We haven't had a new rule in a while ...

[zer0]

Here's hoping Zero never visits Sully's place...

What.

The actual.

F*ck.

How the is that TV not aligned with the stand it sits on?!

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I think you'd find that Twiggy's GRR have been playing a rule like that during their games. From what I've seen so far the 40/20 rule worked quite well.

So has the 'no kick into touch' from your own 22m worked quite well also.

 

[Jimmy_Crouch]

So has the 'no kick into touch' from your own 22m worked quite well also.

But it wont help to develop the skills needed to be a quality super rugby or test player.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

But it wont help to develop the skills needed to be a quality super rugby or test player.

Would have though forcing players to play instead of hacking it out would have at least some overall benefit.

 

[fatprop]

Interesting options and analysis from Jake White

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby...ays-crusaders-tactics-reason-for-rule-changes

"With this in mind, I think it's fantastic that World Rugby is considering implementing the 50/22 rule," White wrote.
"Based on a similar law in Rugby League, the 50/22 rule would award a lineout to the kicking team if they successfully kick from their own half and the ball rolls into touch inside their opponent's 22."
White believes the threat of conceding an attacking lineout would motivate the defending team to deploy 'goalkeepers' on either side of the field to make sure the 50/22 kicks are covered.
That would deplete the defensive line, and mean the attacking team should have a big numerical advantage and be encouraged to exploit this through their attack.

 

[Strewthcobber]

At what point does World Rugby have to start paying royalities for all of the ideas they have pinched?

 

[Derpus]

Interesting options and analysis from Jake White

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby...ays-crusaders-tactics-reason-for-rule-changes

They can't do this. It might open up some actual fucking space.

 

[RugbyReg]

At what point does World Rugby have to start paying royalities for all of the ideas they have pinched?

pay royalties to who for the ideas they've pinched from who?

 

[Dismal Pillock]

They can't do this. It might open up some actual fucking space.

Havent watched loig since the late 80's, is it actually a better watch these days? A "50/22 rule", no 3 minute spells chewed up by scrum resets, etc.

IRB: "Hey, to get rid of these interminably dull midfield hit-ups maybe we should place a phase limit on them? Say, 6 phases then they have to kick?"

 

[Tex]

Havent watched loig since the late 80's, is it actually a better watch these days? A "50/22 rule", no 3 minute spells chewed up by scrum resets, etc.

IRB: "Hey, to get rid of these interminably dull midfield hit-ups maybe we should place a phase limit on them? Say, 6 phases then they have to kick?"

Big bodies and advanced defensive systems clogging the field? Let's lose a couple forwards. What's that you say, the defensive line is advancing too quickly and stifling ball play? Let's move the offside line back 5m from the last feet of the breakdown/maul/scrum...

 

[Braveheart81]

I think a 40/22 would be better than 50/22. The latter is just not enough distance to make it difficult enough.

I'm still pretty conflicted on the idea though. Does the game need it? I don't really think so.

Highlighting a few low scoring, high pressure games where tries were hard to come by as a reason for creating fairly arbitrary ways to gain an advantage is not great policy.

 

[Derpus]

Havent watched loig since the late 80's, is it actually a better watch these days? A "50/22 rule", no 3 minute spells chewed up by scrum resets, etc.

IRB: "Hey, to get rid of these interminably dull midfield hit-ups maybe we should place a phase limit on them? Say, 6 phases then they have to kick?"

State of origin was alright. Better than anything i saw in Super rugby this year, not hard though.

 

[Derpus]

I think a 40/22 would be better than 50/22. The latter is just not enough distance to make it difficult enough.

I'm still pretty conflicted on the idea though. Does the game need it? I don't really think so.

Highlighting a few low scoring, high pressure games where tries were hard to come by as a reason for creating fairly arbitrary ways to gain an advantage is not great policy.

Almost all creativity has been stripped from the game. It's now all about taking advantage of turnover ball because it's literally the only period during the game where you have any room to play.

Otherwise it's just kick to the corners to put them under pressure in possession, and try and force a turnover in the danger zone. Rinse and repeat.

I think something probably needs to change. I'd prefer the 5m offside line over the 40/20 imitation, though. Hell, even enforcing the existing offside line would make things a lot better.

 

[cyclopath]

Almost all creativity has been stripped from the game. It's now all about taking advantage of turnover ball because it's literally the only period during the game where you have any room to play.

Otherwise it's just kick to the corners to put them under pressure in possession, and try and force a turnover in the danger zone. Rinse and repeat.

I think something probably needs to change. I'd prefer the 5m offside line over the 40/20 imitation, though. Hell, even enforcing the existing offside line would make things a lot better.

So, move the imaginary, unenforced offside line back 5m, but really 2-3m as it would be so hard to police, because, imaginary?

 

[Derpus]

So, move the imaginary, unenforced offside line back 5m, but really 2-3m as it would be so hard to police, because, imaginary?

Players pretending to be 5m back would still make it infinitely easier to get over the ad line.

 

[fatprop]

So, move the imaginary, unenforced offside line back 5m, but really 2-3m as it would be so hard to police, because, imaginary?

I don't know why the linesman can't set a 5m line by standing 5m back from the ruck and using that pretty flag to highlight an infringement

 

[Derpus]

A more serious problem would be trying to figure out when you are allowed to enter the ruck and when you would be offside.

 

[cyclopath]

I don't know why the linesman can't set a 5m line by standing 5m back from the ruck and using that pretty flag to highlight an infringement

They haven't for a while, can't see why they'd start now.

 

[Lindommer]

The two TJ/ARs stand 5m back for scrums now, why not for other breakdowns? I like this idea with one addition: the ground should have 1m markings up and down the field, maybe bigger ones for every 5m.

 

[RugbyReg]

The two TJ/ARs stand 5m back for scrums now, why not for other breakdowns? I like this idea with one addition: the ground should have 1m markings up and down the field, maybe bigger ones for every 5m.

cause scrums are at a fixed point. Rucks / mauls move and even their very commencement is up to interpretation.

Under your rule you have to be 5m back from a ruck or maul? Just think about that for a second. There are so many negative and unreasonable outcomes from that