When asked, "If you could change one rule, what would it be and why?" (Not2serious on a BBC Q&A)), Jeremy Guscott replied:
"Hi, I would bring back rucking because it would speed up the game and stop most players lying around the tackle area. It's beyond me why it every went out of the game".
I know this question comes up regularly on the forum, but thought it worth asking again.
By the way,I'm with Guscott on this one.
If you could change one rule, what would it be and why?
Moderators: Tigerbeat, Rizzo, Tigers Press Office, Tigers Webmaster
If you could change one rule, what would it be and why?
Valhalla I am coming!
Re: If you could change one rule, what would it be and why?
End the concept of a maul being different to open play as far as the offside rule is concerned.
If a player is holding the ball he can be tackled by a player entering from any position. Once the ball has been passed from the front player in the maul it must be passed within 5 seconds or any player in front is offside.
I'd change another - just to stop the number of penalties at the tackle situation.
If a player is brought to the ground he must release the ball (regardless of if held or not) and can only play it once he gets to his feet. (Too often players are taken down, released by the tackler only to find that the tackled player gets up and carries on and the ref allows it)
Likewise the tackler should not be penalised for holding on - until the tackled player has released the ball.
While we are at it - props top wear loose fitting cotton shirts to enable binding.
That's 3 changes that would dramatically reduce the number of needless penalties and keep the game flowing.
If a player is holding the ball he can be tackled by a player entering from any position. Once the ball has been passed from the front player in the maul it must be passed within 5 seconds or any player in front is offside.
I'd change another - just to stop the number of penalties at the tackle situation.
If a player is brought to the ground he must release the ball (regardless of if held or not) and can only play it once he gets to his feet. (Too often players are taken down, released by the tackler only to find that the tackled player gets up and carries on and the ref allows it)
Likewise the tackler should not be penalised for holding on - until the tackled player has released the ball.
While we are at it - props top wear loose fitting cotton shirts to enable binding.
That's 3 changes that would dramatically reduce the number of needless penalties and keep the game flowing.
Re: If you could change one rule, what would it be and why?
I disagree. When a Maul is moving it is an artform which should not be removed from the game. What next? The scrum half can take the ball from the opposition scrum. If any player can tackle a player from any postion in a Maul it will make it dangerous as a maul which is made stable by teams pushing against each other, not by pulling it down.mol2 wrote: End the concept of a maul being different to open play as far as the offside rule is concerned.
If a player is holding the ball he can be tackled by a player entering from any position. Once the ball has been passed from the front player in the maul it must be passed within 5 seconds or any player in front is offside.
Is this not the law anyway, just poorly refereed?mol2 wrote: I'd change another - just to stop the number of penalties at the tackle situation.
If a player is brought to the ground he must release the ball (regardless of if held or not) and can only play it once he gets to his feet. (Too often players are taken down, released by the tackler only to find that the tackled player gets up and carries on and the ref allows it)
If the tackler is holding the player around his arms and the ball, how can the tackled player release the ball? The reason the tackler must release the tackled player is so that they can release the ball.mol2 wrote: Likewise the tackler should not be penalised for holding on - until the tackled player has released the ball.
This is somthing that is agree with to a degree but I feel rather that loose shirts which can impede then when running as they can be scragged by the shirt, i feel that a reinforced piece of material should be added under the armpit where props have to bind. failure to bind on this means a penalty.mol2 wrote:While we are at it - props top wear loose fitting cotton shirts to enable binding.
Re: If you could change one rule, what would it be and why?
Not a law change ..................or is it? Get back to a passive scrum engagement and get the chopsy little sod in the number 9 shirt to put the ball in straight.
The ref would have the chance to sort the bind before the shoving commenced, cutting needless penaty restarts. We'd cut the risk of injury the collision brings and we'd get back to a proper shoving contest.
...........IMHO as an aged front rower of course.
The ref would have the chance to sort the bind before the shoving commenced, cutting needless penaty restarts. We'd cut the risk of injury the collision brings and we'd get back to a proper shoving contest.
...........IMHO as an aged front rower of course.
Exile Wigstonite living in Wales.
Poet laureate of the "One Eyed Turk".
Bar stool philosopher in the "Wilted Daffodil"
Poet laureate of the "One Eyed Turk".
Bar stool philosopher in the "Wilted Daffodil"
Re: If you could change one rule, what would it be and why?
How about giving 6 points for a try & 1 point for the conversion & 2 points for a penalty. This would stop teams winning matches without scoring any trys! (sarries come to mind)
Also all aspiring refs to spend time in French league system to learn about reffing scrums properly
Also all aspiring refs to spend time in French league system to learn about reffing scrums properly
-
longlivethecrumbie
- Super User
- Posts: 2438
- Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 6:30 pm
Re: If you could change one rule, what would it be and why?
How about having a specific ref at scrum time - one that is used to the 'dark arts' and is an ex front rower. Most refs that get to the pro levels need to be fit enough to keep up with play and therefore are, more than likely, to have played anywhere other than the front row and are, in some cases, lost to the game. Utilise their expertise and have someone who, I hope to God, knows what is going on in there and in the same move get rid of a huge amount of guess work from an ex winger who is now reffing by having a scrum time ref.GT1 wrote:Also all aspiring refs to spend time in French league system to learn about reffing scrums properly
Re: If you could change one rule, what would it be and why?
Can't really see any ex front rowers putting their pies down long enough to go & look at the scrums! But here's a radical idea the assistant ref nearest the scrum could come onto the pitch & watch/report on skulduggery going on on his side while the ref looks after the other, 2 sets of eyes better than 1.
Re: If you could change one rule, what would it be and why?
Pies AND pints GT1.........AND Pints!GT1 wrote:Can't really see any ex front rowers putting their pies down long enough to go & look at the scrums! But here's a radical idea the assistant ref nearest the scrum could come onto the pitch & watch/report on skulduggery going on on his side while the ref looks after the other, 2 sets of eyes better than 1.
Exile Wigstonite living in Wales.
Poet laureate of the "One Eyed Turk".
Bar stool philosopher in the "Wilted Daffodil"
Poet laureate of the "One Eyed Turk".
Bar stool philosopher in the "Wilted Daffodil"
-
longlivethecrumbie
- Super User
- Posts: 2438
- Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 6:30 pm
Re: If you could change one rule, what would it be and why?
Big Dai wrote:Pies AND pints GT1.........AND Pints!
Re: If you could change one rule, what would it be and why?
Yep! Got to have something to hold in the other hand!longlivethecrumbie wrote:Big Dai wrote:Pies AND pints GT1.........AND Pints!
Exile Wigstonite living in Wales.
Poet laureate of the "One Eyed Turk".
Bar stool philosopher in the "Wilted Daffodil"
Poet laureate of the "One Eyed Turk".
Bar stool philosopher in the "Wilted Daffodil"
Re: If you could change one rule, what would it be and why?
Like quite a few of the suggestions but not in favour of this one. Reducing penalty points would encourage teams to give away more penalties when under pressure (and even when not) when there is too much of this anyway which lead to breaks in play.GT1 wrote:How about giving 6 points for a try & 1 point for the conversion & 2 points for a penalty. This would stop teams winning matches without scoring any trys! (sarries come to mind)
Not sure about changing the try/conversion split to further favour tries. I like to see teams trie and work the ball wowards the posts. In the old days (before my time) there were no points for a try, only for the conversion, hence the name.
I am neither clever enough to understand nor stupid enough to play this game
Re: If you could change one rule, what would it be and why?
1. Proper rucking
2. Props to have a "target" of a contrasting colour sewn into their shirts and opposition props MUST bind on it.
3. More than 4 kicks end to end and the crowd to unanimously blow a raspberry
And I think they are laws
2. Props to have a "target" of a contrasting colour sewn into their shirts and opposition props MUST bind on it.
3. More than 4 kicks end to end and the crowd to unanimously blow a raspberry
And I think they are laws
Omnia dicta fortiora si dicta Latina
Re: If you could change one rule, what would it be and why?
Do props run fast enough to get scragged?physiodan wrote:I disagree. When a Maul is moving it is an artform which should not be removed from the game. What next? The scrum half can take the ball from the opposition scrum. If any player can tackle a player from any postion in a Maul it will make it dangerous as a maul which is made stable by teams pushing against each other, not by pulling it down.mol2 wrote: End the concept of a maul being different to open play as far as the offside rule is concerned.
If a player is holding the ball he can be tackled by a player entering from any position. Once the ball has been passed from the front player in the maul it must be passed within 5 seconds or any player in front is offside.
Is this not the law anyway, just poorly refereed?mol2 wrote: I'd change another - just to stop the number of penalties at the tackle situation.
If a player is brought to the ground he must release the ball (regardless of if held or not) and can only play it once he gets to his feet. (Too often players are taken down, released by the tackler only to find that the tackled player gets up and carries on and the ref allows it)
This change would effectively take make it much easier for the ref.
If the tackler is holding the player around his arms and the ball, how can the tackled player release the ball? The reason the tackler must release the tackled player is so that they can release the ball.mol2 wrote: Likewise the tackler should not be penalised for holding on - until the tackled player has released the ball.
What we see time after time are players legitimately tackled, often turned in the tackle yet, the moment they are released roll over holding the ball and pushing it back to their own side of the ruck. releasing the ball is a passive "act" - short of the tackler hugging the tackled player and the ball getting trapped it can always be released.
This is somthing that is agree with to a degree but I feel rather that loose shirts which can impede then when running as they can be scragged by the shirt, i feel that a reinforced piece of material should be added under the armpit where props have to bind. failure to bind on this means a penalty.mol2 wrote:While we are at it - props top wear loose fitting cotton shirts to enable binding.
Re: If you could change one rule, what would it be and why?
I just wish they'd enforce the existing Laws (whatever flavour they may be - stupid or sensible) so that we know where we stand. Only then can we sensibly start changing them. The list of ignored laws includes:
Feeding the ball straight in to the scrum.
Scrums not pushing before the ball is put in.
Player throwing in at the line-out (typically the hooker) to have his feet outside the field of play.
Blatant obstruction by decoy runners - if you are ahead of the ball and distracting the opposition you are offside - it matters not a jot whether you actually impede someone.
Offside at kick-off.
Binding before shoving when entering rucks and mauls. Get rid of players flying into rucks with their shoulders.
Enforce side entry on attacking teams as well as defending ones.
... and I could go on.
One system that isn't a law I'd get rid of is bonus points: I still fail to see why a big win against a poor side is worth more than a tight one against a good one, or why we reward teams for be less of a failure than then they might have been - the whole concept of bonus points doesn't stand up logically. The object of the game, despite some peoples protestations, is NOT to score tries but the score points. Also big scores are not the same thing as excitement: if they were everybody would watch Basketball (possibly the most tedious spectator sport ever invested) and not the various Football codes.
Feeding the ball straight in to the scrum.
Scrums not pushing before the ball is put in.
Player throwing in at the line-out (typically the hooker) to have his feet outside the field of play.
Blatant obstruction by decoy runners - if you are ahead of the ball and distracting the opposition you are offside - it matters not a jot whether you actually impede someone.
Offside at kick-off.
Binding before shoving when entering rucks and mauls. Get rid of players flying into rucks with their shoulders.
Enforce side entry on attacking teams as well as defending ones.
... and I could go on.
One system that isn't a law I'd get rid of is bonus points: I still fail to see why a big win against a poor side is worth more than a tight one against a good one, or why we reward teams for be less of a failure than then they might have been - the whole concept of bonus points doesn't stand up logically. The object of the game, despite some peoples protestations, is NOT to score tries but the score points. Also big scores are not the same thing as excitement: if they were everybody would watch Basketball (possibly the most tedious spectator sport ever invested) and not the various Football codes.
For when the One Great Scorer comes to write against your name,
He marks - not that you won or lost - but how you played the Game."
He marks - not that you won or lost - but how you played the Game."
Re: If you could change one rule, what would it be and why?
What we see time after time are players legitimately tackled, often turned in the tackle yet, the moment they are released roll over holding the ball and pushing it back to their own side of the ruck. releasing the ball is a passive "act" - short of the tackler hugging the tackled player and the ball getting trapped it can always be released.
The risk with this is the more even the contest for the ball, the less teams try to keep the ball - better to just keep kicking it deep rather than risk being turned over.
It is unfortunate but a change like this would be most effective for a team playing a Saracen's style game plan.
The risk with this is the more even the contest for the ball, the less teams try to keep the ball - better to just keep kicking it deep rather than risk being turned over.
It is unfortunate but a change like this would be most effective for a team playing a Saracen's style game plan.