017 and beyond:
No. Passing the ball puts offside players onside again. You are correct if the ball carrier only runs 5m though.
Depends if the offside line is where the last tackle/ ruck was:
11.8 Putting onside a player retiring during a ruck, maul, scrum or lineout
When a ruck, maul, scrum or lineout forms, a player who is offside and is retiring as required by Law remains offside even when the opposing team wins possession and the ruck, maul, scrum or lineout has ended. The player is put onside by retiring behind the applicable offside line. No other action of the offside player and no action of that player's team mates can put the offside player onside.
If the player remains offside the player can be put onside only by the action of the opposing team. There are two such actions:
Opponent runs 5 metres with ball. When an opponent carrying the ball has run 5 metres, the offside player is put onside. An offside player is not put onside when an opponent passes the ball. Even if the opponents pass the ball several times, their action does not put the offside player onside.
Opponent kicks. When an opponent kicks the ball, the offside player is put onside. -
@Crucial said in Law trials and changes set for 2017 and beyond:
No. Passing the ball puts offside players onside again. You are correct if the ball carrier only runs 5m though.
Depends if the offside line is where the last tackle/ ruck was:
11.8 Putting onside a player retiring during a ruck, maul, scrum or lineout
When a ruck, maul, scrum or lineout forms, a player who is offside and is retiring as required by Law remains offside even when the opposing team wins possession and the ruck, maul, scrum or lineout has ended. The player is put onside by retiring behind the applicable offside line. No other action of the offside player and no action of that player's team mates can put the offside player onside.
If the player remains offside the player can be put onside only by the action of the opposing team. There are two such actions:
Opponent runs 5 metres with ball. When an opponent carrying the ball has run 5 metres, the offside player is put onside. An offside player is not put onside when an opponent passes the ball. Even if the opponents pass the ball several times, their action does not put the offside player onside.
Opponent kicks. When an opponent kicks the ball, the offside player is put onside.@antipodean Yes of course, you are correct, the law changes slightly after a ruck (which is now basically just a tackle)
-
I suspect that one may change from 'an opponent runs 5m' to 'the opposition run 5 metres' after a season or so. Otherwise your scenario is good. Keep passing around like 7s moving 4 metres forward at a time after a linebreak.
@Crucial Actually I think my idea fails if they can be offside as soon as they pass where the tackle was.
Either way these law changes, like most, end up having adverse effects from the intention.
-
Temporary replacement period for off-field HIA now fixed at 10 minutes
World Rugby has approved an amendment to law making it mandatory for players who undertake an off-field screening under the head injury assessment (HIA) protocol not to return before 10 minutes (actual time) have elapsed. The amendment comes into effect globally from 26 August and applies to all participating elite adult rugby competitions*. It amends the previous time stipulation, which included no minimum requirement. With the latest data indicating that the average time for the screening to be undertaken by a team or independent doctor being a shade over seven minutes, the introduction of a fixed time will further promote a calm, clinical environment for assessment without rush or risk of screening time falling well under the average completion time. The adjustment will also assist match management. (...) **Exception: The Rugby Championship 2017, which kicks off this weekend, will operate with the amendment in advance of the global implementation date. -
Press release World Rugby
21 July 2017Six law amendments added to global trial as northern hemisphere programme gets underway
Covering the areas of scrum and tackle/ruck law, these changes will be trialed alongside five previously confirmed laws and will come into effect on 1 August in the northern hemisphere and 1 January in the south.The World Rugby Executive Committee has approved the addition of six law amendments to the programme of global law trials following positive trials in specific international competitions this year. The amendments, which relate to the scrum (Law 20) and tackle/ruck (Laws 15 and 16), are aimed at making the game simpler to play and referee as well as further promoting player welfare. They have been approved following extensive game data analysis as well as player, coach, match official and union feedback from the tournaments in which these six aspects of law were trialled. The six law amendments will now join the scheduled global law trial programme, completing a total package of 11 aspects of law, and will debut in full from 1 August, 2017 in the northern hemisphere and from 1 January, 2018 in the south. 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. The six aspects of law approved to join the global trial programme are: 1. Law 20.5 and 20.6 (d) 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 (non-offending team). 2. Law 20.9 (b) Handling in the scrum – exception The number eight shall be allowed to pick the ball from the feet of the second-rows. Rationale: To promote continuity. 3. Law 20.8 (b) Striking after the throw-in 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. Sanction: Free-kick Rationale: To promote a fair contest for possession. 4. 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.5. Law 16 Ruck 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. 6. Law 16.4: Other ruck offences A player must not kick the ball out of a ruck. The player can only hook it in a backwards motion. Sanction: Penalty Rationale: To promote player welfare and to make it consistent with scrum law. The six new aspects of law were part of the original 2015 laws review process, and were recommended to move to closed trial to provide a further analysis opportunity before global trial could be considered. These closed trials were operational at this year's World Rugby U20 Championship, World Rugby Nations Cup, World Rugby Pacific Challenge, Americas Rugby Championship and Oceania Rugby U20 Championship, with positive outcomes: Scrum outcomes: * More ball coming back into play with fewer penalties and fewer collapses * The ball was thrown in without delay, with scrums continuing to be stable prior to throw-in * No collapses occurred by the number eight picking the ball up from under the second rows Tackle outcomes: * Feedback indicated that the tackle was easier to referee with more clearly defined offside lines and tacklers not interfering with the quality of the ball with more players on their feet allowing counter rucking A comprehensive analysis was undertaken by the specialist Laws Review Group, the Scrum Steering Group, considering detailed and highly-positive union, player and match official feedback, before the recommendations were approved by the Rugby Committee and subsequently the Executive Committee. The trials were also considered at the high performance match officials and coaches meeting earlier this year. World Rugby Chairman Bill Beaumont said: "World Rugby continually reviews the laws to ensure that the game is as enjoyable, simple and safe as possible at all levels. I would like to thank our unions for their full support throughout the process, the experts who evaluated the closed trial data and look forward to seeing the full results of the global trial.”Rugby Committee Chairman John Jeffrey added: "These law amendments are designed to improve the experience of those playing and watching the game at all levels and to avoid negative play where possible. The results of the closed trials were highly-encouraging with more ball out from the scrum, fewer penalties and better stability, which has a player welfare benefit too.” Implementation this year will enable at least a year of evaluation before the moratorium on law amendment begins a year out from Rugby World Cup 2019. Law Review Group members: Alain Rolland; Rhys Jones; Mark Harrington (all World Rugby); Nigel Melville (RFU); Ben Whitaker (ARU); David Nucifora (IRFU); Didier Retiere (FFR); Dave Rennie (NZR), Francesco Ascione (FIR); Rachael Burford (IRPA); Chris Paterson (SRU); Pablo Bouza (UAR); Paul Adams (WRU); Chean Roux (SARU). Previous inputs within the process include Paul O'Connell (IRPA); Eddie Jones (RFU); Nigel Whitehouse (WRU) and Dr Martin Raftery (World Rugby).@Stargazer said in Law trials and changes set for 2017 and beyond:
Press release World Rugby
21 July 2017Six law amendments added to global trial as northern hemisphere programme gets underway
Covering the areas of scrum and tackle/ruck law, these changes will be trialed alongside five previously confirmed laws and will come into effect on 1 August in the northern hemisphere and 1 January in the south.Good video explaining the six law amendments (posted above):
-
Interesting video thanks. First weekend of the AP this weekend and a record number of tries scored. Few factors, good weather, some optional defence and perhaps some of the new laws around the ruck giving the attacking team a little more protection of their ball.
Had to laugh at the scrum feed section on the vid. All that seems to happen now is the 9 stands to the side and still feeds to the second row. Still didn't see a straight feed (or a ref blow for a crooked one...)
-
Some good changes in there but why the fuck did it take so long to ban kicking the ball in the ruck? It's good that they've finally done it but even ignoring player safety, it was never about competing for the ball, just disrupting play for the other team. I've always hated it.
-
@Stargazer said in Law trials and changes set for 2017 and beyond:
Press release World Rugby
21 July 2017Six law amendments added to global trial as northern hemisphere programme gets underway
Covering the areas of scrum and tackle/ruck law, these changes will be trialed alongside five previously confirmed laws and will come into effect on 1 August in the northern hemisphere and 1 January in the south.Good video explaining the six law amendments (posted above):
@Stargazer All I see is less competition for the ball.
And the idea there can be a ruck and hence an offside line because someone stood over a tackle! Not even golden oldies run rucks like that.
-
Some good changes in there but why the fuck did it take so long to ban kicking the ball in the ruck? It's good that they've finally done it but even ignoring player safety, it was never about competing for the ball, just disrupting play for the other team. I've always hated it.
-
@Stargazer All I see is less competition for the ball.
And the idea there can be a ruck and hence an offside line because someone stood over a tackle! Not even golden oldies run rucks like that.
@antipodean said in Law trials and changes set for 2017 and beyond:
@Stargazer All I see is less competition for the ball.
And the idea there can be a ruck and hence an offside line because someone stood over a tackle! Not even golden oldies run rucks like that.
The strangest bit is the offside line then disappearing if the arriving player then steps back again. Rolland says that the opposition players that were previously offside are now onside again. That is plain odd. Once an offside line is formed it should stay in place.
The other thing I noticed was that the kicking the ball in the ruck rule is for player safety- fair enough. We have seen kicks to the head in these situation and there is no onus on the kicker to take care like they would in a tackle situation. It was inconsistent. However, the one man ruck thing demands that an arriving attacker steps over the tackled player encouraging him to plant his foot right where the tackler may still be getting away. Recipe for stomped on heads don't you think? -
Like all rule changes in rugby they create as many new problems as they try to fix. The more I look at it the more I wonder if that tackle/ruck thing was made up by a committee of theorists that have never played a game in their lives (WR Refs?)
If the arriving player doesn't (or can't) step over the tackled player then the situation is no different to the current one that England bitched about when Italy played to the laws. In fact according to Rolland they now have an incentive to hang around offside in case they get put onside again.
What is the reasoning for not just making the tackle the offside again? -
Like all rule changes in rugby they create as many new problems as they try to fix. The more I look at it the more I wonder if that tackle/ruck thing was made up by a committee of theorists that have never played a game in their lives (WR Refs?)
If the arriving player doesn't (or can't) step over the tackled player then the situation is no different to the current one that England bitched about when Italy played to the laws. In fact according to Rolland they now have an incentive to hang around offside in case they get put onside again.
What is the reasoning for not just making the tackle the offside again?@Crucial said in Law trials and changes set for 2017 and beyond:
What is the reasoning for not just making the tackle the offside again?
That's called league.
-
@Crucial said in Law trials and changes set for 2017 and beyond:
What is the reasoning for not just making the tackle the offside again?
That's called league.
@antipodean said in Law trials and changes set for 2017 and beyond:
@Crucial said in Law trials and changes set for 2017 and beyond:
What is the reasoning for not just making the tackle the offside again?
That's called league.
Except in league you cannot contest the ball, that's the big difference. This new rule is like half-league. Removing opportunities to contest and adding in a spurious offside line creation.
-
@antipodean said in Law trials and changes set for 2017 and beyond:
@Crucial said in Law trials and changes set for 2017 and beyond:
What is the reasoning for not just making the tackle the offside again?
That's called league.
Except in league you cannot contest the ball, that's the big difference. This new rule is like half-league. Removing opportunities to contest and adding in a spurious offside line creation.
@Crucial said in Law trials and changes set for 2017 and beyond:
@antipodean said in Law trials and changes set for 2017 and beyond:
@Crucial said in Law trials and changes set for 2017 and beyond:
What is the reasoning for not just making the tackle the offside again?
That's called league.
Except in league you cannot contest the ball, that's the big difference. This new rule is like half-league. Removing opportunities to contest and adding in a spurious offside line creation.
Woosh.
My point is they're removing the contest for possession from the game.
-
@Crucial said in Law trials and changes set for 2017 and beyond:
@antipodean said in Law trials and changes set for 2017 and beyond:
@Crucial said in Law trials and changes set for 2017 and beyond:
What is the reasoning for not just making the tackle the offside again?
That's called league.
Except in league you cannot contest the ball, that's the big difference. This new rule is like half-league. Removing opportunities to contest and adding in a spurious offside line creation.
Woosh.
My point is they're removing the contest for possession from the game.
@antipodean said in Law trials and changes set for 2017 and beyond:
@Crucial said in Law trials and changes set for 2017 and beyond:
@antipodean said in Law trials and changes set for 2017 and beyond:
@Crucial said in Law trials and changes set for 2017 and beyond:
What is the reasoning for not just making the tackle the offside again?
That's called league.
Except in league you cannot contest the ball, that's the big difference. This new rule is like half-league. Removing opportunities to contest and adding in a spurious offside line creation.
Woosh.
My point is they're removing the contest for possession from the game.
OK. Misunderstood what you were saying.
-
@Unco not that I'm a fan of the hacking at the ball at the ruck anyway, but isn't disrupting play for the other team a large part of competing for possession?
@Bones said in Law trials and changes set for 2017 and beyond:
@Unco not that I'm a fan of the hacking at the ball at the ruck anyway, but isn't disrupting play for the other team a large part of competing for possession?
Sure but there should at least be some illusion of proper competition there. To me it isn't much different than a deliberate knock on.
