Rugby Laws/Rules that you want changed...

Discussion in 'General Rugby Union' started by gjohn85, Feb 12, 2007.

  1. gjohn85

    gjohn85 Guest

    Right, this thread is intended for all of those who are unhappy with the current laws/rules or want new rules/laws introduced.

    I can only think of 2 rules of the game that bug me at the moment and I would like to see them changed. These are:

    * Giving the attacking team a scrum five when the attacking team goes over the try line, but get held up - I don't understand this. Surely the defending team should get rewarded for holding up the ball off the attacking team. I would like to see the defending team have a drop out on the 22m line.

    * Allowing defending teams to kick to tap the ball dead - I don't mean at any time, but when an attacking team does a cross field kick over the try line or a kick that goes over the try line, then the defending team should be allowed to kick or tap the ball dead. This is allowed in Rugby League, so why can't we do the same.

    Now it's for your turn, you can also defend the current Laws/Rules if you don't agree with laws/rules members want changed or introduced.
     
  2. Forum Ad Advertisement

  3. PeeJay

    PeeJay Guest

    I think when the ball is held up in the in-goal area, you have to think of it as a ruck out of which the ball will not come, even despite the best efforts of both sides. Therefore, in accordance with the laws for open play, the scrum is given to the attacking side. I agree, it is a little unfair on the defending side, but you can't change the basic laws.
     
  4. Prestwick

    Prestwick Guest

    I have a new rule.

    Rule 245a subsection d: If Richie McCaw is found to be behaving in a naughty manner in the ruck, then the opposition captain has the option of breaking any one of Mr McCaw's fingers or thumbs for each time an infringement is caused.

    When all fingers and thumbs have been exhausted, McCaw must drink a pint of Sambuca and black absinthe for each time an infringement is caused.
     
  5. O'Rothlain

    O'Rothlain Guest

    legalization of closelining....WWF style.
     
  6. BokMagic

    BokMagic Guest

    On a slightly more serious note, rucking should be allowed again. Under the current rule interpretations, seen in this year`s Super 14, it`s becoming way too easy for defenders to just fall on the wrong side of the tackle, and thus slow down good, clean, fast phase-ball from which to attack. If the attacking team had the option to ruck out the beggar lying on the wrong side( and by this I mean rucking out the ball, not kicking the bloke in the head!), we`ll see much better continuity. Either that, or simply allow hands in the ruck for everyone- but it`s a bit of a grey area at the moment that needs clearing up.

    Secondly, cleaning out at the tackle area. We see people flying in, off their feet, at least 1m away from the ball all too often. This will definately result in a serious injury sooner rather than later, and I genuinely hope that some poor player doesn`t first have to pay the ultimate price before this is addressed.

    Thirdly, the rolling maul- the IRB proposal to legalise the collapsing of the maul is ludicrous, to say the least. Expect more serious injuries. But the current rules allowing the rolling maul is just too much like gridiron, to my liking. Why not change the rule wrt the rolling maul, so that the ball-carrier must be in the front of the maul, as opposed to the back? Then the defending side still has a chance to get at the ball, and legalised obstruction won`t occur anymore.

    Lastly, please stop the poor props from having to play patter-patter by touching before the engage. It`s embarrasing.
     
  7. PeeJay

    PeeJay Guest

    Allowing hands in the ruck is just silly. A ruck isn't a contest to see who can pinch the ball quickest. Both teams have their chance to handle the ball before the ruck is formed after the tackle, and if they're not quick enough to take the chance, then tough luck.

    Allowing players to ruck the ball back in a safe manner seems the only option. The touch judges can watch the offside lines, and the ref can watch for any infringements in the breakdown area.

    For those who haven't seen them, here is a list of laws that the IRB are trialling for possible implementation by 2008: Stellenbosch Laws
     
  8. Yeah I agree with all of those laws except for the ones about hands in the ruck and collapsing the maul.

    Especially like the one about more free kicks and less 'long arm' penalties.
     
  9. gjohn85

    gjohn85 Guest

    Another new law that Irb should bring in is allowing 8 subs on the bench. It's common sense to have 4 forwards on the bench & 4 backs on the bench. Having 4 back subs, it gives the coaches a better chance to pick bench players that can cover all the positions should something happen during a game.
     
  10. I don't think you need to encourage more substitutions among the backs. The fact that most teams will field a maximum of 3 on their bench encourages the development of players who can actually play in more than one position and have multiple skill sets.

    If a bench of 8 were allowed then it should be compulsory to have a full front-row on there. However I think 7 is more than enough. It adds to the whole sense of sporting drama. Coaches have to use their judgement and pick a bench they think can cater for any outcome.
     
  11. muttly

    muttly Guest

    subs is a great idea.

    I'd like to also change the scoring. Try 4 points. conversion 1 point. Field goal/penalty 2 points.

    This would slightly alter the game in favour of tries. presently we have too many points for a conversion, and as a result, games are won by kicks - often teams scoring lesser amounts of tries are losing to the team that kicks better. When World Cup finals are decided by the kicking boots of one player, the game needs to reward tries more - if that's what we want. If we just want a kicking game then keep it like it is. Is it any wonder that kicker-less nations such as Fiji and Samoa can't compete well, but put them in 7's where the emphasis is on tries, they are the best in the world.
     
  12. Rugby_Cymru

    Rugby_Cymru Guest

    I think you've got a good point there.
    Bu then again, I am still a little angry that we lost to France on the weekend but outscored them 3 tries to 2!

    :p
     
  13. PeeJay

    PeeJay Guest

    That's our own fault for being so f***ing indisciplined and giving away too many penalties, tbh
     
  14. Rugby_Cymru

    Rugby_Cymru Guest

    Yeah, i know...

    *SIGH*

    How about, instead of creating new laws/rules, keeping an eye on old ones.
    How many games go by where you see the props binding on the arms and not the shirt.
    One binds on the arm, the other is compelled to do so and instead of a battle of strength it's a battle of who can stay up longest before the scrum collapses.
     
Enjoyed this thread? Register to post your reply - click here!

Share This Page