BREAKING NEWS!!!!

[woosaah]

Somewhere on stuff.co.nz

IRB ponders major rule alterations
20 February 2006 
By GREG GROWDEN
Sydney Morning Herald

Several radical law alterations aimed at simplifying the game, including minimising the number of penalties awarded, are being trialled by the International Rugby Board.


A group of leading rugby identities, among them former Wallabies coach Rod Macqueen, has been involved in a week-long IRB seminar in South Africa which reviewed tackle, ruck and maul laws.

These included:


Allowing the ball to be played with the hand at the breakdown;


Only foul and offside play to result in penalty kicks; all other offences to result in free kicks.


Free kicks to be taken only by a tap kick or scrum.


Teams no longer have to match up numbers in the lineout.


Allowing defenders to bring the maul to ground.

Other law changes being trialled include the use of 12 replacements, but no more are allowed once the 12 have been made.

The IRB is also considering introducing in-goal touch judges and applying under-19 scrum laws to the senior level, which include teams being unable to wheel the scrum, or push the scrum more than 1.5 metres.

No law changes can be made until after the 2007 World Cup tournament.
[/b]

Wow this will be different, mauls to the ground could be dangerous, hands in the ruck will be challenging for both teams

this could be a major change for the IRB and rugby in genral

DISCUSS

 

[kaftka]

That's quite major, and I don't know what to think of them...

Allowing to bring mauls to the ground just doesn't sound right. It is dangerous, and that shouldn't be allowed imo...

Not having to match up numbers in the lineout? What's the point in that?

Honestly quite like the sound of the penalty one though...


This is pretty big.

 

[Canadian_Rugby_Guy]

Yeah the mauls thing is pretty dangerous. I don't understand the penalty thing though, does that mean people would no longer be allowed to go for goal or kick for touch?

 

[woosaah]

yeah so the only time a penalty will come in is when someone brings down a scrum, or is off side, or strikes another player. this will decrease the penalty count. hands in the ruck, this will make it harder to keep control of the ball and may make alot of ball unplayable.

its going to be interesting for sure, but these changes (if they happen) wont happen til after the world cup.

it will make for a faster game thats for sure

 

[The TRUTH]

Originally posted by woosaah@Feb 20 2006, 01:14 PM
Only foul and offside play to result in penalty kicks; all other offences to result in free kicks

^^^^^^This is the only rule change i like.

They should also consider lowering the the amount of points for drop goals and penalty kicks

 

[kaftka]

Lower the amount for drop goals sure, but keep the three points for penalties. If you lower the points for penalties, then I think we'll see more of them down in the 22 to reduce the amount of tries conceeded.

 

[The TRUTH]

I was thinking more like 1 point for drop goals 2 points for a penalty and 1 for a conversion

Look at the Brumbies v Bulls game the other night..........the Bulls didn't score a try and were terrible in attack but they found them self in front with 2 minutes to go thanks to numerus (questionable) penalties kicked from the half way line.

The Brumbies were by far the better team but only just won, even though they scored 3 tries to 0.

Teams like SA and England who hardly score any tries, win alot of games because they play for penalties and have great goal kickers.

I think anything to encourage more tries is only going to improve rugby and ensure it continues to grow in popularity for years to come.

 

[Groen_en_Goud]

How dare they even think of changing the law regarding scrums. I love the tussle that goes on in the scrum. :%#%#: :rahh: :ranting: :angry: :redcard: :wall:

 

[Gay-Guy]

Looks like they may need to really rethink the consequences of every rule change.

Having tap kicks instead of penalties at the breakdown will make teams infringe all the more as a tactic to slow the ball down in front of the post. Players on the defending team will just lie there forever until all their players are back in position on the line to tackle. the worse they will get for it is a free kick, but they won't care, as long as all their players are back.

 

[Canadian_Rugby_Guy]

I still don't understand what they mean by that rule. WOuld anyone care to explain?

 

[woosaah]

yeah its shocking

maybe if they keep slowing the ball down/lying over the ball maybe that is consitutes as a fould

if that happens no1 will get clean ball, that rule will be interesting

 

[mark_shaw]

dont f*** with the rules of rugby like they have with cricket..rugbys good as it is! dont change it all just so idiots hu dont wtch rugby wont find it hard 2 understand..f***ing irb f***s f***

 

[sambãd5]

Originally posted by woosaah@Feb 20 2006, 02:14 PM
Allowing the ball to be played with the hand at the breakdown;

bad idea. these penalties are often delibrate for only conceding 3pts, instead of 7. also means ball will be dissrupted alot, and make it messier and slower.

Only foul and offside play to result in penalty kicks; all other offences to result in free kicks. [/b]

i think this is quite similar to what it is now. any chance of some examples?

Free kicks to be taken only by a tap kick or scrum[/b]

again, thats pritty much what they do now.

Teams no longer have to match up numbers in the lineout. [/b]

good idea. speed game up, makes deffence stronger, or attack stronger.

Allowing defenders to bring the maul to ground. [/b]

bad idea. removes one of the best part of foward play.

Other law changes being trialled include the use of 12 replacements, but no more are allowed once the 12 have been made. [/b]

again, what does this mean?

The IRB is also considering introducing in-goal touch judges and applying under-19 scrum laws to the senior level, which include teams being unable to wheel the scrum, or push the scrum more than 1.5 metres. [/b]

proberly for the best. makes things safer.

 

[Wally]

Originally posted by sambad5+Feb 20 2006, 05:04 PM-->

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE

Only foul and offside play to result in penalty kicks; all other offences to result in free kicks. [/b]

i think this is quite similar to what it is now. any chance of some examples? [/b]

Infringements - these occur more than anything else.

<!--QuoteBegin-sambad5@Feb 20 2006, 05:04 PM
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE[/quote]

Other law changes being trialled include the use of 12 replacements, but no more are allowed once the 12 have been made.

again, what does this mean?[/b][/quote]
I'm not totally sure, but maybe it means bringing in an interchange like in rugby league. I think this could be a good a idea.

 

[-JJ-]

Allow hands in the ruck. I assume this will mean you still must be standing? I dunno. Seems stupid. But could work.

Bringing mauls to the ground is veeery stupid. For reasons already pointed out above.

Interchange could be an ok idea. Would stop the ridiculous abuse of the blood bin system. I heard Nucifora I think it was saying "We had to find some blood on Devine"... i.e. Bring on the fake blood pellet things... Retain the rule of "If you can't stop bleeding within 15 minutes of real time, you're not coming back."

 

[sambãd5]

Originally posted by Wally+Feb 20 2006, 07:44 PM-->

<!--QuoteBegin-sambad5

@Feb 20 2006, 05:04 PM
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE

<div class='quotemain'>Other law changes being trialled include the use of 12 replacements, but no more are allowed once the 12 have been made.

again, what does this mean?[/b][/quote]
I'm not totally sure, but maybe it means bringing in an interchange like in rugby league. I think this could be a good a idea. [/b][/quote]
no its not. league players use the micro system, ie. fast for short periods of time. rugby is macro(?) so they only need to be taken off later on in the game. union players dont need to be rested for 10-20min breaks like league players.

i think, if this is what we think it is, is like what jj said, to stop abusing the blood bin system. not really a valid reason imo.

 

[SaintsFan_Webby]

I think the IRB are panicking having been attacked by a journalist somewhere.

The current rules need tightening, not changing completely. Suggestions such as being able to pull don't mauls are ridiculous.

 

[Mr. Laxative]

Originally posted by sambad5@Feb 20 2006, 04:04 PM
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE

Other law changes being trialled include the use of 12 replacements, but no more are allowed once the 12 have been made.

again, what does this mean? [/b][/quote]
same as league 12 subs - only seven on the bench but 12 interchanges can be made.

 

[BOKean]

these rules sound a bit whak if you ask me

the hands in the ruck will slow the game down if anything.
the penalties thing will also slow the game down alot - most of my friends who dont like rugby mention that there are too many scrums which slow the game down. if they are changing the rules to increase fans then they are going about it the wrong way! they will probably do the opposite

 

[QKXV]

These do sound like complete toss. While they're at it why don't they just allow forward passing and high tackling as well? Rugby union has certain rules for a specific reason, without it the game itself cannot exist as rugby union, it becomes something else - american football, rugby league, touch rugby and whathaveyouselse