New laws...

+ Post a Reply
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
  1. #21
    Super Moderator

    • New Zealand
    • 7,536 posts
    • Joined: Apr 2009
    • From: Paderborn, Germany
    • Mentioned
      13 Post(s)
    Hurricanes
    Quote Originally Posted by ratsapprentice View Post
    Thanks for talking at me again.
    I enjoy the insight

  2. # ADS
    Circuit advertisement
    Join Date
    Always
    Location
    Advertising world
    Posts
    Many
     

  3. #22
    Senior Member

    ratsapprentice's Avatar

    • England
    • 9,689 posts
    • Joined: Jan 2013
    • Mentioned
      44 Post(s)
    England
    Quote Originally Posted by TRF_nickdnz View Post
    I enjoy the insight
    The insight is fine... the one way "conversation" is patronising and irritating.

  4. #23
    Referee Coach and Advisor

    smartcooky's Avatar

    • New Zealand
    • 4,877 posts
    • Joined: May 2007
    • Mentioned
      59 Post(s)
    Tasman
    Quote Originally Posted by ratsapprentice View Post
    Thanks for talking at me again.
    I wasn't talking at you at all. I merely picked up on something you posted and expanded on it for the wider audience

  5. #24
    Senior Member

    Mumbles119's Avatar

    • England
    • 442 posts
    • Joined: Feb 2013
    • Mentioned
      3 Post(s)
    London Wasps
    Thinking about how the new laws could affect the preferred body type for the breakdown, I wonder if this went global, we would see the Sean O'Brien type become preferred? If the new goal is to stay upright and contest without need for hands on floor, plus not getting knocked off feet by arriving players. Then shorter, stockier players that are difficult to get under may have an advantage.

    However, this would have a knock on effect on line out options potentially being reduced.

  6. #25
    Your Piscine Overlord

    TRF Mr Fish's Avatar

    • New Zealand
    • 3,956 posts
    • Joined: May 2007
    • Mentioned
      8 Post(s)
    Really can't stand these new laws.


  7. #26
    Senior Member

    RoosTah's Avatar

    • Australia
    • 2,106 posts
    • Joined: May 2004
    • From: Sydney, Australia
    • Mentioned
      19 Post(s)
    Sydney
    Quote Originally Posted by living sacrifice View Post
    Always the SH trailing new laws to try and get more bums on seats. Why don't we just merge league and union so the Aussies can be happy, sod the rest of the world.

    Instead of changing the laws why don't they just enforce the current ones.
    Yeah, the Kiwis are trying to merge union with league to make us Aussies happy and obviously deal with the lack of popularity Union is suffering in NZ . Not at all like Europe, where you love Union above all else... oh wait, you mostly just watch soccer and no one has a record even close to NZ's AND the new laws were requested by WR in DUBLIN.

  8. #27
    Senior Member

    living sacrifice's Avatar

    • England
    • 1,592 posts
    • Joined: May 2008
    • From: Rugby
    • Mentioned
      0 Post(s)
    Northampton
    Quote Originally Posted by RoosTah View Post
    Yeah, the Kiwis are trying to merge union with league to make us Aussies happy and obviously deal with the lack of popularity Union is suffering in NZ . Not at all like Europe, where you love Union above all else... oh wait, you mostly just watch soccer and no one has a record even close to NZ's AND the new laws were requested by WR in DUBLIN.
    I said Aussies not kiwis, please learn to read.
    This is my signature. I really should change it.

  9. #28
    Referee Coach and Advisor

    smartcooky's Avatar

    • New Zealand
    • 4,877 posts
    • Joined: May 2007
    • Mentioned
      59 Post(s)
    Tasman
    Quote Originally Posted by living sacrifice View Post
    I said Aussies not kiwis, please learn to read.
    Really?

    "Always the SH trailing new laws to try and get more bums on seats."

    Firstly, Last time I looked, NZ, Australia, Fiji. Tonga, Samoa, Argentina, South Africa and a couple of dozen other rugby playing nations are all in the SH

    Secondly, this thread is about the new laws being trialled IN NEW ZEALAND. (Clue, the big Mitre 10 Cup table at the top of the page!) So even if you meant Aussies (which I doubt, I think you're just back-pedalling because you realise you got it wrong but can't admit it) then your statement was irrelevant, so you are wrong.

    Thirdly, as has been pointed out to you twice now, Law Trails are done at the behest and the request of World Rugby, NOT individual National Unions.
    If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness, or if your perception is that I post biased views, then put me on your ignore list.
    This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples!

  10. #29
    Senior Member

    living sacrifice's Avatar

    • England
    • 1,592 posts
    • Joined: May 2008
    • From: Rugby
    • Mentioned
      0 Post(s)
    Northampton
    Quote Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
    Really?

    "Always the SH trailing new laws to try and get more bums on seats."

    Firstly, Last time I looked, NZ, Australia, Fiji. Tonga, Samoa, Argentina, South Africa and a couple of dozen other rugby playing nations are all in the SH

    Secondly, this thread is about the new laws being trialled IN NEW ZEALAND. (Clue, the big Mitre 10 Cup table at the top of the page!) So even if you meant Aussies (which I doubt, I think you're just back-pedalling because you realise you got it wrong but can't admit it) then your statement was irrelevant, so you are wrong.

    Thirdly, as has been pointed out to you twice now, Law Trails are done at the behest and the request of World Rugby, NOT individual National Unions.
    Always so aggressive, not sure why all the responses on this thread seem so personal.
    This is my signature. I really should change it.

  11. #30
    Referee Coach and Advisor

    smartcooky's Avatar

    • New Zealand
    • 4,877 posts
    • Joined: May 2007
    • Mentioned
      59 Post(s)
    Tasman
    Quote Originally Posted by living sacrifice View Post
    Always so aggressive, not sure why all the responses on this thread seem so personal.

    Well, maybe if you posted facts when making a statement that purports to be "fact" instead stuff you made up yourself, you wouldn't pis people off
    If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness, or if your perception is that I post biased views, then put me on your ignore list.
    This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples!

  12. #31
    Senior Member

    living sacrifice's Avatar

    • England
    • 1,592 posts
    • Joined: May 2008
    • From: Rugby
    • Mentioned
      0 Post(s)
    Northampton
    Quote Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
    Well, maybe if you posted facts when making a statement that purports to be "fact" instead stuff you made up yourself, you wouldn't pis people off
    Anyone who gets ****** off or angry reading stuff on here needs to get a life.

    This is a forum, people disagree, that's part of the colour of life.
    This is my signature. I really should change it.

  13. #32
    Senior Member

    • Tajikistan
    • 142 posts
    • Joined: Apr 2015
    • Mentioned
      0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mumbles119 View Post
    Thinking about how the new laws could affect the preferred body type for the breakdown, I wonder if this went global, we would see the Sean O'Brien type become preferred? If the new goal is to stay upright and contest without need for hands on floor, plus not getting knocked off feet by arriving players. Then shorter, stockier players that are difficult to get under may have an advantage.

    However, this would have a knock on effect on line out options potentially being reduced.
    Those "shorter, stockier players" have to first get to the breakdown to have an advantage. That might be a problem for the short legged variety.

  14. #33
    Referee Coach and Advisor

    smartcooky's Avatar

    • New Zealand
    • 4,877 posts
    • Joined: May 2007
    • Mentioned
      59 Post(s)
    Tasman
    Quote Originally Posted by living sacrifice View Post
    Anyone who gets ****** off or angry reading stuff on here needs to get a life.

    This is a forum, people disagree, that's part of the colour of life.
    Its not about agreement or disagreement, it about posting BS and claiming it as fact, in other words, lying!
    Last edited by smartcooky; 20-09-16 at 03:02 AM.
    If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness, or if your perception is that I post biased views, then put me on your ignore list.
    This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples!

  15. #34
    Senior Member

    Mumbles119's Avatar

    • England
    • 442 posts
    • Joined: Feb 2013
    • Mentioned
      3 Post(s)
    London Wasps
    As a person of the hobbit variety, I have personal experience of not getting there first due to short legs!

  16. #35
    Senior Member

    The_Blindside's Avatar

    • England
    • 2,206 posts
    • Joined: Oct 2013
    • Mentioned
      6 Post(s)
    British Irish Lions
    Quote Originally Posted by TRF Mr Fish View Post
    Really can't stand these new laws.
    At first I was the same, but looking at it again and reading through the posts, there is good safety reasons for why they are implementing it. So in time I think most people will accept it. Concussion injuries from the jacklars head being exposed, just can't go on, as well as the pressure on their backs, hamstrings as they're cleared out. Paul O'Connell's career was ended by having the muscle from his hamstring area getting ripped off of his bone whilst getting cleared out of a ruck v France at RWC. I'll never forget the sheer agony on his face as he was being carried off the field.

    Also, I've never understood the inconsistency of refs penalising some players for "sealing" off I.e. Collapsing on their player to protect the ball and in other rucks players clearly being off of their feet and arching over the player with their hands on the ground and not being penalised. Hopefully these rules will also clear this inconsistency up.

  17. #36
    Referee Coach and Advisor

    smartcooky's Avatar

    • New Zealand
    • 4,877 posts
    • Joined: May 2007
    • Mentioned
      59 Post(s)
    Tasman
    Quote Originally Posted by The_Blindside View Post
    Also, I've never understood the inconsistency of refs penalising some players for "sealing" off I.e. Collapsing on their player to protect the ball and in other rucks players clearly being off of their feet and arching over the player with their hands on the ground and not being penalised. Hopefully these rules will also clear this inconsistency up.

    There is a very subtle difference as regards hands on the ground between the current Law and the one being trialled.

    Imagine the jackler arriving very quickly, over balancing a little and putting hands down to steady himself. In current Law a player may put his hands on the ground provided that he lifts them off before going for the ball...The act of placing hands on the ground and "sweeping" back to the ball to collect it is illegal

    In the trialled Laws, ANY placing of the hands on the ground beyond the ball is an infringement, even of the player doesn't don't intend to. This does two things

    1. Absolutely prevents any kind of sealing off
    2. Encourages players to approach the breakdown more in control so that the don;t overbalance


    Effectively they have changed Law 16.3 RUCKING

    (a) Players in a ruck must endeavour to stay on their feet.
    Sanction: Penalty kick

    to

    (a) Players in a breakdown must stay on their feet.
    If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness, or if your perception is that I post biased views, then put me on your ignore list.
    This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples!

  18. #37
    Senior Member

    The_Blindside's Avatar

    • England
    • 2,206 posts
    • Joined: Oct 2013
    • Mentioned
      6 Post(s)
    British Irish Lions
    Yep, but these subtle differences haven't helped the game. Most casual fans are bemused by the laws and rules currently applied to the breakdown and ruck. I think this another good reason to clear up the must stay in feet at the ruck/breakdown to simplify rules/laws in this area of the game.

  19. #38
    Senior Member

    • New Zealand
    • 2,781 posts
    • Joined: Aug 2010
    • Mentioned
      7 Post(s)
    Am I the only person who likes these new laws? I think they need a bit of work but I think they have generally had a positive impact on the game.

    was funny watching the Waikato vs, wellington game the other day. The commentary were complaining about the laws then a short time later they were talking about how much more actual play the game has and how great it was that teams are stringing together long phases of play and getting faster ball.

    They were basically saying, " wow I hate these new laws and can't wait till they are scrapped... Gee this is a great game, its amazing how much open play, long phases of play and fast ball we have seen in the competition lately... I wonder why?..."

    Hmmm....

    The breakdown in Rugby has become a real mess, its gotten to the stage where almost every ruck you could penalize either side depending on how/what rules or area you focus on. Its seems much cleaner now, if you want to win the ball you have to stay on your feet and drive over it.

    I'd love to see the stats broken down comparing hast years games to this year. Time in play and phases, trys/points scored etc. Even things like the number of injuries in the game. Get an overall picture of whats happening.
    "The laughing bear, drives a motorcycle" - Israel Dagg, Sep - 2011
    Cometh the hour, cometh the Don!

  20. #39
    Senior Member

    ratsapprentice's Avatar

    • England
    • 9,689 posts
    • Joined: Jan 2013
    • Mentioned
      44 Post(s)
    England
    Nope... I like them too.

    I would be very interested to see the trial extended into next season, to see how teams adapt to it with a full season and pre-season under their belts.

  21. #40
    Senior Member

    • Tajikistan
    • 142 posts
    • Joined: Apr 2015
    • Mentioned
      0 Post(s)
    Looks like they're gone. One problem i heard was the tight forwards were not getting tired out. Props scoring too many tries - Can't have that.
    I also heard they won't go fully back to the old laws, but might go half way in allowing that first player (the Richie Mc Caw type) a go at the ball with his hands. However the next player in has to stay clear.
    They're looking to get rid of that type who cannons into the player bridging or foraging for the ball. If the Refs had correctly policed this under the old rules there'd be no problem - but they didn't. So the second or third man in arrived like a human cannonball and many injuries occurred.

+ Post a Reply
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
To reply to this topic you just need to register for a user name (it's free!)
Already a member? You need to login at the top right of this page to post a reply.