Minor Law ammendments for the New Season

[teds]

There was also a piece on BT Rugby Tonight on 'Law Changes' involving Wayne Barnes and Maro Itojo here. It seemed to be mostly about interpretations rather than actual law changes - and focussed on player safety when a player's head is exposed while he is on the ground and a defending player seeks to kick the ball away. Interpretation changes not Law Changes right?

Was it just me who saw the irony in having itoje as the guest for explaining these particular infringements. That said he came across as very affable and down to earth.

[trendylfj]

Can you clarify the 'no kicks to be taken within 5m'? Is this kicks to touch from a penalty awarded 5m from the opposition try line? A line out is just awarded automatically on the 5m line?

I'll be interested to see how strictly the maul laws will be enforced.

Prior to this amendment if an "attacking" penalty was given between the goal line and the 5m line, it was taken on the 5m line.

However if a "Defending" penalty was given between the goal line and the 5m line, it was taken at the place of the offence.

This amendment now places the mark for "all" penalties between the goal line and the 5m line, on the 5m line.

Glad you cleared up your earlier statement "no kicks to be taken within 5m" - I had visions of the poor defending scrum half at a defending scrum picking the ball up inside the 5m line and not being allowed to kick for touch.

[TheRugbyRef]

Glad you cleared up your earlier statement "no kicks to be taken within 5m" - I had visions of the poor defending scrum half at a defending scrum picking the ball up inside the 5m line and not being allowed to kick for touch.

To be honest it never occurred to me that people would interpret it that way, so was happy to expand my answer.

[Old Hob]

So if a player takes a ball into contact and his next two supporting players come in to the ruck then after a second or two go to ground to secure the ball what can the defending team do?

Nothing, they have to stay on the back foot.

If the ruck is formed and then everyone goes to ground legally the next arriving player needs someone to bind onto, otherwise he has to stay on the back foot offside line. He can't just step over all the bodies and waggle his foot around in the vicinity of the ball.

It's similar to the old "he's ok, he came through the middle" this was an urban myth, if he comes through the middle of the ruck he isn't bound onto anyone, so isn't part of the ruck and is therefore offside.

The problem is in the phrase "everyone goes to ground legally". Under dinosaur laws everyone had to stay on their feet unless tackled to the ground. On the ground - out of the game; simple. The ruck was a contest for the ball with the feet; what is it now? You cannot use hands OR feet apparently so is a shoving along the ground competition like sea-lions but (usually) without the teeth

[TheRugbyRef]

So if a player takes a ball into contact and his next two supporting players come in to the ruck then after a second or two go to ground to secure the ball what can the defending team do?

Nothing, they have to stay on the back foot.

If the ruck is formed and then everyone goes to ground legally the next arriving player needs someone to bind onto, otherwise he has to stay on the back foot offside line. He can't just step over all the bodies and waggle his foot around in the vicinity of the ball.

It's similar to the old "he's ok, he came through the middle" this was an urban myth, if he comes through the middle of the ruck he isn't bound onto anyone, so isn't part of the ruck and is therefore offside.

The problem is in the phrase "everyone goes to ground legally". Under dinosaur laws everyone had to stay on their feet unless tackled to the ground. On the ground - out of the game; simple. The ruck was a contest for the ball with the feet; what is it now? You cannot use hands OR feet apparently so is a shoving along the ground competition like sea-lions but (usually) without the teeth

You can use your feet to contest the ball as long as you do it from an onside position, or are bound onto/into the ruck, and do it safely. I see it every week at grassroots level.

On the ground - out of the game still applies.

[jgriffin]

Still concerned that rucks are effectively sealed off not by players going to ground 'legally' but by swan dives and belly flops from all over the place, as was evident last Friday once the Ospreys realised Pearce wasn't penalising them. Under what circumstances can that be legal? It is very common in the Pro12 it seems on my occasional viewing and match attendance.

[L Smith]

And you'd risk that because....? Far better to defend if there's no-one to bind onto.

...you're Courtney Lawes