World Rugby reveal radical plan

[ourla]

World Rugby reveals radical plans to speed up sport and broaden its appeal

Lot to digest here:

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2024/ ... den-appeal

[johnthegriff]

Is this a little early, we are still several days away from April 1st.

[kpj tiger]

World Rugby won't be happy until they've completely killed rugby will they

[Rugbygramps]

Tin Hat on here but I don’t see anything wrong with any of that and it’s what a number of different discussion threads have been calling for for years. Doesn’t affect the fundamentals of the game but speeds it up and gets rid of a number of existing issues, Croc roles, extended mauls etc.
For me the only concern would be the maximum tackle height which shouldn’t be any lower than the sternum imo

[Scott1]

What's wrong with that?! Only had a brief look but no complaints from me. Caterpillar ruck going,croc rolls and kick tennis? Fantastic news!

[sk 88]

Tin Hat on here but I don’t see anything wrong with any of that and it’s what a number of different discussion threads have been calling for for years. Doesn’t affect the fundamentals of the game but speeds it up and gets rid of a number of existing issues, Croc roles, extended mauls etc.
For me the only concern would be the maximum tackle height which shouldn’t be any lower than the sternum imo

So, for me, several of them run counter to each other & counter to other things they have stated they are trying to achieve.

For instance:
Removing the scrum option from one type of free kick only (from scrums).
This makes the game more complicated by introducing a new category of penalty, the proposal doesn't seem to be removing the scrum option altogether.
It increases the scrutiny & pressure on referees in the big moments because there is a very obvious time it can be abused, namely: near the end of games. Either when on the line or more likely when around half way. For instance the World Cup semi final, England have tried to scrum gamely all day. We're winning & give up a scrum in a kickable position. With this new law we would be crazy to try do anything but give up an early charge free kick.
The referee is then presented with a series of unpalatable options. Give a re-set against the rules. Give a free kick as it was "an accident" that upsets the dominant side inviting abuse. Give a penalty under 7.1.a as it was intentional infringing, which the weaker side will deny & is highly likely to more than upset the losing side.
I'd also say a similar rule to this has been trialled in MLR (I believe it is only being able to scrum again from a penalty once) and has not been a positive addition to the game.

Similarly; making mauls like scrums and only needing to be stopped once before calling use it.
Consequence is that choke tackles are immediately more effective tactic, leading to more scrums (counter to idea from above change) & leading to more stand up chest to chest tackles (counter to the ideas in the high tackle frame work that we want to de incentivise these as the most dangerous types of tackle). Making mauls from the lineout easier to defend is definitely a positive so there is a case that this is a risk/unbalancing worth taking.

Croc rolls are fine to clamp down on but already illegal as collapsing the ruck is already an offence.

[Rugbygramps]

In danger of over complicating things.
It’s very simple scrum time no re scrum for a free kick, so we don’t waste a minute plus for the scrum to be reset, tap and go inject some pace. 2nd free kick offence is a penalty anyway
Same with the maul, why worry about a choke tackle, if the maul is properly set up the ball should be available and if you can’t get it moving first time why get a 2nd opportunity.
Croc roles they are meaning the tactic of removing the jackal player.

Rugby fans tend to look at everything as a negative change rather than speeding the game up and removing negative play

I’d just add that in every game of professional rugby I’ve watched there are at least 2 occasions where another scrum is called after a free kick that is at least 2 wasted minutes of play every game.
Also imo the choke tackle in itself is not a bad thing. It generally occurs either through poor technique by the ball carrier, usually going into contact too high, or good defensive technique which shouldn’t be penalised

[Wes]

The choke tackle itself is OK, however the fact that the defending team immediately collapse the maul when it is called and they win the penalty from that, is contrary to the mauling laws which I can never work out.
Agree totally on the freekick instead of scrum, but if scrums were set quickly, an additional scrum wouldn't be an issue.
The rest? All seems quite reasonable and even if a specific action should be an offence (such as the croc roll), making it known it's never going to be tolerated isn't a bad thing.
Mostly OK, although I did see that there was thought to also removing the jackal which if not allowed and no other rucking either, I can't quite work out where any turnovers are going to come from.

[Rugbygramps]

I must admit that I can’t remember any instances of choke tackles being collapsed by the tackling team, it is counterproductive. Collapsed by the team in possession to try and regain possession then yes.
Could be my memory it is sketchy at best

[ads]

I must admit that I can’t remember any instances of choke tackles being collapsed by the tackling team, it is counterproductive. Collapsed by the team in possession to try and regain possession then yes.
Could be my memory it is sketchy at best

Surely thats the point of the choke tackle isn't it. You tackle the player and hold him up until the ref calls maul, then drop it, pile on and win the penalty.

[Rugbygramps]

I must admit that I can’t remember any instances of choke tackles being collapsed by the tackling team, it is counterproductive. Collapsed by the team in possession to try and regain possession then yes.
Could be my memory it is sketchy at best

Surely thats the point of the choke tackle isn't it. You tackle the player and hold him up until the ref calls maul, then drop it, pile on and win the penalty.

Well you don’t win a penalty you get the put in at a scrum turnover ball.
You hold it up you win control you drop it you run the risk of the team in possession retaining it, imo anyway.

Getting away from it a bit this is a small part of the proposal, not even sure the choke tackle is mentioned

[ads]

I must admit that I can’t remember any instances of choke tackles being collapsed by the tackling team, it is counterproductive. Collapsed by the team in possession to try and regain possession then yes.
Could be my memory it is sketchy at best

Surely thats the point of the choke tackle isn't it. You tackle the player and hold him up until the ref calls maul, then drop it, pile on and win the penalty.

Well you don’t win a penalty you get the put in at a scrum turnover ball.
You hold it up you win control you drop it you run the risk of the team in possession retaining it, imo anyway.

Getting away from it a bit this is a small part of the proposal, not even sure the choke tackle is mentioned

Yeah sorry, I meant win possession not penalty.

[johnthegriff]

Over the years I have seen so many amendments to the laws of the game few of them achieved the desired aim as the first thought of a coach is how to nullify or take advantage of the new situation. Since the intervention of referees to call set, engage etc the formation of a scrum takes longer, the rules I played under were simple your own pack bonds together, you engage the opposition, the ball does not enter the scrum until the scrum.is static and steady and the hooker does not strike until the ball.hits the ground in the centre between the front rows, a lot of the needs we see today is because we moved away from that.
The progress of a maul is often halted by a defender " losing " his footing and going to ground, in the past that could have been painful now there has to be a pause in momentum as the attacking side stops, realigns itself and attempts to walk round the grounded player, the suggested new rules will I believe see more def defenders losing their footing.
I am all for speeding up the lineouts, there is no need for a conference before every out in with the Booker waiting for a prop to tell him what he already knows.
Reducing replacements, this could lead to teams doing a Wasps with uncontested scrums being to a beaten packs advantage. A suggestion could be several.on the bench but a maximum of just four to be used plus maybe one other front rower if recommended by a doctor.

[Rugbygramps]

Regarding the replacements imo it would make sense to keep 3 front row replacements and then 2 more, to avoid the Wasps scenario occurring.

The scrum in the old days may have been quicker but often it was an absolute mess just look at some of the Lions footage from the 70s