Fun thread... let's rewrite the Law book

[Guy Smiley]

We can have some fun with this if you're up for it... all of us love the game (except refry I guess) and we can probably all see something about it we'd like to see change. Most of us also probably harbour misgivings about the way WR run the game and the overall decision making they avoid over long lunches.

So... let's put some balls on the line and offer up suggestions. Take it in good heart... as an idea is discussed potential problems or failings can be revealed that were hard to predict, but throwing ideas in the mix can often result in a decent brew.


I'll start with one

based on concerns over welfare, attracting young players, soothing soccer mum nerves and trying to find a way around the torrent of cards seen in the game, how about we ban tackling above the nipple line altogether? Basically... no contact. So no tackling at shoulder level, no neck roll grapple etc.

Yeah, it would change a lot in how the game is played with ease of passing being a simple factor to suggest. Would that be a bad thing?

[OomStruisbaai]

Guy I am not sure if this is another trolling effort?

Anyways I'll bite.

It will always be a grey area.

This cut both ways attacker and defender. Where is the line when the attacker dip and go lower to bump off the defender?

[LoveOfTheGame]

Ban Caterpillar rucks would be my very first suggestion.

[Enzedder]

You just have to get the ball over the line - not ground it

[Enzedder]

30 minutes each way but the clock stops when the ball goes out of play. Minimum 30 seconds to restart, including goal kicks (once the tee is received).

Max 5 subs

[Sandstorm]

You just have to get the ball over the line - not ground it

No way!!

[average joe]

Take it back to the beginning. No scrums, no tackling, no rucks and you're not allowed to touch the ball with your hands. We can call it football.

[Sandstorm]

Ban Caterpillar rucks would be my very first suggestion.

And the blocking player standing next to the # 9. If you want to slow box-kick (spit), then you get zero protection and take your chances with a lock charging it down.

[Insane_Homer]

The team that kicks the ball can't jump to compete for it.

1. It will stop all the kicking shyte
2. Much safer for everyone
3. No interpretation about what's "competing"

[Sandstorm]

The team that kicks the ball can't jump to compete for it.

1. It will stop all the kicking shyte
2. Much safer for everyone
3. No interpretation about what's "competing"

Interesting…….

[Tichtheid]

An oldie but goodie - bring back rucking.

Less chance of "interpretive" refereeing where one team can glance the ball with a single digit and win the penalty where others can pick up the ball and get penalised - "show him the tackets", as they say in the Scottish Borders, players are less likely to muck around when they have a chance of losing the use of a hand for a while.

I'm not being entirely serious but it is one of my bug bears, when for example "not sporting your weight" is called against one team whilst another seemingly defies the laws of physics without penalty. So what I'm getting at is consistency of refereeing, the laws as they are for the most part fine

[Tichtheid]

The team that kicks the ball can't jump to compete for it.

1. It will stop all the kicking shyte
2. Much safer for everyone
3. No interpretation about what's "competing"

Interesting…….

It rewards a blitz defence, just keep players out of the rucks and you can defend for hours at a time. The answer to it that League came up with is to turn over possession after six tackles. The whole point of Union is that everything has to be a competition for possession.

[Uncle fester]

The team that kicks the ball can't jump to compete for it.

1. It will stop all the kicking shyte
2. Much safer for everyone
3. No interpretation about what's "competing"

I'd be in for that. The launching yourself into the air above a player who is already standing there is a big bugbear of mine and it causes havoc at lower levels.

[Tichtheid]

The team that kicks the ball can't jump to compete for it.

1. It will stop all the kicking shyte
2. Much safer for everyone
3. No interpretation about what's "competing"

I'd be in for that. The launching yourself into the air above a player who is already standing there is a big bugbear of mine and it causes havoc at lower levels.

Aussie Rules guys don't seem to get injured and they leap like salmons on a mission

[Uncle fester]

The team that kicks the ball can't jump to compete for it.

1. It will stop all the kicking shyte
2. Much safer for everyone
3. No interpretation about what's "competing"

I'd be in for that. The launching yourself into the air above a player who is already standing there is a big bugbear of mine and it causes havoc at lower levels.

Aussie Rules guys don't seem to get injured and they leap like salmons on a mission

No offside rule.

[sockwithaticket]

Only one stop of the maul before the ball has to be used.

Tackles can't go higher than the arm pit line.

2 designated water breaks per half. 'Water carriers' (coaches in yellow bibs) are not allowed on at any other point.

The biggest issues are around exsting ruck law enforcement rather than anything that needs to change.

[Brazil]

Players contesting the maul must be on their feet. Croc rolls and wrestling players to the ground to be banned.

The scrum half does not have a divine right of protection at the breakdown, and if he's lifted the ball he's fair game.

Drop the 40-22 as if it were a whale plummeting to earth.

[Slick]

BRING BACK RUCKING

That is all.

Oh, and I like the lowering of the tackle height as well.

Also, penalise touch kickers who go way past the mark at a penalty

Stop penalising scrums just for being beaten.

Get rid of the TMO except for scoring a try and dangerous foul play - this also needs no replays of tiny incidents the ref may have missed on the TV or in the stadium. ie, give the ref back his authority

Finally, only the captain can speak to the ref, no exceptions, unless spoken to or invited to speak.

Actually one more. If you go down clutching your head (which will be reduced anyway with the tackle height being lowered) you are off for a 10 minute HIA, no exceptions.

[inactionman]

An oldie but goodie - bring back rucking.

Less chance of "interpretive" refereeing where one team can glance the ball with a single digit and win the penalty where others can pick up the ball and get penalised - "show him the tackets", as they say in the Scottish Borders, players are less likely to muck around when they have a chance of losing the use of a hand for a while.

I'm not being entirely serious but it is one of my bug bears, when for example "not sporting your weight" is called against one team whilst another seemingly defies the laws of physics without penalty. So what I'm getting at is consistency of refereeing, the laws as they are for the most part fine

Not sure we want the silver slipper back, but I'd agree we should go back to driving the opposition of the ball rather than heads-down trying to grab it. It's too interpretive, if nothing else.

My two pennies worth:

- I'd get rid of scrum penalties for all but the most egregious offences (and by that I mean belting the hooker in the face), they're too subjective, too influential and in many cases are just a result of one pack getting the better of another.
- I'd also ban the headfirst diving at the line from two foot out after endless pick and goes - make it so you need to pass the ball back to the 5 metre line.
- mauls are over the second you stop going forward - must play the ball and not try to restart the advance.
- no lazy running back to block challenge for a high kick. Not sure how you actually legislate for that, but there's too many players just getting in the way of opposition and not trying to compete.

not a change of law, but of application
- just penalise people cheating and not constantly warn them. 'Hands off' after they're flapped hands all over the ball the scrum half is trying to lift etc. The damage is done in terms of slowing ball down, so penalise it.
- clearly penalise players deliberately rolling into the way of opposition attempting to clear a ruck. No mentions which team in green I'm looking at here.
- stop clocks on everything - get the fecking scrum done and dusted in 20-30 seconds, not 2 minutes. If we get rid of scrum penalties it's easier to do this.

[Mahoney]

All kicks worth 2 points. Restart after a successful penalty kick is a scrum to the team that scored at the point where the penalty was conceded. © OB..

50:22 can only happen if you took the ball into the previous ruck / maul (or on 1st phase if you had the put in at the scrum / lineout). i.e. no 50:22 on a turnover.

If you legally come through the centre of a ruck you may drive the scrum half off the ball if it's on the floor. You're only offside if they have picked it up.

For the rest - get a computer to referee it ruthlessly to the letter of the law. No ambiguity, no "the law forbids it but 90 times out of 100 it isn't penalised until this one time when the ref suddenly decides it matters".

[inactionman]

All kicks worth 2 points. Restart after a successful penalty kick is a scrum to the team that scored at the point where the penalty was conceded. © OB..

50:22 can only happen if you took the ball into the previous ruck / maul (or on 1st phase if you had the put in at the scrum / lineout). i.e. no 50:22 on a turnover.

If you legally come through the centre of a ruck you may drive the scrum half off the ball if it's on the floor. You're only offside if they have picked it up.

For the rest - get a computer to referee it ruthlessly to the letter of the law. No ambiguity, no "the law forbids it but 90 times out of 100 it isn't penalised until this one time when the ref suddenly decides it matters".

I like that one - the intent of the 50:22 was to keep defenders spread and stop defensive lines from being packed, not to catch out teams in transition.

On that note I'd also say you can't have 50:22s against teams down to 14 or fewer for the same reason as they will necessarily be sparsely manned in the back field. I appreciate going down to 14 is supposed to inconvenience, but that starts to become double jeopardy. I seem to recall ranting when Ireland did this against England after Steward's Mickey Mouse red card.

[Brazil]

All kicks worth 2 points. Restart after a successful penalty kick is a scrum to the team that scored at the point where the penalty was conceded. © OB..

50:22 can only happen if you took the ball into the previous ruck / maul (or on 1st phase if you had the put in at the scrum / lineout). i.e. no 50:22 on a turnover.

If you legally come through the centre of a ruck you may drive the scrum half off the ball if it's on the floor. You're only offside if they have picked it up.

For the rest - get a computer to referee it ruthlessly to the letter of the law. No ambiguity, no "the law forbids it but 90 times out of 100 it isn't penalised until this one time when the ref suddenly decides it matters".

Why? If you've come through the ruck legally and the scrum half's picked the ball up then the ruck is over, surely? If he can't get it away quickly enough then that's his lookout.

[Slick]

An oldie but goodie - bring back rucking.

Less chance of "interpretive" refereeing where one team can glance the ball with a single digit and win the penalty where others can pick up the ball and get penalised - "show him the tackets", as they say in the Scottish Borders, players are less likely to muck around when they have a chance of losing the use of a hand for a while.

I'm not being entirely serious but it is one of my bug bears, when for example "not sporting your weight" is called against one team whilst another seemingly defies the laws of physics without penalty. So what I'm getting at is consistency of refereeing, the laws as they are for the most part fine

Not sure we want the silver slipper back, but I'd agree we should go back to driving the opposition of the ball rather than heads-down trying to grab it. It's too interpretive, if nothing else.

My two pennies worth:

- I'd get rid of scrum penalties for all but the most egregious offences (and by that I mean belting the hooker in the face), they're too subjective, too influential and in many cases are just a result of one pack getting the better of another.
- I'd also ban the headfirst diving at the line from two foot out after endless pick and goes - make it so you need to pass the ball back to the 5 metre line.
- mauls are over the second you stop going forward - must play the ball and not try to restart the advance.
- no lazy running back to block challenge for a high kick. Not sure how you actually legislate for that, but there's too many players just getting in the way of opposition and not trying to compete.

not a change of law, but of application
- just penalise people cheating and not constantly warn them. 'Hands off' after they're flapped hands all over the ball the scrum half is trying to lift etc. The damage is done in terms of slowing ball down, so penalise it.
- clearly penalise players deliberately rolling into the way of opposition attempting to clear a ruck. No mentions which team in green I'm looking at here.
- stop clocks on everything - get the fecking scrum done and dusted in 20-30 seconds, not 2 minutes. If we get rid of scrum penalties it's easier to do this.

This. It's so frustrating and they all know.

[inactionman]

All kicks worth 2 points. Restart after a successful penalty kick is a scrum to the team that scored at the point where the penalty was conceded. © OB..

50:22 can only happen if you took the ball into the previous ruck / maul (or on 1st phase if you had the put in at the scrum / lineout). i.e. no 50:22 on a turnover.

If you legally come through the centre of a ruck you may drive the scrum half off the ball if it's on the floor. You're only offside if they have picked it up.

For the rest - get a computer to referee it ruthlessly to the letter of the law. No ambiguity, no "the law forbids it but 90 times out of 100 it isn't penalised until this one time when the ref suddenly decides it matters".

Why? If you've come through the ruck legally and the scrum half's picked the ball up then the ruck is over, surely? If he can't get it away quickly enough then that's his lookout.

It'd likely just end up a game of scrum halves getting smashed all game. I'm all for it

[Guy Smiley]

I'd be in for that. The launching yourself into the air above a player who is already standing there is a big bugbear of mine and it causes havoc at lower levels.

Aussie Rules guys don't seem to get injured and they leap like salmons on a mission

No offside rule.

Yup... in AFL if there's a contested marking situation, all of the players are facing the ball coming in so they all jump in the same direction, not into each other. There are still injuries and that code still has issues trying to deal with head high contact... with similar difficulties over ambiguities as we have in Union.

[Guy Smiley]

Reserve players limited to warming up on the sideline, nowhere near the in goal.

[Insane_Homer]

Aussie Rules guys don't seem to get injured and they leap like salmons on a mission

and Rugby is not League, so another reason not too

[Mahoney]

If you legally come through the centre of a ruck you may drive the scrum half off the ball if it's on the floor. You're only offside if they have picked it up.

Why? If you've come through the ruck legally and the scrum half's picked the ball up then the ruck is over, surely? If he can't get it away quickly enough then that's his lookout.

Maybe - I was just worried that it might make the game too messy.

I've just been looking at the laws and as far as I can see the implication of the laws are that defenders legally involved in a ruck, maul, scrum or lineout are onside the moment the set piece ends, so are entitled to their head start over onside defenders not in the set piece. So it would be consistent for the scrum half to be fair game.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

The team that kicks the ball can't jump to compete for it.

1. It will stop all the kicking shyte
2. Much safer for everyone
3. No interpretation about what's "competing"

Or you can jump for the ball but only from underneath the point the ball is landing, you cannot jump from distance into the skill point

[TB63]

Lifting at lineouts..
Ball must go in the centre at a scrum, feeding back is penalty..

[Biffer]

Defenders have to be clearly onside in the defensive line in order not to be penaliaed, instead of having to be clearly offside to be penalised. If you're in the grey area, you're offside.

People go on about these great players needing half a yard of space to produce some magic, then we ref the game to remove that half yard.

Also fine with lowering the tackle height.

[Blake]

1. Make collapsing a maul legal

2. Players are only allowed to jackal if you have one foot planted on each side of the tackled player. They have to step over the prone player, bending down side-on, before playign the ball with their hands. It will encourage more phase play as the jackeler will lose a second or two to get into position and be significantly safer to clear them out.

3. Remove the sanction for a deliberate knockdown / failed intercept. If the defender can get a hand on it, the pass/offload was too late. Knock-on and scrum only if it went forward.

4. Disallow the charging down of goal kicks. It's stupid.

5. Quick lineout throw-ins are only allowed by the player that caught the ball. If the ball was touched by more than one person, no quick throw should be allowed. No more wrestling the ball away to try and force a quick throw in. The scuffles are pointless.

6. Free kicks from all scrum infringements; but multiple infringements can be upgraded to penalties and cards.

7. Advantage should be limited by either phases (eg. 3 phases), time (20 seconds) or distance (10m).

8. No more red cards for head contact. Red cards should be for punching, gouging, biting, stamping etc. Head/shoulder-on-head tackles should get a diffirent card (orange?) with a 15 or 20 min sin bin and a forced substitution of the offender.

[average joe]

1. Make collapsing a maul legal

2. Players are only allowed to jackal if you have one foot planted on each side of the tackled player. They have to step over the prone player, bending down side-on, before playign the ball with their hands. It will encourage more phase play as the jackeler will lose a second or two to get into position and be significantly safer to clear them out.

3. Remove the sanction for a deliberate knockdown / failed intercept. If the defender can get a hand on it, the pass/offload was too late. Knock-on and scrum only if it went forward.

4. Disallow the charging down of goal kicks. It's stupid.

5. Quick lineout throw-ins are only allowed by the player that caught the ball. If the ball was touched by more than one person, no quick throw should be allowed. No more wrestling the ball away to try and force a quick throw in. The scuffles are pointless.

6. Free kicks from all scrum infringements; but multiple infringements can be upgraded to penalties and cards.

7. Advantage should be limited by either phases (eg. 3 phases), time (20 seconds) or distance (10m).

8. No more red cards for head contact. Red cards should be for punching, gouging, biting, stamping etc. Head/shoulder-on-head tackles should get a diffirent card (orange?) with a 15 or 20 min sin bin and a forced substitution of the offender.

I would be headbutting people left, right and centre.

[sockwithaticket]

1. Make collapsing a maul legal

2. Players are only allowed to jackal if you have one foot planted on each side of the tackled player. They have to step over the prone player, bending down side-on, before playign the ball with their hands. It will encourage more phase play as the jackeler will lose a second or two to get into position and be significantly safer to clear them out.

3. Remove the sanction for a deliberate knockdown / failed intercept. If the defender can get a hand on it, the pass/offload was too late. Knock-on and scrum only if it went forward.

4. Disallow the charging down of goal kicks. It's stupid.

5. Quick lineout throw-ins are only allowed by the player that caught the ball. If the ball was touched by more than one person, no quick throw should be allowed. No more wrestling the ball away to try and force a quick throw in. The scuffles are pointless.

6. Free kicks from all scrum infringements; but multiple infringements can be upgraded to penalties and cards.

7. Advantage should be limited by either phases (eg. 3 phases), time (20 seconds) or distance (10m).

8. No more red cards for head contact. Red cards should be for punching, gouging, biting, stamping etc. Head/shoulder-on-head tackles should get a diffirent card (orange?) with a 15 or 20 min sin bin and a forced substitution of the offender.

3. A failed interception is completely different from a deliberate knock on and that's reflected in how they're sanctioned. The key is whether a player is in a realistic chance to take the ball and it seems that fans get incredibly exercised over incidents where the player clearly had at best a fleeting chance of gathering. If all instances only result in a scrum, get ready for players behaving more egregiously to disrupt opposition attacks.

6. Say goodbye to props who can actually scrummage.

8. Absolutely not. Player behaviour on this hasn't changed because the sanctions are inadequate, this would make the consequences even weaker.

[Biffer]

Yeah, that's what I don't get either. People saying red cards are killing the game - they're not, head contact is killing the game, and killing players / former players.

If you want to stop players being sent off, increase the sanction so it's a proper deterrent. So there's a law change - draw a line under previous precedent for suspensions. No time off for being polite, not having done it before etc, that's the minimum expectation. If you don't behave well at the hearing you get an additional suspension. Your second red card adds a percentage on from a baseline, third a higher percentage etc.

So you start at six weeks for red card from a head contact

If you do it again, it's eight. Third time ten. Etc etc. That will mean players losing money, owners losing money and coaches losing jobs, if they don't sort it out.

[Mahoney]

Advantage shouldn't be about time at all. For penalties it should be about whether anything really interesting is developing. For scrums it should be about trying to avoid having the scrum at all.

For scrum advantage, one successful ruck with your players reasonably well aligned = advantage over. That's all you are meant to get from a scrum anyway.

For penalty advantage, the moment you have a breakdown that's a bit "meh", not making significant ground, not particularly fast ball, no overlap on, the penalty should be awarded.

The idea of advantage is to avoid the ridiculous soccer situation where the referee has to see into the future, not to give the attacking team multiple bites at the cherry.

[Blake]

3. A failed interception is completely different from a deliberate knock on and that's reflected in how they're sanctioned. The key is whether a player is in a realistic chance to take the ball and it seems that fans get incredibly exercised over incidents where the player clearly had at best a fleeting chance of gathering. If all instances only result in a scrum, get ready for players behaving more egregiously to disrupt opposition attacks.

I honestly couldn't care less. If an attacker has a 2 on 1 overlap and waits too long to pass, long enough that the defender can slap at the pass and reach the ball (intercept attamept or no), the pass was late and the attacker shouldn't benefit as much as they currently do. They should count their lucky stars that their team retains posession for a scrum. Every athlete believes they have super human abilities and they will go for impossible intercepts...or swat at a ball reflexively. Neither deserves teh same saction as a potentially career ending tackle.

6. Say goodbye to props who can actually scrummage.

I will probably hurt my teams more than any, but there are still benefits to free kicks. The current META of "scumming for penalties" is too overpowered.
Props that unable to scrum properly should still be suffer some consequences, but only after a couple a offences IMO.

8. Absolutely not. Player behaviour on this hasn't changed because the sanctions are inadequate, this would make the consequences even weaker.

I think after 7 years it has become apparent that yellow & red cards for shoulder/head-on-head contact isn't going to be as effective as the same santions were for reducing the prevalence of spear tackles which were all but eradicated in RWC cycle or two. That because spear tackles are a lot more deliberate and intenional, while many of these head contact tackles are reflexive or accidental. The players can still be cited and banned after the matches, but the current mechanism isn't working IMO.

[Blake]

Yeah, that's what I don't get either. People saying red cards are killing the game - they're not, head contact is killing the game, and killing players / former players.

If you want to stop players being sent off, increase the sanction so it's a proper deterrent. So there's a law change - draw a line under previous precedent for suspensions. No time off for being polite, not having done it before etc, that's the minimum expectation. If you don't behave well at the hearing you get an additional suspension. Your second red card adds a percentage on from a baseline, third a higher percentage etc.

So you start at six weeks for red card from a head contact

If you do it again, it's eight. Third time ten. Etc etc. That will mean players losing money, owners losing money and coaches losing jobs, if they don't sort it out.

No problem with that at 100% agree, but that's all after the match. During the match...card (10, 15 or 20 mins, I don't care) and forced substitution of the offender.
Afther the match, throw the book at them. The worse the history, the longer the ban.

[Woddy]

All kicks worth 2 points. Restart after a successful penalty kick is a scrum to the team that scored at the point where the penalty was conceded. © OB..

50:22 can only happen if you took the ball into the previous ruck / maul (or on 1st phase if you had the put in at the scrum / lineout). i.e. no 50:22 on a turnover.

If you legally come through the centre of a ruck you may drive the scrum half off the ball if it's on the floor. You're only offside if they have picked it up.

For the rest - get a computer to referee it ruthlessly to the letter of the law. No ambiguity, no "the law forbids it but 90 times out of 100 it isn't penalised until this one time when the ref suddenly decides it matters".

Why? If you've come through the ruck legally and the scrum half's picked the ball up then the ruck is over, surely? If he can't get it away quickly enough then that's his lookout.

It'd likely just end up a game of scrum halves getting smashed all game. I'm all for it

It might also get rid of the fiction that rucks continue even after everyone who was in it has gone off their feet and force play to speed up.

[Woddy]

Reserve players limited to warming up on the sideline, nowhere near the in goal.

Yes, both of them; and the same applies to the mandatory reserve prop.