Changes to laws

First topic message reminder :

Been kicking around for a while so most of you have probably seen but here yu go. Apologies for the england site rather than wr but it popped up on twitter.

http://www.englandrugby.com/news/world-rugby-announce-six-law-changes/

Pete330v2 wrote:I can see the mandatory hook being enforced as much as the straight put in has been. Will this mean TMO stoppages to check if there was a hook?
How exactly do you get a turnover at ruck time now if it's immediately a ruck with hands out being called? Do you actually have to drive over to win the ball? Will this commit more forwards to the rucks or will rucks become more like the league restarts?

This is the nub. Though you're right to suggest the alternative where more players commit in competition much like the AB's tended to a couple of seasons back - when a turn over at the ruck appeared a possibility they all piled in.

I'm gonna re-watch the Ulster Wasps preseason to see if there's a noticeable change in approach.

I saw a piece yesterday, probably in the toryrag, reporting the RFU's supposed concerns that the law changes/trials are by effect producing more tackles and rucks and this is the driving reason for the increased injury toll being suffered by the current rolling stock. Of course it is plausible but give me strength, as an example of Newtonian spin the rag writer GM is a tedious exponent.
The simple and obvious issue is the players are too big and powerful and as RA so cynically said the game needs to dial back from its current incarnation. I believe as mentioned before the way to do this is to significantly reduce the bench options, Doctors advice only etc.
Looking back in a few years time this period of the games history maybe thought of as some strange aberration, but more likely a time when the game nearly destroyed itself.

It's a difficult solution. In theory fewer subs could mean some players lose mass for more stamina but then you're increasing the workload for those players meaning you suffer more collisions and contacts. I'm also a but wary that the new laws are the cause of the slight difference in play. Realistically there's not much changed to the poaching rules; possibility that teams are mirroring saracens approach of high work rate players on their feet and in the defensive line ASAP after a tackle etc. Will be interesting to see more evidence going forward though.

Are the trial laws bring used for the AI s or are nh teams again at the disadvantage here?

New laws for AIs

https://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/international/96781773/all-blacks-disadvantaged-by-law-trials-referee-wayne-barnes-believes

Ta.

As I understand it, it's basic physics and so we should chose more lower impact collisions rather than continue to expose the players to the multiplying effects of size and speed.

ebop wrote:New laws for AIs

https://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/international/96781773/all-blacks-disadvantaged-by-law-trials-referee-wayne-barnes-believes

Did you suffer from a lot of collisions ebop?

Gwlad wrote:

ebop wrote:New laws for AIs

https://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/international/96781773/all-blacks-disadvantaged-by-law-trials-referee-wayne-barnes-believes

Did you suffer from a lot of collisions ebop?

Did you graduate from kindergarten gwlad?

ebop wrote:

Gwlad wrote:

ebop wrote:New laws for AIs

https://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/international/96781773/all-blacks-disadvantaged-by-law-trials-referee-wayne-barnes-believes

Did you suffer from a lot of collisions ebop?

Did you graduate from kindergarten gwlad?

Obviously you did...you don't graduate from kindergarten

Gwlad wrote:

ebop wrote:

Gwlad wrote:

ebop wrote:New laws for AIs

https://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/international/96781773/all-blacks-disadvantaged-by-law-trials-referee-wayne-barnes-believes

Did you suffer from a lot of collisions ebop?

Did you graduate from kindergarten gwlad?

Obviously you did...you don't graduate from kindergarten

Oh stop being so negative Gwlad, youll get out of there one day, just eat your greens and stop getting off the naughty chair and youll get there, but you need to believe it first

Taylorman wrote:

Gwlad wrote:

ebop wrote:

Gwlad wrote:

ebop wrote:New laws for AIs

https://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/international/96781773/all-blacks-disadvantaged-by-law-trials-referee-wayne-barnes-believes

Did you suffer from a lot of collisions ebop?

Did you graduate from kindergarten gwlad?

Obviously you did...you don't graduate from kindergarten

Oh stop being so negative Gwlad, youll get out of there one day, just eat your greens and stop getting off the naughty chair and youll get there, but you need to believe it first

Sounds like a Steve Hansen locker room chat.

Ben Te'o injured to add to the list. What's going on? Is it really the laws or are players running on empty.

This site does make me laugh sometimes. I do not like you or what you say so you must be a child and not have gotten out of Kindergarten.

It really does highlight the lack of intellect on here at times.

eirebilly wrote:This site does make me laugh sometimes. I do not like you or what you say so you must be a child and not have gotten out of Kindergarten.

It really does highlight the lack of intellect on here at times.

well said, it illustrates that they have nothing else to offer except tired remarks that you usually find in the playground.

Been a few injuries to Welsh players over the weekend

New laws?

The more collisions and contact, accordingly you will experience more injuries however it benefits the defending team more than the team in possession and that could do more harm to the product.

 I'm not convinced yet that these laws were done in the interests of player welfare, time will tell.

So the AI's will be the first opportunity for the SH countries to play under the Trial Laws. This surely will be to the advantage of the NH?

I'm really interested to see how they deal with the tackle/ruck changes and the ramifications for the defense.

I am surprised there hasn't been more chat around the SH's introduction to the trial laws.

Surely this will be a post game discussion point (excuse)?

So despite the new definition of a ruck Scotland took IIRC 5 turnovers at the ruck yesterday with Watson getting 3. so it hasn't stopped the contest for the ball if you have the skill and speed

TJ wrote:So despite the new definition of a ruck Scotland took IIRC 5 turnovers at the ruck yesterday with Watson getting 3.  so it hasn't stopped the contest for the ball if you have the skill and speed

And again  today

And shed loads in the england match. Think we can put to bed the idea the laws are stopping them.

I'm gonna have to retract my torygraph GM insult as I now find myself agreeing with aucklandlaurie above.

Is really does appear that we're breaking more of our toys than before.

I can't tell if players will need to get bigger to punch through the greater number of defenders or faster and possibly smaller to get past the orc's in front of them - or both? However if we do continue as we are then we'll have to get use to seeing less of our favourite players out on the field. One benefit might be that handling skills are under greater pressure and so appear to be improving though NZ still seem out in front in this regard.

It would be good to see some analysis of open play kicking before and since the changes.  It does appear that kicking has become more of a defensive choice than anything else?

Overall I don't like the way the shape and dynamic of the game seems to have been changed, (it's become a very messy and strange union/league hybrid) and so I'm not at all happy with the way that this 'trial' has been conducted as a fait accompli, without any real possibility to return to the previous laws, especially when so close the next WC.

There should have been more in-competition (another Mitre10 or the like) experiments because now we're stuck and has anyone any idea how or where we can go from here?

Continue with them. They seem fine.

Maybe we could get the NZRFU to send a rule book to each player. Not sure what their yellow card count was but I'm sure it was the biggest of any nation this autumn. Fact is when under the pump they resort to cheating; for years we've all known it but such was the fear of their tantrum like response to being refereed the officials often let them get away with it. Well we still get the tantrums and unsporting responses - Hansen post Scotland was an example to all young players and fans on how not to behave - but now it seems the refs are calling NZ out so lets hope they all do get sent a rule book. Whether they can understand the rules is another issue.

Same as always. They take advantage of situations more than the rest so it becomes a bigger talking point.

Its rugby. You play to the referee rather than the laws. If you do something dangerous and the referee misses it you have citations.

Outside of that its just a question of what the officials do and do not catch.

Yet another discussion based around the hope that NZ have just been so good because the laws suited them and they could cheat better

Nope guys. They have been so good simply because they have been so good.

lostinwales wrote:Its rugby. You play to the referee rather than the laws. If you do something dangerous and the referee misses it you have citations.

Outside of that its just a question of what the officials do and do not catch.

Ahem "The referee is the sole judge of fact and of Law during a match. " (6a)
So during the match if the ref allows its within the laws.
Even when he's wrong the ref is in fact right.
So every time someone says the ref got it wrong point to that law, the ref is never wrong it's the players

carpet baboon wrote:

lostinwales wrote:Its rugby. You play to the referee rather than the laws. If you do something dangerous and the referee misses it you have citations.

Outside of that its just a question of what the officials do and do not catch.

Ahem "The referee is the sole judge of fact and of Law during a match. " (6a)
So during the match if the ref allows its within the laws.
Even when he's wrong the ref is in fact right.
So every time someone says the ref got it wrong point to that law, the ref is never wrong it's the players

Why the hell didn't you quote that law out years ago, carpet? A few of us on this site could have been doing with it in some of the repeating arguments on here. Better later than never though.

SecretFly wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:

lostinwales wrote:Its rugby. You play to the referee rather than the laws. If you do something dangerous and the referee misses it you have citations.

Outside of that its just a question of what the officials do and do not catch.

Ahem "The referee is the sole judge of fact and of Law during a match. " (6a)
So during the match if the ref allows its within the laws.
Even when he's wrong the ref is in fact right.
So every time someone says the ref got it wrong point to that law, the ref is never wrong it's the players

Why the hell didn't you quote that law out years ago, carpet?  A few of us on this site could have been doing with it in some of the repeating arguments on here.  Better later than never though.

I did to a certain poster who believed the refs were all in the irfu pocket, repeatedly, as proof they couldn't be cheating.
Ahhhh that was a fun day.

Damn, missed that! I can guess the poster.