World Rugby to trial new Law variations

[dru]

Increasing points for a try and decreasing for a penalty will also increase the incentive for a defending team to concede penalties to keep their line intact. Essentially rewarding cynical play. Not saying it's a bad thing but will require a strategy to combat this.

Sent from my SM-T705Y using Tapatalk

This too can be addressed. Ideally by the refs at the breakdown. But another way, is when a penalty is awarded within the 25, or after the ref has given a warning, the infringed team gets the ball back after the penalty for a tap.

 

[Omar Comin']

Increasing points for a try and decreasing for a penalty will also increase the incentive for a defending team to concede penalties to keep their line intact. Essentially rewarding cynical play. Not saying it's a bad thing but will require a strategy to combat this.

The solution has been seen in the NRC - use the yellow card immediately for clear professional fouls or cynical infringements. It's actually a bigger disincentive than the penalty goal. With the rules as they are now you know you can give away a couple of silly penalties, and a couple of goals before the referee will even warn you about a yellow card. And by conceding the penalty, and the kick you also take all the pressure off your defence as the game then goes back to a kick off or 22. That pressure doesn't go away when the incentive is to score a try.

 

[Marcelo]

Increasing points for a try and decreasing for a penalty will also increase the incentive for a defending team to concede penalties to keep their line intact. Essentially rewarding cynical play. Not saying it's a bad thing but will require a strategy to combat this.

Sent from my SM-T705Y using Tapatalk

Simple. More yellow cards

 

[wamberal]

Fewer yellow cards would be better, IMHO.


Or maybe there should be another option, a five minute card for certain offences.


At the top level the loss of a player for ten minutes is a huge penalty, and does nothing much for the game as a spectacle.


As players get stronger, fitter, and faster, it seems to me increasingly important to keep the full complement on the paddock to the maximum extent consistent with player safety.

Maybe differential penalties would be an answer in more serious cases of yellows. The non-offending side gets a kick at goal from the centre of the 22, and then play recommences at the original spot for another penalty.

 

[Kangaroo Sausage]

As wamberal says, more yellow cards is not better. If it were a temporary strategy which ultimately reduced cynical offending it would be OK. Not sure the differential penalty would work either - I could see it becoming almost like snooker. I can camp in the oppositions 22 racking up goals and holding possession until I eventually score a try.

Interesting putting this point system onto the world cup (ignoring that tactics would have no doubt been different).

The final becomes closer, 32-18. Oz would have remained in touching distance 24-18 even after Carters drop and penalty which could have made a difference.

Both semis become more decisive, ABs beating the boks 20-12 and Oz winning 32-10

In the quarters the ABs blow out even further 70-12. The final penalty against Scotland becomes immaterial as Oz would have already been leading 36-32. SA beats Wales 18-16. Argentina-Ireland hardly changes, 43-20 becomes 42-20.

Sent from my SM-T705Y using Tapatalk

 

[liquor box]

I don't want to change the rules too much but an idea that might work would be when a cynical penalty is conceded in defence in your own half of the field you lose a player too a modified yellow card where your player is on the sideline until you have the ball again in attack.

This might be for one ruck until a turnover or for 15 phases. It is designed to make it hard to defend for a while but not ruin the game allowing the attacking side to score 20 points in the next 10 minutes.

If the attacking side takes a kick at goal then you don't lose a player, this gives the attacking side a chance to earn a few points if they choose but hopefully they will take a kick for touch and a lineout.

As I said I don't want massive changes but a little tweak to the time a yellow card is given for might be a solution.

For repeated infringements maybe the offending player AND the captain go off for a two man advantage until the team gets attacking ball.

 

[Sully]

If a penalty is awarded in the 22 then you get the shot at goal and the restart is a your scrum on the 22.

 

[Omar Comin']

If a penalty is awarded in the 22 then you get the shot at goal and the restart is a your scrum on the 22.

If you did that then if it was say Romania vs USA the match could be an 80 minute loop of scrum, penalty, goal, scrum, penalty, goal etc.

The NRC rules have worked. If teams are cynical they get yellow cards, if they're not cynical they don't get yellow cards. It's the simplest and easiest way to do it. Having the yellow card at 10 minutes makes them a clear deterrent to cynical cheating. The average points difference during a 10 minute yellow card period is about 6-7 points. That's not crazy. Make it 5 and teams may think it's worth conceding them.

 

[Scotty]

Maybe there could be a special penalty goal whereby if the defending team infringes 3 times in a row in their own half. The attacking team gets a kick at goal which is valued at 5 points.

Other penalty kicks are 2 and tries remain at 5.

Would certainly help stop serial infringements.

 

[liquor box]

If you did that then if it was say Romania vs USA the match could be an 80 minute loop of scrum, penalty, goal, scrum, penalty, goal etc.

The NRC rules have worked. If teams are cynical they get yellow cards, if they're not cynical they don't get yellow cards. It's the simplest and easiest way to do it. Having the yellow card at 10 minutes makes them a clear deterrent to cynical cheating. The average points difference during a 10 minute yellow card period is about 6-7 points. That's not crazy. Make it 5 and teams may think it's worth conceding them.

I wonder what effect fatigue has on the players? I would love to now the points conceded in the lat 5-10 minutes of a game for teams that have had guys with cards

 

[terry j]

funny how the argument is usually 'how do we make rugby simpler'. It seems destined to become more and more complex.

 

[waiopehu oldboy]

Other than 6 +'2 scoring (& an automatic 8 for a penalty try) the law changes being trialled in Welsh second division are:

Penalties awarded after time has expired can be kicked to touch and the lineout will be played.

Teams can choose which advantage they want to play if a side infringes on multiple occasions.

No conversions after a penalty try, which is automatically worth eight points.

A maul must start to move within five seconds or the ball must be used.

A player who plays the ball while his foot is in touch but before the ball has crossed the plane of the touchline is deemed to have carried the ball into touch.

Scrum changes allowing a scrum-half to stand with his shoulder level with the centre of the scrum, promoting scrum stability.

The introduction of a five-metre line drop-out as an alternative to a five-metre scrum for a defending team.

No reference to the blights of the unlawfully-formed rolling maul or the milking of penalties at scrum time, these are presumably & hopefully going to be addressed by applying the existing laws more diligently (yeah, right).

Full press release & link to details of the changes here:

http://www.worldrugby.org/news/90108

Anyone know how the trial is going?

WR (World Rugby) announced the trial back in September & there was a thread, from which I've quoted my OP:

http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/community/threads/world-rugby-to-introduce-law-trials.16039/

Perhaps that one & this one could be merged?

 

[Scoey]

The NRC rules have worked.

I am loathe to get involved in this thread because it is essentially just a cut and paste of the NRC law variations thread but I can't go past this without responding.

The NRC rules have worked in your opinion. You had already formed the opinion that they would work, before a game had been played under them though so it's hardly surprising.
It doesn't make it fact though which is what you imply when you talk in absolutes such as you have above.

Anyway, as you were.

 

[Omar Comin']

The NRC rules have worked in your opinion. You had already formed the opinion that they would work, before a game had been played under them though so it's hardly surprising.
It doesn't make it fact though which is what you imply when you talk in absolutes such as you have above.

Well they have had generally positive feedback on facebook, the roar, even here! And they've done what I thought they would do and what they aimed to do. I can't remember if you specifically said this, but quite a few of you guys thought it wouldn't result in a reduction in penalty goal attempts at all. That it would just mean more professional fouls and the same, if not more penalty goals. That was the main argument against the points change from people on this site! You all went quiet on that pretty quickly.

I actually don't know how you could say they haven't worked. Penalty goal attempts barely happen, except to break a tie or push a margin beyond 8 points, and the games are generally open, featuring plenty of attacking intent, and not too much cynical stuff in defence - because of the deterrent of the yellow card. Which, I might add, is in contrast to a lot of Australian derby's in Super Rugby.

 

[Highlander35]

NRC became a bit samey this year. Avoiding Penalty fests is important, but it swung far too much the other way. There's more or less no point in taking penalties unless you're exactly 7 or 8 up, 1 or 2 down, or tied.

For mine, I think dropping the conversion back to 2 would be adequate.

To beat or tie 1 converted try under the current system is 3 penalties, it's 4 under the current NRC and would still be four under that change. The same rules for 2 converted tries would be 5, 8 and 7 respectively.

It wouldnae solve it entirely, but it would hopefully break up the long scoreless stretches of play you sometimes see, when quality defending or incompetent attacking, or both from one side results in a load of scoreless play between the defending 5 metre line and the attacking 40.

 

[Omar Comin']

Australian super rugby derby's can also be quite a bit samey. Just samey in a more negative way.

But I wouldn't be against that Highlander. It would also keep an odd number in the scoring system, which I think makes for more interesting scores (including 1 point games). That probably helps avoid more draws too.

Also, I wouldn't mind keeping the drop goal at 3 points. Drop goals require plenty of skill and are scored in general play, where the defending team have a chance to block them. It's not like a penalty goal where the whole game stops for a minute or two while everyone else waits around watching 1 bloke do some silly routine before taking an uncontested kick.

 

[Spew McMeniman]

I agree with wamberal that a 5 minute card should be added. If you get two then its a yellow and then another is a red.

I think the points system should change but it doesn't need a huge overhaul. A try should be 6 points, conversion 1 and leave the rest as is. It's ridiculous that two penalties is worth more than an unconverted try at the moment. Conversion to 1 point as a deadlock breaker.

 

[Omar Comin']

funny how the argument is usually 'how do we make rugby simpler'. It seems destined to become more and more complex.

I can think of 2 ways to simplify the laws. Both involve ending a distinction between a ruck and a tackle.

One was the rule in the full ELV's that allowed hands in the ruck. The other would be to not allow hands in the tackle (so effectively calling any tackle situation a ruck as they are ruled now).

Either would get rid of all the complexity around rights of the tackler, beating the ruck, surviving the clean out etc.

But the NH didn't go for the ELV's and the latter would get rid of the skill of pilfering the ball (instead teams would have to drive over the ball / counter ruck to win a turnover).

 

[Highlander35]

Are they nerfing the maul yet?

Would like to see it switched from can't join the maul behind the carrier to can't move ahead of the carrier at all, demand the transfer of the ball backwards rather than the sliding player.

Sent from my LG-P713 using Tapatalk

 

[chasmac]

What about the wronged team in a yellow card incident getting to nominate which opposition player sits on the sideline. E.G. In the Ben Smith yellow card incident, the Wallabies nominate say Sam Whitelock to spend time in the bin.