5 Laws you'd like to see changed in rugby

[biffer]

2: Protect the maul, kill the choke tackle!

- Once a player is held up off the ground this is a maul and as long as it continues to move forward it is still a maul. Should the maul stop and the ball become trapped then the defending team receive the put in to the scrum. Should the maul collapse whilst moving forward then a penalty be awarded.

This would get rid of passing from the game. If there's no incentive to get the ball away, then teams will just take it into contact every time and never feed it back. The maul is a big enough advantage already if you can get one going, giving it even more of an advantage would be terrible.

[Mo Leicester]

Stop "Clearing out" at the ruck. Its just a licence for blocking beyond the ball, tackling without the ball and going to ground to prevent a competition for the ball.

Players should be made to stay on their feet and compete for the ball.

Anybody eccept the ball carrier or tackler going to ground should be penalised.

Anyone taking out a player without a hand on the ball should be sinbinned.

[Noddy555]

For Rich1576 Over a number of years a huge part of the Tigers success has been their ability to control the ball in such situations when games are tight. Running the clock down is prevalent in most sports and it is all part of the game. Why would tigers fans be in favour of seeing an end to this? It is up to the opposition to devise ways to counter this.

[tigerburnie]

I think this highlights the fact that there's already been too much mucking around with the laws. At the risk of repeating myself here, if the refs would apply the laws rather than interpreting them and causing inconsistencies, the game isn't in too bad a shape as it is.

[h's dad]

Not so much a rule change, but look at the bonus point being introduced into the 6 Nations.

Nooooo
As old threads have said, this could potentially having one side top the table and another be Grand Slam winners. Unthinkable.

[GETHIN EXILE]

The changes I would like to see would be

1. At kick offs and restarts from the centre spot the kicking team must be 10 metres behind the kicker, this would enable safe catches, no player to be lifted to catch the ball.

2. The props having to support the hooker and both hookers being required to strike for the ball thus making the scrum a true hooking contest. This would prevent the defending hooker being used as an extra driving force.

3. All passes must clearly travel backwards. Anything else to be deemed a forward pass thus ending the constant debate on whether a pass was flat or forward.

4. No player can pick up the ball at a ruck unless it has come past the back foot, this would stop scrum halves reaching in for the ball and penalties being given for "playing the 9" in instances where the 9 clearly has hands on the ball in the ruck.

5. A return to the old tackle law whereby the tackled player has to release the ball immediately and the tackler does not need to move away until the ball is on the ground. Too often referees call "ruck" when the player on the ground clearly has the ball held up off the ground or the referee calls "still in" when the only part of a players body on top of the ball is a hand.

[tigerburnie]

The changes I would like to see would be

1. At kick offs and restarts from the centre spot the kicking team must be 10 metres behind the kicker, this would enable safe catches, no player to be lifted to catch the ball.

2. The props having to support the hooker and both hookers being required to strike for the ball thus making the scrum a true hooking contest. This would prevent the defending hooker being used as an extra driving force.

3. All passes must clearly travel backwards. Anything else to be deemed a forward pass thus ending the constant debate on whether a pass was flat or forward.

4. No player can pick up the ball at a ruck unless it has come past the back foot, this would stop scrum halves reaching in for the ball and penalties being given for "playing the 9" in instances where the 9 clearly has hands on the ball in the ruck.

5. A return to the old tackle law whereby the tackled player has to release the ball immediately and the tackler does not need to move away until the ball is on the ground. Too often referees call "ruck" when the player on the ground clearly has the ball held up off the ground or the referee calls "still in" when the only part of a players body on top of the ball is a hand.

Hmmmm point 2 is a dodgy one, we used have a call for an 8 man shove back in the bad old days. If the ball is actually put down the middle, then the hooker would have to strike for the ball, this law is already adequate, just can't remember the last time a ref called for a squint feed.

[GETHIN EXILE]

Tigerburnie the squint feed started as a defence against the 8 man shove, when both hookers were competing the shove only came on once one side had secured the ball and strikes against the head were an integral and interesting part of the game. I remember as an 11 year old being taught that the props should support the hooker so he could have his studs just grazing the grass ready to strike. Hookers used to wear shin pads as getting kicked by your opposite number was a regular thing.

[GETHIN EXILE]

the current law does not require both hookers to attempt to hook the ball and in fact allows the loosehead to play it with his foot which is why the squint feed often looks worse than it is.

[tigerburnie]

the current law does not require both hookers to attempt to hook the ball and in fact allows the loosehead to play it with his foot which is why the squint feed often looks worse than it is.

Not disagreeing particularily, I did a bit at Loosehead as I got slower and fatter before retiring, just feel that we could resolve a lot of the issues raised in this thread by the refs just applying the laws we already have. I am getting a bit wary of law changes as they don't seem to be favouring northern hemisphere style of play.

[tigerburnie]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/31641675

Don't think this needs it's own thread, but adds to the discussion here.......................thoughts?

[jgriffin]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/31641675

Don't think this needs it's own thread, but adds to the discussion here.......................thoughts?

Wouldn't argue with any of it except the headguards, they make people feel safe yet they have no effect at all except to protect the ears.
Jiffy saying what most of the older players do - bring back rucking, speed the game up, make it safer.

[chipnchase]

Very interesting article, can't agree with the head guard thing. There is no proof to say that they prevent concussion and agree that they encourage players to go in harder.

I think its clear from peoples posts that the game isn't serving the fans or the players at the moment.

What ever happened to the days of being able to 'turn' a player? It used to be a fine art to use a players momentum by wrapping them up and turning them towards your team winning you turnover ball. Now if you tried it you'd get binned despite 'winning' the collision.

[chipnchase]

Some examples of clean rugby before the game became over complicated.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwywUqBVAeI

Imagine how fast some of these guys would be now on modern pitches with modern footwear.

[DickyP]

Ban all kicks in open play. Much better.

Less lineouts, so less stoppages and force teams to play out of their own 22.

If you want rugby league go and watch it - RU without lineouts is madness.