General reffing woes, law changes etc.

[Mikey Brown]

Now that the 5 nations has come to a close, I'm interested what issues people think could be addressed with the reffing of the game. It seems a lot of people are turned off by the endless reset scrums, TMO decisions and baffling calls at the breakdown, yet there are still a ton of infringements going unpunished throughout most games.

I don't imagine there's a quick fix, but calls to be tougher on offsides, feeding at the scrum, binding/scattering/off-feet at the breakdown have been pretty consistent for a few years now. Is it likely any of these things are going to be looked at? I feel like now would have been the time if they were.

Is it too much to ask these are addressed? It doesn't feel like there's much focus on these areas at the moment.

Wrapping up the ball carrier so they can't release and then claiming you were going for a turnover is another one that bugs the hell out of me, but it's probably not very high priority.

Also I hate how the ball can be out of the ruck and playable for an age before it's technically 'out', but that seems to be the way they want it for some reason. Though there's been more attention on the absurd 'caterpillar ruck' recently. Interestingly in the Scotland game there was a moment where Paul Williams told a Scotland player he wasn't allowed to join the ruck because the ball was already won. I'm pretty certain that's not a feature of the game at all, but he was trying to prevent another player joining and slowing everything down just to be a blocker for the clearance kick.

[Mikey Brown]

Oh. And clamp down on the endless flapping of arms and shouting at the ref.

[Puja]

{Waits for the first curmudgeon to post, "Just enforce the current laws properly and that'll solve all of the problems!"}

Puja

[Oakboy]

The breakdown needs attention for sure. Some of the so-called clearing out is just violence with injuries waiting to happen. The way that is dealt with is inconsistent with the fussiness associated with tackling.

Maybe the ball should be considered out of the ruck as soon as the SH touches it with hand or foot?

[Big D]

I think marshalling the offsides better especially from kicks/kick offs would make a difference.

[Banquo]

{Waits for the first curmudgeon to post, "Just enforce the current laws properly and that'll solve all of the problems!"}

Puja

...because the continual putting lipstick on a pig works so well?

[Galfon]

Now that the 5 nations has come to a close..

no need to be so harsh on Italy ..
Players off their feet at rucks, time lost with TMO reviews, lethargic scrum management, general inconsistencies (will always be thus)
...and crooked RL stylee feeds!

[Digby]

{Waits for the first curmudgeon to post, "Just enforce the current laws properly and that'll solve all of the problems!"}

Puja

...because the continual putting lipstick on a pig works so well?

I'm not convinced player having to bind properly at rucks before legally rucking will work as hoped, but I'd like to see it continually enforced such we get a chance to find out, that alongside offside being actually offside and the straight feeds at the scrum we were actually promised before the craven arseholes caved, and then after 1-2 seasons we can take a view on actual changes

[Digby]

Maybe the ball should be considered out of the ruck as soon as the SH touches it with hand or foot?

No, just no. Anything that isn't perfect fast ball is going to be all but unplayable, and I don't see how that helps build any continuity in an attack

[p/d]

make the 9 fair game once he has connected with the ball.
Ping the f*ck out of the rush defence, even if there is just a hint of offside.
Make the line out a free for all. Up to the lifters to look after their man not the opposition.
Tell Barnes a loose fitting tracksuit is not the attire for a touch judge.

[Banquo]

{Waits for the first curmudgeon to post, "Just enforce the current laws properly and that'll solve all of the problems!"}

Puja

...because the continual putting lipstick on a pig works so well?

I'm not convinced player having to bind properly at rucks before legally rucking will work as hoped, but I'd like to see it continually enforced such we get a chance to find out, that alongside offside being actually offside and the straight feeds at the scrum we were actually promised before the craven arseholes caved, and then after 1-2 seasons we can take a view on actual changes

Well yes....

[Which Tyler]

{Waits for the first curmudgeon to post, "Just enforce the current laws properly and that'll solve all of the problems!"}

Puja

I don't think anyone would go that far; but...
Just enforce the current laws properly so that we know what does and doesn't work, and address it from there.

[Digby]

make the 9 fair game once he has connected with the ball.

I think there's room to cease having the refs wait 5 seconds before calling use it, maybe they wait 5 seconds and just say ball's out rather than giving another 5 seconds, but to be fair game one you've touched the ball is just not on, the 9 would be getting clattered on repeat basis before they could possibly have gathered the ball to even think about passing it away, even if we assume all defences will stop cheating just the mess of many breakdowns will ensure a paralysis of the game, scrums would be more fun to watch

[Banquo]

{Waits for the first curmudgeon to post, "Just enforce the current laws properly and that'll solve all of the problems!"}

Puja

I don't think anyone would go that far; but...
Just enforce the current laws properly so that we know what does and doesn't work, and address it from there.

well yes....

[Bonzo]

I think that some of the existing laws need reviewing and either being reinforced or, if they are obsolete, got rid of. We can't have referees deciding which they will enforce.

For example, round the ruck:

Law 15.3: Players involved in all stages of the ruck must have their heads and shoulders no lower than their hips. Sanction: Free-kick. Never enforced.

And 15.7: A player must bind onto a team-mate or an opposition player. The bind must precede or be simultaneous with contact with any other part of the body. Sanction: Penalty. Never enforced.

And 15.12: Players must endeavour to remain on their feet throughout the ruck. Sanction: Penalty. Erratically enforced.

I personally hate the way in which players arriving at the tackle are encouraged to "jackal" by bending over the ball in such a way that the attacking players arriving can only hit him around the head or neck. It's dangerous and at odds with the drive to protect players from being hit in the head in the tackle. Perhaps players should be allowed to enter the ruck from the side so that they can clear out an opponent without making contact with the head?

[fivepointer]

The ruck. Outlaw the jackal. No more hands in the ruck at any stage. You have to be on your feet at all times. No more flopping on the ball, either to secure it or to try and get a turnover.
The maul. Reward the team going forward. Stop this nonsense with players lying over the ball and not releasing. If the ball can be freed up, play on.
Offside. Simply police the back foot. Its not that difficult.
Subs. Reduce to 4 or 5.
Ban the caterpillar and strictly enforce SH's use the ball quickly otherwise its a scrum for the opposition.
Refs under no account to use players first names.

[Mikey Brown]

That's another one that might be superficial but really bothers me. I known the refs work in close proximity with these players but I just want them to be absolute robots while the game is going on. It feeds in to the whole on-field coaching thing which just means letting the laws slide, or allowing players 2-3 vital seconds to correct their error. Generally at the expense of the team trying to attack.

What is outlawing the jackal entirely a solution to though? I don't want any changes that encourage further league-style fan defences of 13 men.

[switchskier]

There's too much going on for any one referee. So the one change that I'd like to see would be a secondary ref on the field of play. Not going full American Football but someone who has a specific remit to police certain things, and allow touch judges to concentrate on offsides etc which they can do from further away.

[Spiffy]

Stop awarding turnovers that are not turnovers at all.

[Mellsblue]

To second points already made:
Once a ruck is declared over by the ref no further players can join, ie ban the caterpillar.
Reward whichever team is going forward in a maul prior to collapse, ie ban the choke tackle.
Keep the current protection of the no9 but speed up how quickly the ball must be moved once at the base, ie ban Ben Youngs.
Rigorously police the offside line at the breakdown

[Gloskarlos]

Ban the caterpillar
Ban ANY hint of a dummy from the 9 at all, head twitch or whatever.
Keeping ball ‘out’ as soon as it is lifted I still think is sensible, not a single defensive line is on the back foot of any ruck, more like the mid point frankly, police this better and the 9 shouldn’t need a caterpillar or 5 seconds to use it.

[Mikey Brown]

Stop awarding turnovers that are not turnovers at all.

Meaning?

[Buggaluggs]

Rewarding the team going forward in a maul with the scrum would, I think, lead to tactics where any team with a big pack would simply trundle, scrum, trundle, scrum, 3 points. Repeat.

[Spiffy]

Stop awarding turnovers that are not turnovers at all.

Meaning?

A traditional turnover is when a player supporting his own weight, but not with the arms, latches on the ball, picks it up and presents it to his own side. Now many refs award it for just touching the ball with two hands and nothing else and mostly the turned over ball is unplayable. A good turnover should be its own reward since the team getting it now has possession and can theoretically use the ball. In this case there should be no need for the ref to do anything at all. Cheap, undeserved turnovers, many illegal re. weight bearing, going well beyond the ball etc. are probably more common than genuine turnovers.

[Mikey Brown]

I don’t really understand that. Either you’re saying the same thing as everyone else about actually enforcing laws around supporting your body weight etc. or you’d need to remove the sanction for carrier not releasing the ball.

I agree that a clean steal is a fantastic skill, but I don’t see how you make a penalty-turnover worth less without encouraging the infringements that cause it.