Should there be more space behind the ruck?

My understanding is that the threat of tactical kicking was what created space in union ... maybe train the ball-users to kick and chase ?

I think there is slowly a realization that premeditated subs ruin a teams flow. Previously I believe subs have been made with the assumption that fresh legs will only have a positive. But lately it seems that some coaches have deliberately held off on the silly 5minute substitutions. Maye Rugby should look to Soccer and their limit of only 3? Subs from the bench of 5 being able to be made. So you could have 7 subs o the bench, but only 3 can be subbed?

agree. touch judges should be able to make this call with a flag just like they do offside in soccer. then there won't be any issue. the main umpire has too much to deal with at the breakdown.

Just reduce the number of subsitutes. Too many are ruining the natural flow of the game. Players are no built for impact, not endurance.

and would be worse for second tier teams as well widening the gulf.

Thats hard on the big guys, 80 minutes is quite a long time for 100kg behemoths. We are still a game for all shapes and sizes. 90 minutes is the length of a soccer game and they don't use their upper bodies like Rugby does. So I hope not.

I'm all for competition at the breakdown however this must be balanced in favour of the attacking team. without the confidence of being able to recycle possession at the ruck then teams will revert to kicking the ball as a first option rather than risk losing it in contact. The rules are fine the way they are right now. Just police offfside better as has already been mentioned numerous times above.

could we just make intenational matches 10 minutes longer each then?

Chronic oldies like me don't even like the 5m rule. Rugby is a close quarter contest full stop. Defense and Attack using everything in their arsenals to prise open any advantage. Need space? Take it. Need time? Create it. The scoring usually happens late in each half as bodies tire and poorer decisions are made. Managing your energy is part of the game. And don't get me started on the interchange either! There should be just one offside line for everyone and no artificial gaps. Makes it easier for the refs too. I need to have a nap!!

in the professional age people realise when the are unlikely to win a ruck and would commit one or two to slow the ball down allowing the rest fan out across the backline to target the next ruck and create a wall of defence. this is the reality that was borne out the last few years before the latest change in interpetations . i would say that these games are probably a fair bit more relevant in anticipating the impact of rule tweaks than games played 20 years ago by amateurs.

Bang on the money (the aptly named) sledgeandhammer! Frank Hyde always argued against the 10m rule – said it would kill instinctive creativity from ball-playing forwards and halves. He also pointed out that RL already had a a 10m rule, with the play-the-ball in the middle of both teams back 5m – but because referees gave up on enforcing the attack being back 5m, and the space between the teams disappeared, it was easier to put all the onus on the defence by making them go back 10m. That produced the dummy-half scoots and "hit ups" that blight modern RL. Always strikes me as incongorous….the defence does its job by tackling a ball carrier to the ground…but the defence is then punished for doing precisely what it should be doing, by having to immediately give up 10m of its ground!….and the attacker and his team who got caught with the ball instead of passing it (and isn’t the latter what we want to see?) is rewarded!

Spot on Jock M. It's a pity the younger brigade can't appreciate the point you're making. A true ruck contest of the past drew in most, if not all, of the 16 forwards. It left the rest of the field open for the backs to attack in, free of forwards in the opposition defence line (and kept out of their own backline too!).

Many prominent league 'experts' such as Warren Ryan, Peter Sterling and Wayne Bennet bemoan the 10 metre rule and claim it has led to a losss of specialist 5/8ths and traditional backline play. With the extra space available, the cheapest yards are from one off dummy half runs, which stifle creativity. Apparently many junior league coaches actually teach teams not to use the ball as it the percentages are less. Perhaps this is why someone like Quade Cooper is so sought after in league, and why they are still picking Barret for SOG..

completely disagree jock, the longer the ball stays in the ruck the longer the defence has to organise and at this level that means that you're just not gonna get through it

Re introduce a true contest at the breakdown and the space for attack will occur. Stop the tackled player playing the ball on the ground-give the defence every opportunity to steal the ball or to put pressure on and the rest will look after itself. The breakdown is now static-barely any different to a league play the ball. Grab yourself some old footage and you will see what I mean.

plus it would be almost impossible for one ref to watch everthing that goes on in a ruck and check if the defnce was 5m back from the ruck.

I agree. Thats what makes the ruck a ruck! The ability to commit enough people to try and win the ball. If youre 10m back I'd say endless recycle would become easy. Also you dont need a 10m gap to make ground as you said. In union especially, and in league too if you watch it, all the best attacking moves come when the ball players are passing closer to the defensive line anyway. I honestly believe that making the defence stand back is just rewarding the mediocre.

spot on, teams are very rarely completely behind the last feet in a ruck and of course it makes a huge difference. i think they're (the refs) hesitant to pull it up every time as it interrupts the flow of the game. reckon they need to get another 2 touchies, one for policing offside on each side. then short arm for the first 2 offsides and full arm for the 3rd. the game moves too fast for the touchies these days to be doing it all.

Chig, there's no doubt that having the defending team back 5 or 10m from the ruck would give the perception of opening the game up, but I think Nick is on the money here, it would just become a pick-and-drive-fest. It might make the rolling maul more prevelant too, which could be an argument for doing it, but with the defence even 5m back the rolling maul would become just about unstoppable. Teams wouldn't bother kicking out of their own 22, they'd just start up the maul and plough on upfield. It would be great to see, for about a quarter of a game, but it would also become pretty boring pretty quickly. The ELV 5m rule for scrums has made a difference, and there's been a lot of set-play tries from scrums since (Ashley-Cooper in Brisbane last year instantly comes to mind), but I think the rules strike the right balance now as they are. JF is also correct, if 'last feet' was actually policed properly, you'd get similar improvements to what you're suggesting the 5m rule would provide....

"The 10 metre rule was introduced to counteract the interchange rule adopted from AFL" Huh? Are you saying that the AFL invented the inter-change rule and that the NSWRL copied it in the late 1980s? Plenty of sports had such a rule long before AFL. League's free interchange was modelled on the blood bin rule that had already and the NFL. Anyway, the 10m rule came from the RFL in England in about 1993 not Australia.