New law trials

[Puja]

I'm active on a Yank rugby forum and the Americas Rugby Championship (a 6N with US, Can, Arg, Uruguay, Chile, Brazil) going to be one of the competitions trialling the 50:22 kick. The response has been cautiously intrigued and the comparison has been made to the opening up and increase in space of American football when the forward pass was legalised.

It has the significant possibility of unplanned repurcussions (as every law change in rugby does), but I'm becoming more in favour the more I think. I don't see how you can avoid having at least two players back, maybe even three, and thus depleting the defensive line.

Puja

[Digby]

it's how much it gets the third player back, and who the third player is I'll be interested to see. also how it'll be resourced in kick tennis? any idiot can get the back three providing depth coverage against one kick, but as they chase kicks ahead the more you have 3 back not 2, 2 perhaps being the norm, it's going to be much faster that there's a resourcing problem

I think I'd probably still put 2 back, but maybe have they edge a little further apart, hopefully it does something

[Cameo]

If the opposition is in their 22, you may also need to consider two lines of cover at the back or bring the deep cover up slightly to stop the kick bouncing into touch just over the half way line

[Digby]

If the opposition is in their 22, you may also need to consider two lines of cover at the back or bring the deep cover up slightly to stop the kick bouncing into touch just over the half way line

I thought the point was the ball had to go out inside the 22? So is there a variant if you're kicking from inside your own 22?

[Puja]

If the opposition is in their 22, you may also need to consider two lines of cover at the back or bring the deep cover up slightly to stop the kick bouncing into touch just over the half way line

I thought the point was the ball had to go out inside the 22? So is there a variant if you're kicking from inside your own 22?

2 50:22 kick - If the team in possession kicks the ball from inside their own half indirectly into touch inside their opponents' 22 or from inside their own 22 into their opponents' half, they will throw in to the resultant line-out.

Puja

[Digby]

Well I'm clearly paying attention. That's not an easy kick to make from your own 22 though.

It might make wingers have to work harder, the Nadolos of the world will not enjoy the extra shuttle runs nor the extra distance on them

[Cameo]

Well I'm clearly paying attention. That's not an easy kick to make from your own 22 though.

It might make wingers have to work harder, the Nadolos of the world will not enjoy the extra shuttle runs nor the extra distance on them

No, there are normally a fair few fatties drifting around in that space between the ten metre lines so that kick might be too risky a lot of the time.

Might be relevant from kickoffs where 12 go up in a line with three back. If you can orchestrate it so a good kicker is kicking from about the 22, he'll have a choice of trying to bounce it out over the half way line or, if the wingers come up too far to prevent that, trying to boom it over their heads.

[16th man]

I can't find the article now but I'm sure I read something a few months ago which went into the logic and intention of 4.

Iirc it boils down to an attempt to address concussion and brain damage by reducing repetitive head and neck collisions being caused by players getting as low as they can and picking and going around the corner time and again.

Seeing as it's the line of scrimmage that does the most damage in the NFL, trying to reduce that sort of repetitive contact seems sensible.

It does mean curing forwards of white line fever though, so good luck to coaches on that one....

[Which Tyler]

I can't find the article now but I'm sure I read something a few months ago which went into the logic and intention of 4.

Iirc it boils down to an attempt to address concussion and brain damage by reducing repetitive head and neck collisions being caused by players getting as low as they can and picking and going around the corner time and again.

Seeing as it's the line of scrimmage that does the most damage in the NFL, trying to reduce that sort of repetitive contact seems sensible.

It does mean curing forwards of white line fever though, so good luck to coaches on that one....

I wonder if they considered enforcing the existing law on not-binding ahead of contact?

[Epaminondas Pules]

The Law Review Group will reconvene in March to review the trials' results before making recommendations to the Rugby Committee.

The trials were approved for the four-year law amendment review cycle that began after the 2019 World Cup following an analysis by the Law Review Group last March, with several unions expressing an interest in operating one or more of the trials.

Preventing dangerous high tackles remains a high priority for World Rugby as they look to reduce the number of concussions.

1 The High Tackle Technique Warning, which was trialled at the World Rugby Under-20 Championship and reduced concussions by more than 50%, will now be trialled in the Super Rugby championship which begins on 31 January and also the Top 14 in France.

The other amendments to be trialled across the globe are:

2 50:22 kick - If the team in possession kicks the ball from inside their own half indirectly into touch inside their opponents' 22 or from inside their own 22 into their opponents' half, they will throw in to the resultant line-out.

3 The introduction of an infringement (penalty and free-kick) limit for teams. Once a team has reached the limit, a mandatory yellow card is given to the last offending player as a team sanction.

4 The awarding of a goal-line drop-out to the defending team when an attacking player, who brings the ball into in-goal, is held up.

Aren't 2 and 4 basically just rugby league or variants therein. I don't see much point in either really. Almost seems like tinkering for tinkering sake, when they could, as an example, look at the application of existing laws and you know, actually apply them. See how it goes if the existing laws are actually applied and then go from there.

[Cameo]

According to the Guardian, the kick one is:

The aim is to tempt teams to go for touch rather than
keep the ball in play and cut the chance of concussion
by lowering the tackle count.

That would seem a strange aim to me. The arguments for it here are more persuasive. If we want more time with the ball out of play, we could just shorten matches or let people kick to touch on the full.

[Which Tyler]

According to the Guardian, the kick one is:

The aim is to tempt teams to go for touch rather than
keep the ball in play and cut the chance of concussion
by lowering the tackle count.

That would seem a strange aim to me. The arguments for it here are more persuasive. If we want more time with the ball out of play, we could just shorten matches or let people kick to touch on the full.

Purely playing devil's advocate here - is there any area of rugby that annoys "us" more than aimless kicking to relieve pressure for 30 seconds? I'm happy if those kicks suddenly have an target in mind - especially if it also does things like drag an extra player into the backfield.

I'm not in favour of this ELV, but I am intrigued to see how it works in practice.