Super 14 to trial new laws

[esoj]

now the super 14 next year will have added interest as most of the new experimential lawas are going to be trialed in the comp. a couple have been left out but most of them will be trialled

http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/1320238/1483759

 

[Brodizzle]

This is a good change, I am EXTREMELY happy that hands in the ruck weren't added, from watching the ARC games it turned the game into something like in Rugby 08, where there was a turnover whenever a player didn't have the whole forward pack hanging onto them to push off the opposition...not good for the props though

 

[Hamster]

This is a good change, I am EXTREMELY happy that hands in the ruck weren't added, from watching the ARC games it turned the game into something like in Rugby 08, where there was a turnover whenever a player didn't have the whole forward pack hanging onto them to push off the opposition...not good for the props though [/b]

Yep agree with that pretty much and pulling down a maul also. I reckon if someone did it should be a scrum not penalty.

Surely they must have included the rule you cannot pass the ball into your own 22 and kick it out? That was one of the better rules.

 

[Brodizzle]

<div class='quotemain'> This is a good change, I am EXTREMELY happy that hands in the ruck weren't added, from watching the ARC games it turned the game into something like in Rugby 08, where there was a turnover whenever a player didn't have the whole forward pack hanging onto them to push off the opposition...not good for the props though [/b]

Yep agree with that pretty much and pulling down a maul also. I reckon if someone did it should be a scrum not penalty.

Surely they must have included the rule you cannot pass the ball into your own 22 and kick it out? That was one of the better rules.
[/b][/quote]
This is the section in the RugbyHeaven copy. (although written by SMH so could very likely be part of thier made up journalism)

'Inside the 22-metre line:
When a defending player receives the ball outside the 22-metre line and passes, puts or takes the ball back inside the 22, the following can occur -
a. If the ball is then kicked directly into touch, the lineout is in line with where the ball was kicked.
b. If a tackle, ruck or maul is subsequently formed and the ball is then kicked directly into touch, the lineout is where the ball crossed the touch line.'

So yes, the 22-line rule is in place for this Super 14...

http://www.rugbyheaven.com.au/news/news/su...6530642822.html

 

[Steve-o]

Should turn out to be one hell of a Super 14 comp. If this becomes international English rugby is doom!
I predict some meat heads to forget about the new rules in the heat of battle. Anyone consistently watch the games in Oz when they were tested? If so, how'd the players adapt to them?
Don't you just love the power of SANZAR?

 

[Brodizzle]

Anyone consistently watch the games in Oz when they were tested? If so, how'd the players adapt to them?
[/b]

The first few weeks were hard, but that is mostly due to the hands in the ruck rule, when the team didn't put enough players in the ruck, but that was soon sorted out withing a few weeks....

The increased work rate all players had to put in meant that towards the end of the game there was more stoppages for 'injuries' and the such, but this, once again, changed a little bit more after a few weeks when the players became better conditioned....

Teams can play both the attacking style and a game based on penalties etc. but the new rules allow more change for the attacking team to get some go forward...

Hopefully they don't have the rule about yellow cards that ARC had, there would be an average of 2 or 3 a game....absolutely ruin the spectacle....

 

[esoj]

early days of the arc it wasn't too pretty all round as the players weren't used to the rules. towards the end of the comp it was a lot better but the hands in the ruck turned the game into a bit of a shambles really and slowed the game down at rucks a bit as both forwards would climb in fairly often. I was also unhappy that some offences inside the 22 that were fairly deliberate were only penalized with free kicks instead of penalites.

it will be interesting to see how it peforms at the next level up where the players are more professional and better skilled.

 

[Steve-o]

Another rule I'm concerned about, is that a player must be 5m behind the last mans feet at a ruck. It will open up play, but surely it be mostly interpretation as to what is 5m on a fairly unmarked field like a rugby field? Was this a problem in the ARC?

 

[Brodizzle]

Another rule I'm concerned about, is that a player must be 5m behind the last mans feet at a ruck. It will open up play, but surely it be mostly interpretation as to what is 5m on a fairly unmarked field like a rugby field? Was this a problem in the ARC?
[/b]

The refs were horrendous in ARC, I honestly don't think this rule was even enforced...linesman were too busy finding things to tell the refs to card people for then to lok at the 5m line...

 

[Bullitt]

Christ, the next LAW to be tested are only 2 people are allowed to stand square of the tackled player while the rest will have to retreat 10m.

Then it will be decided that 15 players are far too many. 13 sounds like a much better, overall more rounded number.

And after all, we want to encourage much more scoring, so let's drop the value of everything. Say, 4 for a try, 2 for a conversion, 1 for a penalty and 1 for a drop goal. (Unless of course Australia have just won a match with the boot, then a DG shall remain at 3 because naturally it makes far more sense).

Then finally, the pièce de résistance will be when only 5 rucks, mauls or breakdowns, for the sake of ease, let's call them tackles, will be allowed before the ball has to be given to the opposition.

I don't know why no-one hasn't ever tried these different laws in rugby before, it could be a sensation - Especially in Australia and the North West of England.

Responce elsewhere however may well be "take it or leave it".

 

[BokMagic]

..... and while you`re at it Mite, why not try the absolutely revolutionary concept of actually paying your players to play professionally?

Anyway, had a good look at these rules, and in theory, looks like it could be pretty decent. Guess I`m kinda in the same camp as Steve-o here, would first like to see it in action before making a judgement.

 

[Steve-o]

<div class='quotemain'>
Another rule I'm concerned about, is that a player must be 5m behind the last mans feet at a ruck. It will open up play, but surely it be mostly interpretation as to what is 5m on a fairly unmarked field like a rugby field? Was this a problem in the ARC?
[/b]

The refs were horrendous in ARC, I honestly don't think this rule was even enforced...linesman were too busy finding things to tell the refs to card people for then to lok at the 5m line... [/b][/quote]

Hmm interesting.. Something must of encouraged SANZAR to impliment these rules in the Super 14 though. Although alot of people praise it, it seems that it has quite a few flaws as well

 

[scuubasteve]

Interesting that rugby officials are often criticised for sitting on their hands too often, and when they make a unanimous decision to better the game they are again questioned.

SANZAR has taken the best approach it could have with the ELV's. They have left out the law changes where a clear cut advantage was not apparent, including the ruck and maul laws but have accepted that the game has areas where it can be improved for players, refs and fans.

They also adapted some of the original Stellenbosch ELV's too. The corner flags were originally supposed to be moved back off the touchline by 5m. But instead they have been retained where they are so if the ball is kicked to the corner there is still a clear marker which separates the in-goal and playing field areas. But now the flag is simply not out if touched. Best of both worlds.

The one biggest, and probably least talked about change, that will effect the game greatly is the new tackle ball offside line. As soon as a tackle is made there is now an automatic offside line which defending players must retreat behind, not just for rucks. So instead of defending players being allowed to retreat after a linebreak, they must now get back behind that line reagardless of whether it becomes a ruck or not, so the speed of play should increase.

The 5m line is for scrums, not rucks. The attacking team stays further back than 5m anyway. So the only difference here is the defensive line. I too believe this will just mimic RL after a while. Teams will just charge the inside channel to chew up yardage and get over the gain line.

If they wanted to make a better attacking platform from the scrum why not change the offside line for the scrum half rather than the whole backline? Its the disrupted ball that teams have to deal with (even after having a dominant scrum) that makes a crisp pass to the flyhalf difficult, not the depth of the backline. But that issue aside, the right call has been made.

 

[candybum]

i presonally dont think the s14 needed these law changes, s14 was exciting anyway! tactics used by the s14 teams made for the most exciting rugby comp! but i guess its good if they're considering the law changes in international rugby, so the players could get used to it i suppose!

 

[Brodizzle]

http://news.rugbyheaven.com.au/elvs-a-dual...71205-1f5d.html

Stuart Dickinson going on about how the new laws could mean your English type style teams will use the abundance of free kicks to set scrum after scrum...it didn't happen in the ARC but is sure to happen in the NH...so if anything it will help to bring out the differing styles of teams even more....making the game even more vibrant as both styles of play could be used in tandem....