Tag: World Rugby rule changes

Another rule World Rugby should review

What is a poor rugger to do if an opponent throws a pass that lands in our player’s outstretched hands? Try to intercept the pass and run down the field for a try, one of the most exciting events in rugby? Or, pull his arms into the alligator position and watch your opponents’ outside backs ramble in for a try?

If our back, like J.P. Smith in last week’s 32-31 loss to New Orleans, tries to intercept, but the ball is just too far out there to make a clean catch and fumbles away in front of Smith, what does he get for trying? A yellow card. Not understanding that.

When Smith’s knock on happened, the announcers on The Rugby Network sang out, “That’s intentional!” What was intentional? Smith intended to intercept the pass? Or did he intend to stop NOLA’s forward progress in a premeditated murder of the game ball? Smith alone knows what his intentions were (and as he immediately started walking to the sideline before the ref had pulled the card from his socks, Smith seemed to know that under today’s laws, a yellow card would be coming).

Smith goes off the field. Seattle is playing with 14, and NOLA collects a penalty kick, a try and a conversion, enough to eke out a 32-31 win over Seattle.

If Smith had spiked the ball, batted it to the sideline or prevented a try (not so, as there were other defenders outside of him), then that is worthy of a penalty and a yellow card for unprofessional play. That kind of play is not adding to the excitement or entertainment value of the game, which is what World Rugby in rule changes coming July 1 says it is trying to do.

But for a failed attempt at an intercepted pass? That’s a knock on. Scrum, and play on.

Eric Fleming, in a FB post to madcapschemes.com, explained it well:

“As a center ref I was always told we cannot officiate intention just the outcome. I think this is the only law that has the word intention in it. How can a ref determine intention? Is it worthy of a penalty, for sure, a yellow card, I’m not so sure it does in every instance. It’s listed in the laws as unfair play, not dangerous play but two of these in a match could have your watching the match from the sideline. Yellow should be reserved for a knock on that prevents a clear try. Yellow for a fumbled interception attempt causing a team to be at 14 players could result in a 14 point punishment. In 7s I believe it would occur more often and certainly lose your team the match. I don’t see in the laws where it necessitates a YC so maybe the game management guidelines on this need a review.”

We’re all with Eric on a review of this law.

Going forward: Seawolves at Dallas on Sunday at 4 p.m. PDT. On TV at ROOT Sports and The Rugby Network.

Watch party at Trenchers Kitchen and Tap, 822 N. 10th Place, Renton.

Anyone know of a watch party in the North End? Kangaroo and Kiwi?

World Rugby changing rules; let’s help them

World Rugby announced last week rule changes that will begin on July 1, 2024, along with some trial runs of other alterations in the game.

Critics, well represented by South Africans, say this is the world body getting rid of scrums, perhaps because the Springboks, a great scrummaging team, have won the last two World Cups. Others say these frequent rule changes will make it even harder for a new fan to understand and follow the game.

The rugby governing body says that this will open up the game, make it more entertaining and add to player safety.

Briefly, the changes are: choosing a scrum after a free kick has been eliminated; changes in offside rules on kicks that could stop “tennis” kicking; and a penalty for “crocodile rolls” – twisting a tackled player, still on his feet, in the “tackle area,” whatever that is.

The trial runs include a “shot clock” on scrums and lineouts; a 20-minute red card sin bin; and this limit on mauls: The ball must be played after the maul has been stopped once, not twice.

Here at madcapschemes.com, we want players to be safe, we don’t like “tennis” rugby, we like open, running rugby but still admire good scrummaging and we hate mauls.

World Rugby should have gone further in changing the rules on mauls. Especially mauls that come off a lineout resulting from a penalty kick to the sidelines, made more frequent by the last changes rugby made to kicks after a penalty is awarded.

One change could be to reestablish the rules on open field kicks to penalty kicks: If the penalty kicker is behind the 22-meter line, he/she can kick the ball straight out. If the penalty kicker is in front of the 22 and trying to kick the ball out of bounds, it must land in bounds before it goes out. The defending team would have a better chance at fielding the ball. This could add to tennis rugby, but it could mean more running attacks.

The scores from these mauls, which a TV announcer this last weekend termed “guaranteed tries,” are too numerous, too hard to defend and too boring.

Take Saturday’s Seattle Seawolves’ 32-31 loss to New Orleans. Seattle got one “guaranteed try” – thank you Huw Taylor and the rest of the pack and the backs who joined in. But NOLA had three of them.

The way the Seawolves scored was more exciting, the kind of entertaining rugby World Rugby is looking for. Mack Mason’s kick ahead, fielded and tapped down by Divan Rossouw for a try. J.P. Smith finding a gap in NOLA’s back line and racing in for a try. Another scurry through NOLA’s defense by Rossouw for a try that left the Seawolves one point shy of winning.

As exciting as it may have been, it didn’t win the game under today’s rules. The Seawolves must figure out how to defend against the maul. They have to stop collapsing or obstructing the other team’s mauls, collecting more penalties. And they have to stop the original penalties that brought them to within five meters of their own goal line.

That’s if they want to get back to winning when they meet the Jackals in Dallas on Sunday, May 19, at 4 p.m. The game will be shown on Root Sports and The Rugby Network.

And we’re not done advising World Rugby on changing rules. Next post: Why does a failed pass interception deserve a yellow card?