IRB introduce new laws for trial - More TMO authority, 23 rather than 22 and 5second rucks included

Brian Moore has just tweeted that the IRB are to introduce a new 5 sec law for keeping the ball at the back of a ruck.

What are people's thoughts/opinions on this ?

Slow balls infuriates me - should give Philip's a kick up the arse

munkian, thought that Dickson was far more guilty of this than Phillips in the 6Ns, but in terms of keeping the ball alive and speeding up the game, this can only be a good thing

munkian wrote:Brian Moore has just tweeted that the IRB are to introduce a new 5 sec law for keeping the ball at the back of a ruck.

What are people's thoughts/opinions on this ?

Slow balls infuriates me - should give Philip's a kick up the arse

I like it. It's a good way to discourage teams from just winding down the clock a la Quins on Saturday, or NZ (ahem) in the RWC final.

Great News.

But do we really need another Rucking Law!

Will this be down to the Refs discretion? or will the crowd start counting down the clock at every Rucking Ruck?

That’s all we Rucking need.

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:munkian, thought that Dickson was far more guilty of this than Phillips in the 6Ns, but in terms of keeping the ball alive and speeding up the game, this can only be a good thing

I thought so too but didn't want to start another Anglo\Cymru flame war

In other news, former Ireland and Munster scrum half Tomas O'Leary has accounced his immediate retirement from the professional game, slamming new IRB ruck changes as "utterly unrealistic". "What do they expect?", the 28 year old Corkman implored. "I've been signed by London Irish on the basis that nobody can keep the ball at the back of the ruck longer than I do. My entire game plan is utterly redundant. This is completely unrealistic". O'Learys signature slow-motion passing has become the stuff of legend and has earned him 24 international appearances, two Heineken Cup winners medals, a 6 Nations grand slam winners medal and selection for the British and Irish Lions.

Good God,arent there enough frivolous,unmanageable,laws already. So whats going to happen if a team keeps the ball at the back of a ruck for more than five seconds......we have a scrum...

SSSSSSSSSSCCCCCCCCCRRRRRRRREEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMM.

Talk about progress.

Seems an absurd law. If refs actually applied the rules and forced the team in possession to actually defend the ruck rather than seal it off with bodies then they'd be no issue. The problem lies in that the conga line binds on to prone bodies that are not on their feet and are effectively a human barricade.

red_stag wrote:In other news, former Ireland and Munster scrum half Tomas O'Leary has accounced his immediate retirement from the professional game, slamming new IRB ruck changes as "utterly unrealistic". "What do they expect?", the 28 year old Corkman implored. "I've been signed by London Irish on the basis that nobody can keep the ball at the back of the ruck longer than I do. My entire game plan is utterly redundant. This is completely unrealistic". O'Learys signature slow-motion passing has become the stuff of legend and has earned him 24 international appearances, two Heineken Cup winners medals, a 6 Nations grand slam winners medal and selection for the British and Irish Lions.

Cracker stag! .... geebus a 5 minute rule would have gotten O'Leary....

Young Murray will need to watch himself too....

Perhaps we will see the use it or loose it call come into place. I think it's a good thing, fed up of scrum halfs flapping their arms around, but when does th five seconds start, before or after the ball has been presented ?

Lord, I would imagine that it will work the same as a scrum. Nobody will be penalised by it.

Referees will be trained to call "use it" a few seconds after the ball is available. If they don't use it after another second or two, it is a scrum.

To me this won't have that big a bearing on things.

In hindsight sorting the scrum out probably shoudl've been a priority....

So having a scrum is going to speed up the game???????

Hmmm....I hate the ball being at the backfoot forever but I kind of agree with akldlaurie, what happens next? Ideally a free kick would take place to speed the game up! Who is going to ref it and when does the countdown begin? Maybe we could borrow the ‘shotclock’ from basketball?

Seriously though the ref has enough to watch out for without counting loudly to 5 every 10 secs.....

I truly believe we are gravitating towards the 2 ref system. One controls the ruck/maul/scrum, the other controls the backfoot/offside line etc. I think only then could this system work.

So ontop of everything else they now want Bruce Lawrence to count to five as well.

Auckland and Chewed,

I suspect that referees are not going to be setting scrum after scrum. They are not even going to be counting properly to 5 I would bet.

Literally once ball is available they'll give the scrummie a few seconds. He doesn't do anything they;ll manage it. "Use it #9". Give him a few more seconds and then blow the whistle.

I would bet my right arm that few if any scrums will be given and if they are it will be for serious dawdling at the back of the ruck.

Fair enough Stag, but I think having a free kick against you would be a good deterent to speed up the game. You know you'll be on the back foot if you don't use it quickly....

Staggy
But is it really such a big problem in the game that it requires more legislation?

To be honest I can think of many other isues in the game requiring far more urgent attention than this...

red_stag wrote:Auckland and Chewed,

I suspect that referees are not going to be setting scrum after scrum. They are not even going to be counting properly to 5 I would bet.

Literally once ball is available they'll give the scrummie a few seconds. He doesn't do anything they;ll manage it. "Use it #9". Give him a few more seconds and then blow the whistle.

I would bet my right arm that few if any scrums will be given and if they are it will be for serious dawdling at the back of the ruck.

And then depending on the ref it may be repeted three or four times. Like certain refs do with 'Hands off', 'Release it', and 'use it now' at the maul.

Would it work if they say us it and if he doesn't in 2/3 seconds the opposition can just go get it ie. the ball is as if it were laying on the ground.

After a few hard hits the #9 would be quick to get it out of there

Auckalnd, not especially. As I said I dont think it will have that big a bearing. Was happy enough without it. I don't mind that its been introduced either.

I strongly agree with your last sentence that there are bigger evils in the game.

But this is a relatively simple one to deal with while most of the others actually take some thinking.

Can't see this being a problem really though. And teams always have the option to tap and go if there's space.

Which leads me to the tap and go rules. Surely if we're trying to speed the game up could the refs be told to not be so fussy about the precise spot the tap goes from, especially if it's behind/to the side. Austin Healy had a good idea that the point players could tap from should be in line with the ref across the whole pitch.

Aren't there already sanctions in place for time wasting? Couldn't these be used?

yappy
Are you serious,are you saying that teams are going to get penalised for this?

Sounds like the disaster is my mind. Why not fix the easy broken thing like scrum feed croked? and scrum engaging? instead introduce new point of contentious? yet another rule at breaking down? If the team is in ascendancy and can controlling the ball by stationery ruck why is so bad to pause? so many laws already police with vague consistentcy so why add one more problem?

I'm all for speeding up the game but this could easily have the opposite effect, far better to give control of the decision to the ref without stipulating 5 seconds, then if the Ref feels a team are deliberately slowing the game he can decide to warn or penalise them.
Lets give the ref's a little credit for been able to keep a game flowing and fair instead of bogging them down with more and more rules that are open to interpretation.

Brilliant... Would add that referees should allow at least five seconds at tackle situations before they award penalties...

George Clancy take note...!

Deciding that an attacking player isolated within two seconds of a tackle, before it is humanly possible for their team mates to arrive at the ruck and assist, thus awarding the defending team a penalty is not the way that every other referee in the game adjudicates the tackle situation.

Maestegmafia, but if it is not human possible then how is opposition there to stealing the ball?

The tackler must released so if players are not supporting then will be turn over.

Otherwise you have rugby league with unlimited tackles and is always a try in posession.

maestegmafia wrote:Brilliant... Would add that referees should allow at least five seconds at tackle situations before they award penalties...

George Clancy take note...!

Deciding that an attacking player isolated within two seconds of a tackle, before it is humanly possible for their team mates to arrive at the ruck and assist, thus awarding the defending team a penalty is not the way that every other referee in the game adjudicates the tackle situation.

Nonsense, there are people trying to win the ball. He hasnt released. Penalty. All he has to do is let go of the ball and there are no penalties to be given.

Munster conceded genuinely about 6 penalties for this against the Ospreys who rightly got into positions to win the ball and were denied by the guy hanging on.

The players set the pace.

Can we not sort out the scrum before giving the ref's even more 'discretionary' rules at the ruck.

I just say that two posts ago. We agreement comfort.

Bugger, that's Plan A out of the window!

Oh goody, another well thought through change in laws from the IRB...

to be fair, theres nothing more graceful in rugby union than watching dickson fervantly flap his arms for 7 minutes at the back of a ruck like an albatross trying to escape from a pool semen in which he has one leg stuck whilst the referee watches on like some sort of horny vulture waiting for dickson to go down.

Perhaps they could just enforce the existing lawsa bit first.

After all if we made sure that any players joining a ruck were in a pushing position the conga line would disappear.

After that we can make sure that the back rows are actually engaged at scrum time and not slipping their bindings continuously.

And stopped the "hit" at scrums

And insisted on a straight put in

And stopped people in the lineout shifting positions

etc etc


But no, we introduce yet anothe bl00dy law.

Are you sure Moore isn't having a laugh? But if true the IRB seem hell bent on pushing away the real long standing fans, the game already is unrecognizeable from 12years ago.

Now referee will say: "tackle-roll-release-ruck - pause - free" at the phase of the ruck and his timings will be consistency just like for the scrum. It work so well I can see why they apply elsewheres.

Comfort wrote:to be fair, theres nothing more graceful in rugby union than watching dickson fervantly flap his arms for 7 minutes at the back of a ruck like an albatross trying to escape from a pool semen in which he has one leg stuck whilst the referee watches on like some sort of horny vulture waiting for dickson to go down.

I think you got a little muddled with your threads there...

If it speeds the game up and stops team/s from running the clock down. Then i am all for it.

http://www.espnscrum.com/scrum/rugby/story/164137.html

Television match officials are set to be handed increased powers and teams are to be give five seconds to us the ball at rucks as part of an extensive trial of Law amendments sanctioned by the International Rugby Board.

Currently TMOs can only be called upon to rule on the act of scoring but as of next season they will also be allowed to offer input on incidents within the field of play that have led to the scoring of a try, and foul play on the field of play.

In addition, the IRB has acted to limit the amount of time that the ball is available at the back of a ruck and from August in the northern hemisphere and January in the southern hemisphere, teams will have five seconds to use possession after being instructed to do so by the referee.

The changes are among five proposed Law amendments and three additional trials to adopted globally having been endorsed by the IRB Council at its annual meeting in Dublin on Tuesday.

They will also see the rules governing the taking of a quick throw-in will also be altered. Players will be able to take a quick throw-in from anywhere outside the field of play between the line of touch and their own goal line, while if an opponent knocks-on into touch the non-offending side can choose a line-out as opposed to the standard scrum.

Conversions will have to be taken within 90 seconds of a try being awarded, and should foul play or a technical offence take place at a line-out then the non-offending side can opt to have a further line-out on their own throw.

Then there are the three additional trials, including the expansion of the TMO's role. The November Test window will also see international sides allowed to select eight replacements, bringing them in line with domestic competition where an extra front-row substitute is named on the bench.

The final additional trial will be to allow Sevens teams to use up to five replacements during a match as the result of the demands and expansion of the Sevens World Series.

The amendment process was the first steered by an independent Laws Representative Group, made up of representatives from each of the 10 tier one unions and the IRB Rugby Committee. Extensive evaluations of the amendments took place at Cambridge and Stellenbosch Universities earlier this year.

One further amendment, regarding the problem area of the scrum, has been referred to the specialist Scrum Steering Group. The current 'crouch, touch, pause, engage' sequence of setting a scrum has come in for heavy criticism, and the group will consider a change to a 'crouch, touch, set' sequence that would allow the respective front rows to set the scrum.

IRB chairman Bernard Lapasset said: "We have a collective responsibility to ensure that the Game is as enjoyable to play, officiate and watch as possible at every level while player welfare is of paramount importance.

"Rugby is currently in good health with participation growing around the world, but there is collective responsibility to ensure that a structured process can be implemented to allow for global analysis and to monitor trends relating to the shape and character of the Game as it evolves.

"The Laws Representative Group were encouraged by the outcomes of the initial trials in Cambridge and Stellenbosch. The next step is a global trial with full buy-in and which has been approved by council on the basis that the amendments can have a positive effect on the playing of the game. The global trials are not fait accompli. It is essential at the end of the global trial process that decisions made are in the best interest of rugby worldwide."

The five Law amendments to be trialled globally are:

1. Law 16.7 (Ruck): The ball has to be used within five seconds of it being made available at the back of a ruck with a warning from the referee to "use it". Sanction - Scrum.

2. 19.2 (b) (Quick Throw-In) For a quick throw in, the player may be anywhere outside the field of play between the line of touch and the player's goal line.

3. 19.4 (who throws in) When the ball goes into touch from a knock-on, the non-offending team will be offered the choice of a lineout at the point the ball crossed the touch line; or a scrum at the place of the knock-on. The non-offending team may exercise this option by taking a quick throw-in.

4. 21.4 Penalty and free kick options and requirements: Lineout alternative. A team awarded a penalty or a free kick at a lineout may choose a further lineout, they throw in. This is in addition to the scrum option.

5. A conversion kick must be completed within one minute 30 seconds from the time that a try has been awarded.

In addition to the global trials, the IRB Council approved three specific additional trials:

1. A trial to extend the jurisdiction of the TMO to incidents within the field of play that have led to the scoring of a try and foul play in the field of play to take place at an appropriate elite competition in order that a protocol can be developed for the November 2012 Tests.

2. A trial has been sanctioned for the November 2012 Test window permitting international teams to nominate up to eight replacements in the match day squad for Test matches. In line with current practice at domestic elite Rugby level, the additional player must be a qualified front row player.

3. An amendment to Law 3.4 (Sevens Variation) to enable Sevens teams to nominate up to five replacements/substitutes. Under the revision, which will operate from June 1 2012, a team may substitute or replace up to five players during a match. Approval has been granted on player welfare grounds to recognise the additional demands on players and squads owing to the expansion of the HSBC Sevens World Series where there are three blocks of three events on consecutive weekends.

Most of those sound reasonable. Not sure what the difference in 19.2(b) is.

Also looks like they're having a good think about the scrums but something will be trialled soon. The 8 man bench is probably better in terms of having cover for both sides but I can't remember the last time there was an uncontested scrum at international level (an Aus v Bar a few years ago is all that springs to mind).

HammerofThunor wrote:Most of those sound reasonable. Not sure what the difference in 19.2(b) is.

Also looks like they're having a good think about the scrums but something will be trialled soon. The 8 man bench is probably better in terms of having cover for both sides but I can't remember the last time there was an uncontested scrum at international level (an Aus v Bar a few years ago is all that springs to mind).

"They will also see the rules governing the taking of a quick throw-in will also be altered. Players will be able to take a quick throw-in from anywhere outside the field of play between the line of touch and their own goal line"

Yeah, I dont see it. Doesnt have to be on the line for a quick throw-in?

HammerofThunor wrote:The 8 man bench is probably better in terms of having cover for both sides but I can't remember the last time there was an uncontested scrum at international level (an Aus v Bar a few years ago is all that springs to mind).

What I like about that change is that it doesn't restrict you to having a prop who can play both sides or taking a chance on injuries with a specialist.

For England it would allow us to go for Marler & Thomas on the bench rather than Stevens.

johnpartle wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:The 8 man bench is probably better in terms of having cover for both sides but I can't remember the last time there was an uncontested scrum at international level (an Aus v Bar a few years ago is all that springs to mind).

What I like about that change is that it doesn't restrict you to having a prop who can play both sides or taking a chance on injuries with a specialist.

For England it would allow us to go for Marler & Thomas on the bench rather than Stevens.

Yep - it will certainly help all countries develop a second THP. Since normally it is a LHP covering TH on the bench.

Bad new for Paul James, good news for Craig Mitchell

Like the sound of most of that

Sounds like some well considered suggestions.

At last the 23rd man! On the whole they seem good. 5 secs from ruck to play though- could see a lot more deliberate slowing down of opposition ball to win the scrum there

ChequeredJersey wrote:At last the 23rd man! On the whole they seem good. 5 secs from ruck to play though- could see a lot more deliberate slowing down of opposition ball to win the scrum there

It does say 5s after the ref tells them to us it - It seems like a direct attempt to stop the long box-kick caterpillar thingy that has become so popular.

Change to the TMO will be a big mess. Will be working like in rugby league when referee calls for TMO to interefere more selective for some team than others. Angle for the camera mean a lot of things like pass can be call forward from TV when not looking like it in live. Meanings a lot of try be liquidated just because they referred.

Why do IRB get involved with so many change all the time when it is easy for all fans to see where the problem is occur.

Great so now they awarding the scrum all time when the phase ball is slowed down? Wjy? To "make the game faster"? When we know the scrum take 2-3 minute to finish every time and end up with the penalty 40% of time. This new rule is stupidest.

ALSO means team with dominant scrum can take the ball slowly to ruck on purpose and use as tactic to get scrum and winning the penalties.

Always is "law of unindented consequence" with rule change. Like how the ELV lead to kicking ping-poing match instead of rugby when was suppose to make more running.

ChequeredJersey wrote:At last the 23rd man! On the whole they seem good. 5 secs from ruck to play though- could see a lot more deliberate slowing down of opposition ball to win the scrum there

Thunor, I think it will be 5 seconds after the ball has been presented. Then you will get the use it warning.