If you could change the laws of rugby, what would you change?

[TOCC]

There seems to be a perception that the Northern Hemisphere and that England specifically love the scrum and current scrum laws, but the below videos show that there are issues with the scrum across the globe.

 

[Strewthcobber]

There seems to be a perception that the Northern Hemisphere and that England specifically love the scrum and current scrum laws, but the below videos show that there are issues with the scrum across the globe.

Your comment about the NFL in the other thread makes me wonder - do we need a different camera angle for scrums at pro level?

Something like the view behind the line of scrimmage might do a better job of showing what's going on at scrum time because no matter what the laws are at the moment what refs are seeing and penalising just doesn't come across for the TV viewer.

 

[TOCC]

the distance between the packs engagement increased from 1995-2005 and then from 2005 the height of the front row engagements has gotten much lower.

In this video they highlight the speed in which the ball is fed into the scrum, in 1996 the ball is fed into the scrum almost at the exact time that the front rows engage, now the referee is making props hold up the scrum for 5-10seconds before the ball is fed.

 

[Highlander35]

Hehe. That was one of the worst forward packs I can remember seeing in a long time. 2nd stringers in the front row, tighthead about 4 games back from 18 months out, Lock first game back from 3 months out, lock at 6, hooker and 7, centre at 8, 4th string front rowers plus back from injury tighthead on the bench, flanker as reserve lock, utility back as reserve backrower.

As for the topic at hand (re: scrums) The general perception is that it's not ideal, and needs to be changed somehow. That somehow, and the extent of that somehow is the important thing.

 

[TOCC]

Your comment about the NFL in the other thread makes me wonder - do we need a different camera angle for scrums at pro level?

Something like the view behind the line of scrimmage might do a better job of showing what's going on at scrum time because no matter what the laws are at the moment what refs are seeing and penalising just doesn't come across for the TV viewer.

A good commentator can make a conversation about paint drying interesting, rugby union has very few good commentators, additionally scrums in the current form are a blight on the game, so you have the perfect storm of crap commentators and a crap product which is making for poor viewing.

I think there is room in which the camera angles could provide viewers with a better perspective of what is occurring in the game, but at the end of the day you can't polish a turd. Scrums need to be addressed, they need to be sped up and they need to consume less of the game time.

 

[TOCC]

After watching those scrum feeds from around 2000 you can see how much faster the scrum feeds were back then, the ball was fed almost as soon as the players engaged. Now players are forced to crouch, touch and engage for between 6-10seconds before the ball is fed.

 

[HighPlainsDrifter]

A rule to limit halfbacks saying "Sir,Sir" to the referee for only 5 times in a game with no other discussion allowed from them . Sounds like cruel punishment for the halves but the referees would be in some kind of nirvana .

 

[qwerty51]

A rule to limit halfbacks saying "Sir,Sir" to the referee for only 5 times in a game with no other discussion allowed from them . Sounds like cruel punishment for the halves but the referees would be in some kind of nirvana .

That quota would be up within 3 mins.

 

[tragic]

Compulsory yellow card for a penalty try has been shown to be a crock a few times in TRC.
Sometimes the penalty try is enough.
And sometimes both are well deserved.
Why make it compulsory for both?
Surely the ref can make a call on this one.

 

[Gnostic]

Compulsory yellow for dangerous foul play. End of. If such offence prevented a definite try the correct penalty is to award the try. The dangerous play issue is dealt with separately by way of yellow card.

Pretty straight forward.

 

[Rugbynutter39]

2 points instead of 3 point for a penalty goal

People want to watch free flowing attacking rugby not to see who has the best goal kicker

 

[cyclopath]

2 points instead of 3 point for a penalty goal

People want to watch free flowing attacking rugby not to see who has the best goal kicker

Do you reckon teams that cynically infringe in their own 40m or less to stop conceding tries will be put off by giving away less points for a PG? There's a downside to your upside.

 

[Lorenzo]

2 points instead of 3 point for a penalty goal

People want to watch free flowing attacking rugby not to see who has the best goal kicker

Says who?

A try used to be worth zero points - it awarded you a "try" at goal. That's how central to rugby goalkicking has always been.

You can watch league if you don't value goal kicking.

 

[Lorenzo]

Just eliminate the shot at goal option for scrum penalties. Refs have no idea what is going on at the scrum. We have to accept that to some degree but they shouldn't be essentially awarding points to one side based upon their misunderstanding of the scrum.

 

[Gnostic]

Just eliminate the shot at goal option for scrum penalties. Refs have no idea what is going on at the scrum. We have to accept that to some degree but they shouldn't be essentially awarding points to one side based upon their misunderstanding of the scrum.

As with the downside for lowering the points value of penalties the downside here is that teams will just infringe at the scrum. Better education for refs and use of technology will assist. It is never going to be perfect but that is the nature of the game.

 

[Lorenzo]

As with the downside for lowering the points value of penalties the downside here is that teams will just infringe at the scrum. Better education for refs and use of technology will assist. It is never going to be perfect but that is the nature of the game.

You still get the opportunity to kick for touch and the lineout throw in, so giving away a penalty is still unattractive. The refs are basically guessing at this stage.

 

[terry j]

no more holding the ball at the back of the scrum simply to win a penalty. If it is there, use it or lose it. the scrum is not a way to milk penalties, it is to get the game started again.

 

[TOCC]

I want to see less pedantic refereeing, like last night when Nigel called Beale for a 'knock on' when he out the big hit on Adam Carter, tackles like that should be rewarded and not punished..

There should be some sort of exception to the knock rule if it's caused by the opposition and the ball isn't played at.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ruggo]

I would like to see teams with a penalty after time is up be given the lineout option. Like in the NRC last year. That way they have the full advantage that comes with the penalty at their disposal.

 

[Gnostic]

I would like to see no tinkering with the laws, just an even consistent execution of what is already there. Unfortunately for me I am likely to get neither point.