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

[TOCC]

Sort of, the winner of each conference gets a home quarter final and South Africa has two conferences in 2016. Technically Argentina or Japan could host the QF and RSA get nothing.

The trade-off is that RSA have less wild-card teams in the finals. Half of the Australasian conference will reach the finals(5 finals spots), but only a third of the RSA teams will reach the finals(3 spots).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Scrubber2050]

Advantage Rule:

10 seconds , 10 metres field gain or a kick = advantage over.

 

[Teh Other Dave]

Advantage Rule:

10 seconds , 10 metres field gain or a kick = advantage over.

No, no, no, no. You can't deny us our favourite hue and cry - 'Waddabout the bloody advantage ref?!'

 

[Scoey]

Advantage Rule:

10 seconds , 10 metres field gain or a kick = advantage over.

No thanks Scrubber. Compared to peeling off 30-40m with a kick to touch and then line out throw, a 10m gain is no advantage at all. If they did this, I reckon you could count on a fair few scrum halves knock on at the back of the next ruck for fear that advantage will be over. Some of the most enterprising play you will see is during penalty advantage.

 

[Scrubber2050]

I suppose Sciey, the thing that shits me a bit is the Refs interpretation on what constitutes an advantage. Sometimes it is quick and sometimes it seems forever.

I would just love to take that aspect away fom the Ref.

 

[Scoey]

Yeah I know what you mean, but referees discretion will always be a big part of the game. Where you seek to remove that human element, you will end up with the debacle that has become TMOs slow-mo reviewing potential tries where a football may or may not have touched a blade of grass.

 

[Scrubber2050]

Yep - plenty of average TMO's as well as QAssistant Refs

 

[Teh Other Dave]

The ultimate question is whether a ref can see if the team with advantage had the potential to gain the same benefit as they would if the penatly or scrum was awarded. For a penalty, that's field position and line out throw, or a set shot for three points. For a scrum, it's a feed with eight defenders bound into a small space. So refs will typically give a fairly luxurious penalty advantage, especially if it's in the attacking quarter, and will likewise give a fairly brief advantage for a scrum or free kick. Naturally we'll disagree with the ref, because we all see different things unfolding.

 

[Brumby Runner]

No thanks Scrubber. Compared to peeling off 30-40m with a kick to touch and then line out throw, a 10m gain is no advantage at all. If they did this, I reckon you could count on a fair few scrum halves knock on at the back of the next ruck for fear that advantage will be over. Some of the most enterprising play you will see is during penalty advantage.

An interesting observation some of us have made this year with NZ sides, especially the Crusaders, is that they will kill the advantage against them as soon as they are able. I'm sure it is a deliberate action coached into them to make sure opposition sides don't get too much opportunity to play enterprising rugby under advantage.

 

[Tordah]

An interesting observation some of us have made this year with NZ sides, especially the Crusaders, is that they will kill the advantage against them as soon as they are able. I'm sure it is a deliberate action coached into them to make sure opposition sides don't get too much opportunity to play enterprising rugby under advantage.

The Brumbies don't do that.

 

[Brumby Runner]

The Brumbies don't do that.

Not that I've noticed.

In any case they sure could still learn plenty from the Crusaders.

 

[Hugie]

I want to float this idea, not wedded to it.

What if we allowed the Loose head prop to put his hand on the ground, once the ball was fed. The defending LHP could have his hand on the ground from the "set". This would substantially stiffen up the scrum front row from a structural engineering point of view.

 

[747]

This is my first post so 'hello' and here is my rule change which is very minimal.

Instead of allowing the backrowers to disengage from scrums as soon as the halfback passes the ball, for my rule change, the backrow needs to stay attached until after the fly-half catches the ball. The exception to this would be one the opposition number 8 takes the ball from the back of the scrum and runs with it.

I think that this would create more time and space for the backline, especially considering how fast back-rowers are today.

 

[Dan54]

Not keen on that 747, at the moment you can break as soon as ball is clear of scrum, with your idea there is too much advantage to attacking team, what if the 9 doesn't pass the ball, how long before loosies can snot him??

 

[rugbysmartarse]

Not keen on that 747, at the moment you can break as soon as ball is clear of scrum, with your idea there is too much advantage to attacking team, what if the 9 doesn't pass the ball, how long before loosies can snot him??

my law variation is that half backs should be able to be snotted at any given opportunity

 

[wamberal]

my law variation is that half backs should be able to be snotted at any given opportunity

That's not a Law, that's just commonsense.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

I reckon we should revert to old school lineouts. Far too many laws, exceptions and interpretations. Far too much time wasted with the set up before the hooker throws it in.

No lifting. Rugby is a game for all shapes and sizes. Make the beanpoles do some work.

The Lineout ends when the ball has been delivered to the 1/2 back. If it moves off the line of touch, players not in the lineout must still remain 10 metres behind the last feet. If a team decides to drop a couple of fatties into the backline to bolster the back line defence then there is opportunity for the fatties to drive a long way against reduced numbers. Encourage teams to commit most fatties to the lineouts creates space for the princesses to show their wares.

Speed the game up. The ball must be thrown in to the lineout within x seconds of the lineout being formed. Sick of seeing the Lineout Caller reciting the Oxford English Dictionary to the Thrower who then translates it into Latin before eventually throwing the pill in. Not sure what x should be but it should be less than the hookers take now.

No leaving the lineout to rejoin the lineout at another position. OK to move forward and back provided the player doesn't change their order in the lineout.

Halfback can't join the lineout to receive the ball. Only players "in the line" can deliver the ball to the halfback.

If no one from the non throwing team jumps for the ball, then the ball can be delivered to the outside arm of an attacking player. who must deliver it in turn to the half back, or ruck or maul it upfield.

 

[Aussie D]

HJ, remembering the dockyard brawl the lineout was prior to lifting being allowed I would be against your suggestion. As to the time wasting it comes down to two factors - coaching and urgency. As a young rugby player I was taught you had to get to the lineout faster than the opposition - especially on their throw. Too often in professional rugby you see players taking their time getting to the lineout. I also get ticked off when a team takes the penalty kick to touch (after wasting a heap of time coming up with the decision to kick to touch), walk to the lineout and then proceed to call. Surely the lineout could be called prior to kicking to touch (you can always change the call if the need arises).

 

[Joeleee]

Interested to hear your thoughts on the following,

In order to reduce long range shots at goal add another cross bar 3-4 metres above the original cross bar.

To stop long range shots at goal, you could also award a scrum to the opposition at the place you took the kick if you missed. It would add a risk/reward for taking the points. Unfortunately it would also encourage more cynical play as penalties wouldn't be as much of a punishment.

 

[Strewthcobber]

To stop long range shots at goal, you could also award a scrum to the opposition at the place you took the kick if you missed. It would add a risk/reward for taking the points. Unfortunately it would also encourage more cynical play as penalties wouldn't be as much of a punishment.

Another alternative would be to eliminate place goals from the game - drop goals only. And reduce the amount of time for the goal to be taken.