• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

What Union could learn from League..

Sam Owen

First XV
Joined
Jul 20, 2010
Messages
2,315
Country Flag
Samoa
Club or Nation
Blues
I hope this thread doesnt turn into a which code is better type debate, although its most likely you'll get that. It might get no reponses at all lol.

Please people, no Union vs League!

To start things of I'd say Union needs to make up its mind in regards to its general rules. Always law changes and players have to adjust, sometimes they have to do this during international test matches.

I've always told people that are learning about the two different codes that League is like a game of Draughts and Union is like a game of Chess. However Union changes their laws a lot and they should sort it out so things can be more concrete and simplified. Thats something I think that Union could learn from League.
 
interesting topic and agree that sometimes the union law changes are frustrating.

The question is why? I can understand from a safety perspective, but a lot of the law changes seem to stem from people trying to make the sport more appealing to the masses.
 
What I liked from leg was that the referee was hardly noticeable it seemed. Apart from the obvious move and all, but really. It seems like rugby is one of the only sports whee fans can name referees. There are some in football, but nowhere near as much as rugby.
 
I think the reason that laws have been constantly fiddled with over the last few years is because while rugby has always been a sport where players live on the edge but with the game going pro players push that little bit harder and looking for the exploit, for a lack of a better term. I'm not trying to sat that it's a bad ting I think it could be one of the contributing factors.
 
One of the major things is that refs in union are given far less scope to judge whether a tackle (or any other action) is dangerous.
The laws they are given mean that a lot of binary decisions are made - often meaning that people are penalised for things that clearly are not all that dangerous.

I know I see a lot of tackles punished that I would personally not complain about had they happened to me.

Essentially I feel league embraces the fact that it's a contact sport more than some sections of union do.
 
Candidate ideas that could be brought into union

► Offside lines 5m back from the ruck (and maul)

► Reduce penalty kicks to 2 points and dropped goals to 1 point

► line-drop out for carried back and grounded or made dead (keep 5m scrum for held-up)

► 40-20 kick (in Union it would be a 10-22 kick)

► Specialist Assistant Referees/Touch Judges

► "not played at" Law for touch
 
Really don't see how an offside line 5m back from the ruck is enforceable. Smells like a disaster waiting to happen.
 
Definitely not from the ruck - although could be a good way to get some conditioning done in training!
From the Maul it could work.
 
hey can you explain this one to an amateur like myself? cheers

In Rugby League, if a player kicks the ball and it strikes an opponent who does not make any attempt to play at the ball, and the ball rebounds off the opponent into touch, the person responsible for the ball going into touch is the kicker, not the opponent.

[TEXTAREA]ARL Laws of the Game
SECTION 9 : TOUCH AND TOUCH IN-GOAL

7. In all aspects of play, a player who does not
deliberately play at the ball (eg. ricochet or rebound)
will not be disadvantaged by a consequent restart of
play when the ball has gone dead or into touch.
[/TEXTAREA]

So in league:

Red 6 kicks the ball into the back of a Blue player and the ball ricochets into touch, Blue have the feed to the scrum, not Red
 
Last edited:
However Union changes their laws a lot and they should sort it out so things can be more concrete and simplified.

Rugby Union is one of the most complex games out there, it's very hard to simplify it. You could change one law that you think is going to simplify it, but it causes issues in other areas. I agree it does need a few tweaks here and there, but it's not that straightforward to simplify it. League is a simple game and probably has half the rules union has, look at the scrum, noone pushes, there's no competing for the ball, it's a non event. You mess with the union laws too much, we'll end up with a hybrid of union & league.
 
Rugby Union is one of the most complex games out there, it's very hard to simplify it. You could change one law that you think is going to simplify it, but it causes issues in other areas. I agree it does need a few tweaks here and there, but it's not that straightforward to simplify it. League is a simple game and probably has half the rules union has, look at the scrum, noone pushes, there's no competing for the ball, it's a non event. You mess with the union laws too much, we'll end up with a hybrid of union & league.

Here's a good example for you;

Law 15 outlines the responsibilities options and obligations of all players at the tackle.

Late in 2007/08, the iRB changed the Law with regard to arriving players at the tackle. They decided that if an arriving player (or the tackler getting to his feet) got his hands on the ball before a ruck was formed, he would be entitled to keep his hands on the ball (previously, the player had to let go). The result of this was a dramatic change in the way the game was played.

1. Jacklers had a few extra seconds to secure a turnover, leading to
2. Many more turnovers and the chances of losing the ball when taking it into contact increased dramatically
3. Coaches/Teams became unwilling to take the ball into contact, especially in their own half, so they chose to kick, and try to gain a turnover in the opponents half
4. It became more advantageous to NOT have the ball, so aerial ping pong was born.

The entire way the game is played was changed, because the Law was changed to allow the jackler an extra couple seconds with his hands on the ball.

But sometimes, you don't even need to change a Law to change something. Sometimes just a change in the interpretation or the way a law is enforced can have a dramatic effect on the game.

In 2010, SANZAR Referees decided that they needed to address the issues I have outlined above. They decided that they would set a priority order in which things must occur after the tackle. That order was...

1. Tackle
2. Tackler(s) MUST release tackled player (to give him the opportunity to place pass or push the ball)
3. Tackled player, once released by the tackler(s), may place, pass or push the ball, but MUST release it to any jackler/arriving players.

So that, if a player arrived at the same moment the tackler and tackled player went to ground, and if the tackler was still holding the player, while the arriving player jackles for the ball, the penalty kick would go against the tackler for not releasing. Previously, the tackled player would have been penalised for not releasing the ball. This again changed the emphasis, made turnovers more difficult to get, and the aerial ping-pong virtually disappeared from the game in just one season.

Both these are great examples of "The Law of Untended Consequences"
 
What's a jackler?


das


Jackler is a generic term for a player who goes after the ball to win a turnover at a tackle/ruck. The jackler can be...

1. a tackler who brought the ball-carrier to ground, and has gone to ground himself, released him, got to his feet and is going for the ball.

2. a tackle assist who brought the ball-carrier to ground but did not go to ground himself and who showed a clear release and went back through the gate to go for the ball.

3. a player who was standing at the tackle when the ball-carrier was brought to ground at his feet so that he is positioned in the gate and is going for the ball.

4. a player who has arrived at the tackle through the gate, and is going for the ball.
 
Jackler is a generic term for a player who goes after the ball to win a turnover at a tackle/ruck. The jackler can be...

1. a tackler who brought the ball-carrier to ground, and has gone to ground himself, released him, got to his feet and is going for the ball.

2. a tackle assist who brought the ball-carrier to ground but did not go to ground himself and who showed a clear release and went back through the gate to go for the ball.

3. a player who was standing at the tackle when the ball-carrier was brought to ground at his feet so that he is positioned in the gate and is going for the ball.

4. a player who has arrived at the tackle through the gate, and is going for the ball.

Thanks. I actually googled the word, looked it up in dictionaries, and was unable to find it at all. Is it a regional/slang word, or something? I've just never heard it before.


das
 
Rugby Union is one of the most complex games out there, it's very hard to simplify it. You could change one law that you think is going to simplify it, but it causes issues in other areas. I agree it does need a few tweaks here and there, but it's not that straightforward to simplify it. League is a simple game and probably has half the rules union has, look at the scrum, noone pushes, there's no competing for the ball, it's a non event. You mess with the union laws too much, we'll end up with a hybrid of union & league.

Yes Im sure its a difficult puzzle to piece together as we've seen for a long time now and I totally understand the different contests in the game and the rules that control that. Makes me wonder with all this chopping and changing, haven't they already messed with the laws of the game too much? Will it ever stop?

I love both games equally but when Im watching Union, these a few things about Union that can confuse or frustrate me (e.g. Scrum penalties). In the end it's the refs that cops the stick (e.g. Post game interview of refs interpretation excuse for losing).
 
Candidate ideas that could be brought into union

► Offside lines 5m back from the ruck (and maul)

► Reduce penalty kicks to 2 points and dropped goals to 1 point

► line-drop out for carried back and grounded or made dead (keep 5m scrum for held-up)

► 40-20 kick (in Union it would be a 10-22 kick)

► Specialist Assistant Referees/Touch Judges

► "not played at" Law for touch

I like the last 4. The 10-22 kick would reward tactical kicking. Extra refs, extra eyes, more jobs. I thought not played at was already in place with Union. Line out drop out, good and bad I guess. Those are good examples of what Union could take away from League.
 
In Rugby League, if a player kicks the ball and it strikes an opponent who does not make any attempt to play at the ball, and the ball rebounds off the opponent into touch, the person responsible for the ball going into touch is the kicker, not the opponent.

[TEXTAREA]ARL Laws of the Game
SECTION 9 : TOUCH AND TOUCH IN-GOAL

7. In all aspects of play, a player who does not
deliberately play at the ball (eg. ricochet or rebound)
will not be disadvantaged by a consequent restart of
play when the ball has gone dead or into touch.
[/TEXTAREA]

So in league:

Red 6 kicks the ball into the back of a Blue player and the ball ricochets into touch, Blue have the feed to the scrum, not Red
That's a fantastic idea. I really like it.

When players go to charge down a kick and connect with the ball, but only deflect it rather than actually charging it down, if the ball bounces into touch, then the deflection gives possession to the kicker's team. Teams can gain a good 20+ meters from being nearly charged down. It always struck me as odd that the kicker would be rewarded for being incompetent/charger punished for doing something good.

But I don't like the idea of 10-22s. I always hated the equivalent rule in league, because the defending team hardly has a way of stopping it. Teams already kick to the corner to apply pressure and I like that system.

And I really, really don't like the idea of being 5m behind the ruck. Changes the game way too fundamentally.
 
Last edited:
But I don't like the idea of 10-22s. I always hated the equivalent rule in league, because the defending team hardly has a way of stopping it.

But they do have a way of defending against it; they have to be aware of the tactic, and be prepared to put one or two extra players back to defend against it, which will make their front line defences one or two players short, which in turn, might encourage the attacking team to run the ball at the slightly weakened defensive line.
 
Exactly.

40-20 kicking is very hard to get right. A team with an intelligent full back and wingers will drop back to avoid the danger well in advance. It is an extremely difficult skill to pull off.
 

Latest posts

Top