DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
ComeAllWithin (Harlequins Rugby)
HTML https://comeallwithin.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Everything not rugby related!
*****************************************************
#Post#: 117639--------------------------------------------------
Brian Moore Article re Law changes (Daily Telegraph)
By: deadlyfrom5yardsout Date: January 1, 2024, 3:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The law changes I would make to rugby
Tweaks to 50:22 law, and a willingness for referees to apply
existing laws about kicking the ball away from a ruck, could
transform rugby
BRIAN MOORE
1 January 2024 • 7:13am
Brian Moore
Danny Care, box-kicking
The box kick has become too effective – that needs to change
CREDIT: Getty Images/Patrick Khachfe
What do I wish for rugby in 2024? Let me start by endorsing
Warren Gatland’s recent call for less kicking and rugby to be a
more attacking spectacle. I think Gatland speaks for most rugby
union fans on this topic, but how you achieve this is far from
agreed. Indeed, Gatland’s solutions were indistinct and herein
lies the problem.
You cannot reduce the emphasis on kicking without attempting to
disincentivise it as the most effective means of gaining
territory and applying pressure to opponents. To achieve this
end, World Rugby might have to make several attempts, as
suggested changes might fail or have unintended consequences.
However, if it does not take these risks there is no chance of
changing what are presently successful kicking strategies. There
needs to be a will to make positive suggestions, rather than
sitting there and parroting “that won’t work.”
I agree with Gatland’s call to allow the 50:22 to be made even
when the ball is passed back into the attacking team’s own half.
This might mean the defending back three having it back more
often, making attacking space available out wide.
I disagree with his call to remove the marking of a high ball in
the 22. Under the old law, where the catcher had to be
stationary and make a mark on catching the ball, the
“up-and-under” was widely used. What stopped this happening was
the change to allow a mark to be made when landing after
catching the ball in the air. Removing it is likely to see a
return to the former tactic. In fact, extending the mark zone to
the 10-metre line might further disincentivise the high ball. If
you supplemented this with a law that the marking player had to
tap the ball and pass or run, you would speed up the restart and
not allow time to be taken by kicking to touch.
All this would go some way to removing the bane of many fans’
matchday experience: the box kick. This type of kick has now
become almost ubiquitous, not only as an exit from a team’s 22,
but as an attacking option between the 22 and the opponent’s
10-metre line.
It is not just its frequency that had become baleful, it is
because it takes an age to set up. For no good reason, referees
seem universally disinclined to enforce the so-called
five-second time limit for kickers to use the ball after being
told to do so. I can only recall one instance of this happening
in the whole of 2023.
To make matters worse, World Rugby have resiled from the
outlawing of caterpillar rucks. We are again seeing the
interminable spectacle of several forwards joining rucks and
wasting yet more time as the ball is slowly rolled back through
several extra feet before it is finally box-kicked. Once the
ball is available at the back of a ruck the referee should call
for it to be played and no player should thereafter be allowed
to join the ruck. Yes, this would make the box kick more
difficult – that is the point, and it would be the same for both
sides.
As said, you cannot guarantee the positive effects of such
proposals and it could mean that teams revert to long kicking
duels, but at least during those there is the chance of counter
attacking because there is space into which players can run.
Box-kicking is a suffocating tactic from which it is almost
impossible to counterattack; that is why is used so much.
While we are in wishing mood, referees should look at lineout
formation. They seem to have stopped the papal conclave that
used to happen before every lineout, but they are still allowing
the throw-in to wait until the last second before entering the
lineout. They already have the throw; they should not be given
the further advantage of late entry which just wastes more time.
It is the same at scrums. They are again starting to take an age
to ready, form and complete. I understand referees not wanting
to hasten the engage sequence, but they would be aided by a law
stating that if the put-in team is not ready to engage by a
stipulated time they lose the feed. If the other pack is not
ready, a free kick is given.
Lastly, I endorse Gatland’s call to reduce the number of
voluntary substitutes. If we cannot agree to go back to only
injury-related substitutions, at least drastically reduce the
number of substitutions. The trend towards picking benches
dominated by forwards is only going to grow, limiting fatigue
from which attacking space becomes available. This is without
considering the fact that it would make club squads smaller and
possibly solvent. Wouldn’t that be a good thing after 2023?
Rugby Newsletter
*****************************************************