ARU calls on Rugby fans to suggest innovative experimental laws

[William18]

This is largely a myth to be honest. Anyone who actually lives here and knows any genuine Rugby fans would know that all that sort of talk comes from people who are exclusively League fans. However, most people are in favour of rules that encourage less kicking and more ball in hand rugby.

The thing is that a lot of people up north don't understand is that in terms of scale Union in Australia is about the size of League in England (the difference being the Wallabies are still competitive - unlike the English League team); i.e. it's incredibly niche. The game is now 4th behind Australian Football, Rugby League, and Soccer, in that order. As such a lot of the commentary on rules is from generally derisive League and AFL fans.

If I were to offer a suggestion, I'd like to see how the game would look with a shift in the way penalties are given. Automatic yellow cards for a third consecutive ruck infringement/offside play would have a positive influence in my view; it would make rucks cleaner and open up play.

I think the difference is that rugby union in Australia is able to appeal to the whole country, at least for a test match. Rugby league in England does not do that.

 

[ratsapprentice]

^ Yep.

My experience of Super Rugby commentary is what I'm basing my assertion that a lot of Aussies want to scrap the scrum in particular on.

 

[SimonG]

Why is it always Australia that want rules changed

Because Aussies demand excitement and are the only progressive folk in Union?

Campese should have a voice on this too...the great man is wasted by the Rugby fraternity.

 

[RoosTah]

I think the difference is that rugby union in Australia is able to appeal to the whole country, at least for a test match. Rugby league in England does not do that.

That's not really true... The game is still really confined mostly to Sydney and Brisbane. Outside of those heartlands it really only has a smattering of support and usually has it's games played on delayed telecast if there's the prospect it might conflict with the AFL.

^ Yep.

My experience of Super Rugby commentary is what I'm basing my assertion that a lot of Aussies want to scrap the scrum in particular on.

I'm not really sure which commentators would honestly suggest scrapping the scrum, and having watched Super Rugby since the beginning I can't ever remember it being suggested. Heck, Phil kearns is always going on about how scrums are "a thing of beauty"...

 

[ratsapprentice]

I think you're underestimating the difference in general support outside of Aussie RU and English RL heartlands.

The Wallabies managed to get 20,000 in Newcastle in pouring rain vs Scotland in 2012.

England RL manage about half that inside their "territory".

Because Aussies demand excitement and are the only progressive folk in Union?

Campese should have a voice on this too...the great man is wasted by the Rugby fraternity.

Can I ask what your motivations for posting on a RU forum are? ...because frankly you don't seem to even like the sport.

It seems strange to me that you'd spend so much time (even signing up) discussing a sport that you have, at best, a passing interest in.

 

[Da Grappla]

Sigesige00 mk2

Not even close...I want rucks, contested scrums, lineouts AND I dislike RL to the point of having trying to force myself to watch last World Cup final and not succeeding.

In addition, my field position is openside flanker. Ruck is the best place to be at

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Only change I really want is a secondary ref. In a scrum you then have a ref either side. Hopefully this well reduce the number of resets a lot and with any luck will allow proper reffing of the scrum. The majority of scrums are reset because someone is doing something wrong but not being penalised. It could also help at the breakdown having refs either side of it. The exact mechanics would need to be sorted out like are both refs equal or is there a primary ref that can overrule the secondary one? Personally I prefer that idea with the secondary ref being more like a linesman on the pitch.

People may say why do you need it when much of that is the job of a linesman and I think it wouldn't be necessary if they flagged up these things but they rarely do. It's really not that easy to see what is going on even 10m away.

 

[Josht36]

Only change I really want is a secondary ref. In a scrum you then have a ref either side. Hopefully this well reduce the number of resets a lot and with any luck will allow proper reffing of the scrum. The majority of scrums are reset because someone is doing something wrong but not being penalised. It could also help at the breakdown having refs either side of it. The exact mechanics would need to be sorted out like are both refs equal or is there a primary ref that can overrule the secondary one? Personally I prefer that idea with the secondary ref being more like a linesman on the pitch.

People may say why do you need it when much of that is the job of a linesman and I think it wouldn't be necessary if they flagged up these things but they rarely do. It's really not that easy to see what is going on even 10m away.

Could this be achieved with a fourth official coming onto the pitch just for scrums to overview the other side? I feel there would be too much disagreement/confusion if you had 2 refs on the pitch simultaneously.

 

[McTallshort]

Personally I blame the PRL......

3 things we do need to sort out in our game are:

1. Scrums (still)
2. Too much TMO interference
3. ridiculously long playing season.

The scrums still need sorting because you can get a full penalty for a simple binding infringment which can cost you the game. Players like G Jenkins have made a career from hoodwinking refs into giving easily kickable penalties at scrum time and IMO scrum infindgements should be free kicks only.

TMO needs to be used as before in the awarding of the actual try not some slightly forward pass 4 phases before and foul play needs leaving to a citing officer if its not spotted in the game.

Not sure about the SH but up here players play far too much rugby.

 

[smartcooky]

Only change I really want is a secondary ref. In a scrum you then have a ref either side. Hopefully this well reduce the number of resets a lot and with any luck will allow proper reffing of the scrum. The majority of scrums are reset because someone is doing something wrong but not being penalised. It could also help at the breakdown having refs either side of it. The exact mechanics would need to be sorted out like are both refs equal or is there a primary ref that can overrule the secondary one? Personally I prefer that idea with the secondary ref being more like a linesman on the pitch.

People may say why do you need it when much of that is the job of a linesman and I think it wouldn't be necessary if they flagged up these things but they rarely do. It's really not that easy to see what is going on even 10m away.

You could make a better point of using ARs for this by bringing the nearside AR into the field of play for any scrum. If you try to get the AR 5m from the scrum, the most he would have to come infield would be about 30m for any scrum along the mid-line.

As for suggestions,


1. A Free Kick awarded anywhere on the field, when kicked into touch gets a gain in ground but the throw still goes to the opposition.

2. Add the green bit to, and remove the red bit from Law 22.8

[TEXTAREA]LAW 22.8 BALL KICKED DEAD THROUGH IN-GOAL
If a team kicks the ball through their opponents' in-goal into touch-in-goal or on or over the
dead ball line, except by an unsuccessful place kick at goal or attempted dropped goal, the
defending team has two choices:

To have a drop-out,
or
To have a scrum at the place where the ball was kicked and they throw in.[/TEXTAREA]

The longer the distance you attempt a drop kick from, the more chance you will miss, the more risk you will end up coming back for an opposition scrum where you kicked from.

3. Pick up on the RL idea of the 40-20 kick (call it a 10-22 kick if you like). e.g. a tactical kick by Blue from inside their own 10m line that bounces into touch inside the Gold 22m line, gets Blue the throw in to the line-out. This will cause defending teams to consider having an additional defender back cover such a kick, making just a little more space in the defensive line.

 

[snoopy snoopy dog dog]

I'd suggest anyone who has views on changes they'd like to see implemented should re-post their opinions when the debate goes "live" with the ARU on May 19. I know I will.

Of the above suggestions, smartcooky and ragerancher offer the best ideas so far in my opinion - I think I've posted smartcooky's ideas a couple of times in the past! On ragerancher's suggestion, how about having one a primary referee who basically does the job a ref currently does with a secondary referee concerned mainly with refereeing the offside line. A second set of eyes vigorously enforcing offside would free up a lot of space. Defences get away with encroaching into offside positions far too often and touch judges don't seem to pick up on it at all.

A blight on the game is aimless tactical kicking. How about if a defender is in his own half and catches the ball on the full while he has both feet on the ground, he has the option to either "mark" the catch or ask for a scrum back from where the kick was taken? This rewards contestable kicks since it puts the defender in two minds - does he risk staying on the ground and perhaps lose the contest for the ball (like the old mark rule in the 22) or does he jump for it and fore-go any chance of a scrum back? It punishes poor kicking in equal measure.

A controversial one - how about we re-examine the size of the ball? Would making it a fraction smaller make it easier to handle? Perhaps this is dumbing down the game but I don't know anyone who's entertained by constant knock ons.

Move the goal posts to the deadball line. It gives us an unobstructed view of the tryline and also makes the pitch longer for shots at goal. Teams will be less likely to kick for goal from the half way line if the posts are 10 metres further away than is currently the case. It makes the game slightly more attack minded without altering any playing rules.

If the pitch marking are white, would it make sense for the ball to be a different colour from a purely practical point of view? For example, from a 5mt maul, a yellow ball touching the tryline under a pile of bodies is easier to see than a white ball.

A limited form of rolling substitutions could be trialled. Players are getting bigger, stronger, faster and hits are getting ever more severe. Rolling substitutions could ease the strain on players.

 

[William18]

That's not really true... The game is still really confined mostly to Sydney and Brisbane. Outside of those heartlands it really only has a smattering of support and usually has it's games played on delayed telecast if there's the prospect it might conflict with the AFL.



I'm not really sure which commentators would honestly suggest scrapping the scrum, and having watched Super Rugby since the beginning I can't ever remember it being suggested. Heck, Phil kearns is always going on about how scrums are "a thing of beauty"...

Nah I disagree. Australia has teams in its four largest population centres. Next season the UK will have no rugby league teams in any of its four largest population centres. Rugby union is something most Australian sports fans at least know it exists. If you go to England then the Super League doesn't get on the news; if you go to BBC Sport then rugby league isn't even on their front page. You have to go looking for info. The day after a test match the Wallabies will probably be the leading story in the newspaper, that never happens for the Super League.

I like scrums; they really don't worry me too much. The only thing I find annoying is endless resets. Yes, a lot of scrums end in penalties but I see this as a reward for a dominant scrum rather than a blight on the art of scrummaging itself.

I think the most important things to do in rugby is to sort out the length/structure of the season and ensure the game continues to grow internationally. I actually enjoy basically all the rules as they are

 

[LittleGuy]

I'd suggest anyone who has views on changes they'd like to see implemented should re-post their opinions when the debate goes "live" with the ARU on May 19. I know I will.

Of the above suggestions, smartcooky and ragerancher offer the best ideas so far in my opinion - I think I've posted smartcooky's ideas a couple of times in the past! On ragerancher's suggestion, how about having one a primary referee who basically does the job a ref currently does with a secondary referee concerned mainly with refereeing the offside line. A second set of eyes vigorously enforcing offside would free up a lot of space. Defences get away with encroaching into offside positions far too often and touch judges don't seem to pick up on it at all.

A blight on the game is aimless tactical kicking. How about if a defender is in his own half and catches the ball on the full while he has both feet on the ground, he has the option to either "mark" the catch or ask for a scrum back from where the kick was taken? This rewards contestable kicks since it puts the defender in two minds - does he risk staying on the ground and perhaps lose the contest for the ball (like the old mark rule in the 22) or does he jump for it and fore-go any chance of a scrum back? It punishes poor kicking in equal measure.

A controversial one - how about we re-examine the size of the ball? Would making it a fraction smaller make it easier to handle? Perhaps this is dumbing down the game but I don't know anyone who's entertained by constant knock ons.

Move the goal posts to the deadball line. It gives us an unobstructed view of the tryline and also makes the pitch longer for shots at goal. Teams will be less likely to kick for goal from the half way line if the posts are 10 metres further away than is currently the case. It makes the game slightly more attack minded without altering any playing rules.

If the pitch marking are white, would it make sense for the ball to be a different colour from a purely practical point of view? For example, from a 5mt maul, a yellow ball touching the tryline under a pile of bodies is easier to see than a white ball.

A limited form of rolling substitutions could be trialled. Players are getting bigger, stronger, faster and hits are getting ever more severe. Rolling substitutions could ease the strain on players.

This would be fairly revolutionary, even the NFL didn't change this till the 1970's and the Canadian gridiron rules still have the posts at the front of the endzone(though the field is ten yards longer and endzones are larger).

 

[RoosTah]

Nah I disagree. Australia has teams in its four largest population centres. Next season the UK will have no rugby league teams in any of its four largest population centres. Rugby union is something most Australian sports fans at least know it exists. If you go to England then the Super League doesn't get on the news; if you go to BBC Sport then rugby league isn't even on their front page. You have to go looking for info. The day after a test match the Wallabies will probably be the leading story in the newspaper, that never happens for the Super League.

Australia has Super Rugby Franchises in WA and Victoria, but almost all their players come from the NSW and Qld club comps, so the "national" footprint of Rugby is almost entirely superficial. In reality and in terms of sheer numbers, the game is closer to League in the UK than a lot of people think. As for the Wallabies being the "leading story", having spent a lot of time in Melbourne, I can tell you that even a rare victory over the All Blacks at the MCG (which was about half full and mostly AB fans) that I attended back in 2007 failed to push the AFL as the leading sports story the next day and was no where near the front page.

 

[smartcooky]

australia has super rugby franchises in wa and victoria, but almost all their players come from the nsw and qld club comps (or new zealand), so the "national" footprint of rugby is almost entirely superficial. In reality and in terms of sheer numbers, the game is closer to league in the uk than a lot of people think. As for the wallabies being the "leading story", having spent a lot of time in melbourne, i can tell you that even a rare victory over the all blacks at the mcg (which was about half full and mostly ab fans) that i attended back in 2007 failed to push the afl as the leading sports story the next day and was no where near the front page.

ftfy

 

[RoosTah]

ftfy

But that "fix" makes it inaccurate. I said "almost all their players" come from NSW and Qld, and that is true. There's a smattering of guys from NZ, a few from South Africa and the odd genuine local product from Vic or WA, but the vast majority are NSW and Qld players.

There, ftfy .

 

[jonny24]

This would be fairly revolutionary, even the NFL didn't change this till the 1970's and the Canadian gridiron rules still have the posts at the front of the endzone(though the field is ten yards longer and endzones are larger).

They could move the base of the posts behind the line though, wouldn't affect kicking but would eliminate confusion when scoring tries near them.

I wouldn't mind rolling subs either, to a degree. We play with them in really hot days sometimes. I think it would translate to a faster game on the pitch cus players could go hard for ten or twenty and then recover for a bit. I think a limit might be a good idea though. Maybe even just allowing any players taken off to Re enter after half time.

 

[Muzzy]

Drops goals to be worth 1 point

 

[smartcooky]

I wouldn't mind rolling subs either, to a degree. We play with them in really hot days sometimes. I think it would translate to a faster game on the pitch cus players could go hard for ten or twenty and then recover for a bit. I think a limit might be a good idea though. Maybe even just allowing any players taken off to Re enter after half time.

Rolling subs is already in the Laws of the Game but its a "Union Specific Law" which mean that Unions can opt whether or not to use them for their own competitions below elite level...

[TEXTAREA]3.14 UNION SPECIFIC VARIATIONS
(a) A Union may implement rolling substitutions at defined levels of the Game within its
jurisdiction. The number of substitutions must not exceed twelve. The administration and
rules relating to rolling substitutions are the responsibility of the Union having jurisdiction.[/TEXTAREA]

 

[goodNumber10]

"if a team has no more props on the bench, then instead of an uncontested scrum they must kick to the line and give the throw in to the opposition"

They will get a territorial advantage but forfeit the possession.