New Rugby Laws 1/8/2021

[OomStruisbaai]

Will apply from 1 August 2021
SARugbyMag

LAWS:

50/22: This law trial is intended to create space via a tactical choice for players to drop out of the defensive line in order to prevent their opponents from kicking for touch, reducing impact of defensive line speed.
Goalline drop-out: This law trial is intended to reduce the number of scrums, reward good defence, encourage counter-attacking and increase the rate of ball in play.
Pre-bound pods of players: Outlawing the practice of pods of three or more players being pre-bound prior to receiving the ball – the sanction will be a penalty kick.
Sanctioning the lower-limb clear-out: Penalising players who target/drop their weight on to the lower limbs of a jackler – the sanction will be a penalty kick.
Tightening law relating to latching: One-player latch to be permitted, but this player has the same responsibilities as a first arriving player (ie must stay on feet, enter through gate and not fall to floor) – the sanction will be a penalty kick.

[Paddington Bear]

When does a goalline drop out apply?

[Big D]

The goal line drop out is an awful rule. Especially at altitude. A player gets held up in goal and then the defence gets to kick the ball 40m+ downfield to "encourage counter attacking rugby".

The 50/22 will be crap too. All the best teams will be capable o exploiting that far too easily.

[Paddington Bear]

OK - in which case the goal line drop out is the next step in trying to depower the maul.

Imagine trying to wrestle the ball out of a pile up to take a quick drop out...

[Biffer]

Don't like any of those except the pre bound players one.

[Raggs]

How exactly does it encourage counter attacking rugby, when the best thing you can do with turnover ball in your own half now, is welly it as far as you can so it bounces out and you get a lineout.

[clydecloggie]

The goal line drop out is an awful rule. Especially at altitude. A player gets held up in goal and then the defence gets to kick the ball 40m+ downfield to "encourage counter attacking rugby".

The 50/22 will be crap too. All the best teams will be capable o exploiting that far too easily.

Agree it's awful. Even at sea level :). Most likely next action is a line-out close to the 10m line. Scrum 5's are fine, there's a lot riding on them. If you want to reduce interminable scrums, set a time limit on them or reduce any scrum infringements to free kicks rather than penalties.

Really hated it in the Rainbow Cup.

[Big D]

The drop out thing also makes it harder for the refs. Held up a mm before the line it is a tough scrum put in for the defending team, on the line it is a 22m drop out. Quite a big difference.

[Kawazaki]

A pity they've not sought to govern the jacklers, in fact it looks like they're keen to make it harder to remove them.

[Niegs]

Big ‘fudge you’ to Exeter! (though I know virtually very team pre-binds these days). That one allowing a single player latch (why even allow that!?) mentions staying on feet like players usually do that / refs always ping offenders now.

Will it be strictly applied? At first, maybe. Consistently, later? Doubt it. Prove me wrong World Rugby and yer refs!

[average joe]

Don't know why we would need "jacklers". If you're tackled you should release the ball, if the other guy is on his feet he should just be able to pick the ball up and play on, not have to wrestle you for it and then have three other guys slam into him while he's bent at the waist.

[Kawazaki]

Don't know why we would need "jacklers". If you're tackled you should release the ball, if the other guy is on his feet he should just be able to pick the ball up and play on, not have to wrestle you for it and then have three other guys slam into him while he's bent at the waist.

The tackled player rarely gets the chance to place the ball back in the first place. I've said in here before, if they simply changed the law that the jackler has to step over the tackled player before he's allowed to go for the ball with his hands then at a stroke it would kill two birds with one stone; 1. The jackler would be supporting his own bodyweight, and 2. The jackler would mostly be side on at the tackle area and not in a position where his neck is vulnerable. And just for good measure, 3. It would be very obvious to the referee, opposition and fans if the jackler is legal or not.

[average joe]

Don't know why we would need "jacklers". If you're tackled you should release the ball, if the other guy is on his feet he should just be able to pick the ball up and play on, not have to wrestle you for it and then have three other guys slam into him while he's bent at the waist.

The tackled player rarely gets the chance to place the ball back in the first place. I've said in here before, if they simply changed the law that the jackler has to step over the tackled player before he's allowed to go for the ball with his hands then at a stroke it would kill two birds with one stone; 1. The jackler would be supporting his own bodyweight, and 2. The jackler would mostly be side on at the tackle area and not in a position where his neck is vulnerable. And just for good measure, 3. It would be very obvious to the referee, opposition and fans if the jackler is legal or not.

Placing the ball means you reach back to put the ball down, after that you need to let go of the ball. If you're laying on your back release the ball. What would make a "jackler" legal or not? If he's on his feet he should be allowed to play the ball. Same applies to the tackled player. If you tackled me and I mange to get back on my feet and the ball is still laying there I should be allowed to pick it up and play on, no?

[Kawazaki]

Don't know why we would need "jacklers". If you're tackled you should release the ball, if the other guy is on his feet he should just be able to pick the ball up and play on, not have to wrestle you for it and then have three other guys slam into him while he's bent at the waist.

The tackled player rarely gets the chance to place the ball back in the first place. I've said in here before, if they simply changed the law that the jackler has to step over the tackled player before he's allowed to go for the ball with his hands then at a stroke it would kill two birds with one stone; 1. The jackler would be supporting his own bodyweight, and 2. The jackler would mostly be side on at the tackle area and not in a position where his neck is vulnerable. And just for good measure, 3. It would be very obvious to the referee, opposition and fans if the jackler is legal or not.

Placing the ball means you reach back to put the ball down, after that you need to let go of the ball. If you're laying on your back release the ball. What would make a "jackler" legal or not? If he's on his feet he should be allowed to play the ball. Same applies to the tackled player. If you tackled me and I mange to get back on my feet and the ball is still laying there I should be allowed to pick it up and play on, no?

Comparing your own experience as a player with what happens at the pro level is never a great way to understand how or why laws do or don't work.

Jacklers are there primarily to stop quick ball regardless of whether they win the ball or not. And they almost certainly won't be the primary tackler who just got to his feet faster than the ball carrier. I've got nothing against competitive rucks and turnovers but I don't like the current balance between attack and defence. Make the jackler do more to commit to the ruck before he's allowed to put his hands on the ball is all I'm suggesting.

[average joe]

If he's not the tackler or the tackled then he should be able to play the ball. If there's a ruck he shouldn't be putting his hands on the ball anyways, unless he's the 9.

[ia801310]

The 50/22 and goal line drop out rule have no place in Union. It feels like they are copying league to try and cater to the Australian audience. However outside Australia Union is the far more successful code.

[Paddington Bear]

If you want a vision of the future, imagine World Rugby culturally cringing at League and desperately trying and failing to usurp football, forever.