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

[Slim 293]

AFL don't seem to have much trouble working this one out, with a curved boundary line to boot. And their boundary umpires are generally further away from the play than rugby TJs.

But in the AFL it's policed very loosely when somebody actually gets the space near the boundary to run across the line while keeping it in.......

It would be an absolute disaster in rugby........

Scoring tries in the corner would become an absolute joke with players simply just purposely throwing their body out of play while keeping the ball in.......

 

[yourmatesam]

ball out if the BALL touches, or crosses, the lines. Only exception is a kicked ball blown back in while in flight. Take a leaf out of soccer's and AFL's books here

I like your thinking here Lindo, heaps easier to manage than the current (confusing) system.

Has anyone seen "Line Ball Your Call", the current touch laws are so confusing the ARU developed a book to clear things up - and even after that, they're still murky!!

 

[Moses]

If a team have advantage and kick the ball out, the captain of that team should have two options:
1. Take a lineout from where that kick went out
2. Kick it again, then take a lineout from where this one goes out.

The rule should apply even if the ball is kicked out on the full during an advantage period.

 

[Lindommer]

.....the current touch laws are so confusing the ARU developed a book to clear things up - and even after that, they're still murky!

Such as a player in touch touching a moving, or stationary, ball. Current Laws as clear as mud. Even international TJ/ARs get this one wrong.

My original post missed another suggested change: the lack of clarity in the current Laws re a player in touch holding, or whatever, the ball. This is set out in the definitions of Law 19: "A player in touch may kick or knock the ball, but not hold it, provided the ball has not crossed the plane of the touchline". MMmmm? I realise this goes against my suggestion where the ball is, and only the ball, should determine touch but surely if the current Laws are to make sense a player in touch shouldn't have anything to do with the ball. Maybe my soccer/AFL suggestion could have a rider: players must be in the playing area to be able to play at the ball, ie. once you're over the touch or dead ball lines without the ball you can't play at the pill. But the principle espoused in soccer and AFL where the ball's position determines touch has a lot going for it.

 

[Scoey]

Time off for:

• Kicks at goal
• After a try is scored
• Scrums
• Lineouts

And we could run out a different side for defense and another side for offense! Actually I don't mind this idea, but when I read it, my first thought was how long a game could technically last - much like NFL with all thiewr stoppages! Imagine how drunk I could get at the game then!!!

But I digress, the only rule I would change is bring back f'ing rucking. When you could use your boots, players falling on the wrong side, hands in the ruck etc actually a lot of the issues people here are wanting to address were not that much of a problem!

 

[fatprop]

Lineout

Rugby is about competing for the ball, if you don't compete for the ball at lineout, you lose the right of a not straight decision

Scrum

Require the props to keep their hands on the shoulder point after the touch and both bind long

 

[Blue]

I would give attacking teams six opportunities to score on each possession, and then they would lose it. Also, the defence wouldn't be allowed to try recover the ball on the ground and they have to go back 10 metres after each tackle. And I'd get rid of flankers, pushing on scrums and lineouts.

Man's a farquin genius.

 

[Blue]

Lineout

Rugby is about competing for the ball, if you don't compete for the ball at lineout, you lose the right of a not straight decision

Scrum

Require the props to keep their hands on the shoulder point after the touch and both bind long

Yes. I would remove "Pause" as well.

So it's Touch, but the hand stays, and then engage.

Not sure if the lineout one would work. There might be a grey area in terms of what defines competition. One guy in the air? A guy who competes directly with the player who takes the ball?

 

[Blue]

Not having scrums, penalties or kicks within 15m of a sidleine would (should/could) have many positive effects. If it's a scrum the attacking side will have 15m of blindside to work with. If a kick for the line the kicking side will have a much better angle to get distance. If a kick at goal the mark will be up to 15m closer to the middle resulting in a easier kick.

The object of this, and a few other suggested changes, isn't to alter the fabric of rugby but to further penalise offences. If any of them result in fewer penalties as players think a bit more about the consequences of infringing, so much the better. But some of the suggested changes in the Laws here are certainly worth a trial.

Agree with all those but surely we should not be making kicks easier? Or do you mean line kicks?

 

[Ignoto]

Not sure if the lineout one would work. There might be a grey area in terms of what defines competition. One guy in the air? A guy who competes directly with the player who takes the ball?

Either would be fine. You shouldn't be allowed to get the ball if you never made an attempt to compete for it.

 

[Blue]

Also how about limiting the pick and drive teams use to close out a match. Sometimes it goes on for like 3 minutes. Although I guess it is a skill to not give away a penalty and hold on to the thing. Boring as batshit though.

And how about a strict no dickheads policy?

 

[liquor box]

I would have it so if you dont compete, the lineout being straight is not an issue

I would have some sort of timere that the ref can keep in his pocket that beeps instead of him calling a scrum, think of the countdown timers in a cycling time trial, small beeps for the crouch, touch, pause and a long beep for engage. This means everyone knows what speed it is going to occur.

I would have the blindside touchie come onto the field for every scrum and stand whare a referee stands but on the opposite side, it seems that the issues always occur on the opposite side to the referee.

If you have an advantage and take a shot of field goal the advantage has been taken

If you have an advantage and drop the ball over the line then you have had your advantage

Rucking is to be considered compulsory, after each S15 game the team that inflicts the most damage to the oppositions ribs gets a bonus point

 

[Jnor]

Lineout

Rugby is about competing for the ball, if you don't compete for the ball at lineout, you lose the right of a not straight decision

I think some refs are putting this into practice anyway - I've seen it in subbies at any rate. Something to do with materiality perhaps?

Also how about limiting the pick and drive teams use to close out a match. Sometimes it goes on for like 3 minutes. Although I guess it is a skill to not give away a penalty and hold on to the thing. Boring as batshit though.

And how about a strict no dickheads policy?

Agree on the first point (both aspects). As for the second, isn't that why God invented rugby league?

 

[fatprop]

Yes. I would remove "Pause" as well.

So it's Touch, but the hand stays, and then engage.

Not sure if the lineout one would work. There might be a grey area in terms of what defines competition. One guy in the air? A guy who competes directly with the player who takes the ball?

One player in the air would do it for me, I hate watch teams sit back to sack the maul and then get a scrum for an incorrect throw.

Compete you bastards, compete

 

[fatprop]

Also how about limiting the pick and drive teams use to close out a match. Sometimes it goes on for like 3 minutes. Although I guess it is a skill to not give away a penalty and hold on to the thing. Boring as batshit though.

And how about a strict no dickheads policy?

The proposed "use it or lose it" ruck rule should keep it moving

 

[TheBigDog]

I just have one problem with people suggesting that props jerseys should be looser. I assume we are looking at making these changes for every level of the game (internationals, super rugby, club rugby - premier grade, lower grades etc). For anyone who has played/watched lower grades rugby the fitness of players does decrease the lower you go and therefore some of the props are rather large gentlemen (I mean fat large here btw). My only concern is that to find loose fitting jerseys for these guys is going to require a XXXXL in some cases. And then lets say a team has a rotation of props they use each week, one bloke is 110kg while the other is 130kg. Are teams going to have to provide multiple 1 and 3 jerseys of different sizes to accomodate for different props?

Not trying to bag out the idea, I think its good, but just looking at the logistics of it seems a bit much. Would definately work for professional rugby but if its meant to be used throughout all grades then it becomes an issue. If anything is going to be brought in for the safety/stabilization of scrums you would think it would be brought in at all levels because injuries do still happen and an argument can be made that club rugby could be more prone to this because players don't use correct technique etc.

 

[Lindommer]

Yes. I would remove "Pause" as well. So it's Touch, but the hand stays, and then engage.

Blue, the iRB have declared the new sequence will be "Crouch/Touch/Set". With pauses, of course, but no pause/Pause/pause before the final engagement. Nothing about the hand staying after Touch. Still like to see a much faster setting of scrums. Tahs, for instance, are tortoisely slow, Wallabies aren't much better.

 

[Ignoto]

My only concern is that to find loose fitting jerseys for these guys is going to require a XXXXL in some cases. And then lets say a team has a rotation of props they use each week, one bloke is 110kg while the other is 130kg. Are teams going to have to provide multiple 1 and 3 jerseys of different sizes to accomodate for different props?

Pretty simple - your subs means you get a jersey each year. The number on that jersey is your club number so it'll be unique. If you're looking at premier grade, they can all have the 1-22 if you really want.

 

[Braveheart81]

I would make Waratahs fans sit a rugby IQ test before they are allowed to boo when a penalty kick for goal is taken or whinge about the Waratahs kicking from their own 22 rather than running the ball.

 

[Lindommer]

What was wrong with the loose-fitting cotton jumpers back in the olden days? Props had no trouble getting a good handful of jumper then. And clubs seemed to have no trouble with one set per team.