Potential law change

[Colombia]

To address aerial ping pong, how about when one team kicks and the other team kicks it back, the team which initially kicked and gets it back then has to run the ball and cannot just kick it back for a second time?

 

[Maverick1987]

To address aerial ping pong, how about when one team kicks and the other team kicks it back, the team which initially kicked and gets it back then has to run the ball and cannot just kick it back for a second time?

Nah . Just because you kick the ball doesn't mean it's a waste . NZ kick the ball more than anyone else

 

[Five Meters Out]

Kicking's part of the game. Occasionally it goes back and fwd for too long, but there's other aspects of the game that irk me far more than this. many of these have been addressed in minor rule changes introduced into Super this year.
E.g. Halfback can't come around the scrum and get between flanker and no.8.
Ball carrier can't shuffle to the back of a rolling maul.
No hands in front of off side line at rucks and mauls.
I like these changes.

 

[Colombia]

To be clear, I'm not against kicking, just the aerial ping-pong rallies.

 

[smartcooky]

To address aerial ping pong, how about when one team kicks and the other team kicks it back, the team which initially kicked and gets it back then has to run the ball and cannot just kick it back for a second time?

You can't have laws like that in the game, too cumbersome to deal with for referees and law writers

If WR want to curb the the amount of aerial kicking in the game, there is a simple way to do it... extend the area allowed for a mark and kick to touch with a gain in ground, from the 22m area out to the 10m line or even half way.

Teams kick aimlessly downfield for two reasons

1. in the hope that they will get a mistake from their opponents

2. in the hope that their opponents will kick it into touch, thereby giving the kicker a territorial gain (their throw to a line-out in their opponent's territory) i.e. "winning the kicking duel"

If the mark-area was extended to the 10m line or the half away, the aimless kick will be marked, and the marking team will be quite happy to belt the ball into touch inside the original kicking team's 22m. This would put a stop to the aerial ping pong after the first kick. Such a change will also encourage kicking teams to kick tactically and accurately into shorter space rather than deeper to hand.

 

[LiRFCMatt]

You can't have laws like that in the game, too cumbersome to deal with for referees and law writers

If WR want to curb the the amount of aerial kicking in the game, there is a simple way to do it... extend the area allowed for a mark and kick to touch with a gain in ground, from the 22m area out to the 10m line or even half way.

Teams kick aimlessly downfield for two reasons

1. in the hope that they will get a mistake from their opponents

2. in the hope that their opponents will kick it into touch, thereby giving the kicker a territorial gain (their throw to a line-out in their opponent's territory) i.e. "winning the kicking duel"

If the mark-area was extended to the 10m line or the half away, the aimless kick will be marked, and the marking team will be quite happy to belt the ball into touch inside the original kicking team's 22m. This would put a stop to the aerial ping pong after the first kick. Such a change will also encourage kicking teams to kick tactically and accurately into shorter space rather than deeper to hand.

Think that would swing power the other way too much, the game would likely become almost only running rugby.

- - - Updated - - -

It's nice to see, yeah, but I think it takes away a massive part of the game

 

[Don't Skip Leg Day]

Kicking's part of the game. Occasionally it goes back and fwd for too long, but there's other aspects of the game that irk me far more than this. many of these have been addressed in minor rule changes introduced into Super this year.
E.g. Halfback can't come around the scrum and get between flanker and no.8.
Ball carrier can't shuffle to the back of a rolling maul.
No hands in front of off side line at rucks and mauls.
I like these changes.

What does no hands in front of the off side line mean in rucks and mauls? Am I being dumb or is that obvious, not really sure what that means

 

[Tony Manx]

What does no hands in front of the off side line mean in rucks and mauls? Am I being dumb or is that obvious, not really sure what that means

How can you have a maul where no hands are involved?

 

[gaston le gaff]

I think he means that hands can only go where the ball is, and that the defender cannot bridge the tackled player thus gaining the chance for another of his team to get hands on the ball and a possible penalty, seen far too often and not always pinged by the ref, some players are experts Armitage from Toulon probable the best, his size (small) gives him the advantage that it is very difficult to see if he is bridging or has his hands on the ball.

 

[smartcooky]

Think that would swing power the other way too much, the game would likely become almost only running rugby

I don't think it would.

At one time, the Laws did allow a mark to be taken anywhere on the field, and kicking was still a very important part of the game back then. In fact, the player who took the mark was allowed a drop kick at goal. It was called a "Goal from a Mark" and was very, very rare. The only one I can recall seeing was scored by Ian Clarke (brother of Don "The Boot" Clarke) for the Barbarians against the All Blacks at Cardiff Arms Park in 1964

I think that even with a "mark in your own half" Law, there would still be plenty of kicking. Players would just need to learn to kick more skilfully and more accurately.

 

[Colombia]

You can't have laws like that in the game, too cumbersome to deal with for referees and law writers

Seems fairly straight forward. If you kick it, and they kick it back to you, you have to run it.

If WR want to curb the the amount of aerial kicking in the game, there is a simple way to do it... extend the area allowed for a mark and kick to touch with a gain in ground, from the 22m area out to the 10m line or even half way.

It's not really aerial kicking that is the issue, I don't think anyone has an issue with kicking (I certainly don't) but rather the aerial ping-pong where it goes back and forwards more than once.

I think it only has to go back and forwards once. There should be no kicking battle beyond two kicks imo.

A kick can be interesting, the return can be interesting, constantly kicking and returning in a rally is boring.

 

[Tony Manx]

I say bring back rucking in its entirety!

If you know you are going to get booted hard on the ground for holding onto the ball and not moving out of the way, you soon release the ball and get the hell out of the way - both things that Murray failed to do on Saturday!!!!!