What if rugby had a shot clock?

What's more, set moves from tap penalties are enjoyable for spectators to watch. Some people think that's important too I believe.

Hey OJ yeah I did see the Blues try that move. At the time I hoped that execution failure wouldn't discourage them from trying again. You know we see so much repetitive attacking, so much dumb play, so many penalties and so few tap moves. It's a legitimate option and a good way to test defences. Basically it's a set piece where the attacking team has full control and can try complex moves that the defense hasn't seen before in video analysis; so your chance of breaking the defense Is better I would have thought. And surely pro teams have the time to rehearse these things. Sadly, most pro teams are risk averse.

Katipo, did you see a few weeks back when the Blues tried to do "the wall" from a penalty and failed miserably? I actually didn't know you could still do this. The Boks used to score from that set penalty move of theirs all the time.

Jeznez what you are suggesting in removing wrestling from the game is simply a terrible idea.Wrestling is a skill whether you like it or not. To say that the wrestling player should be penalised for going off their feet is ridiculous. Wrestling allows brains to outplay size and strength. As a flanker who is much smaller and lighter than many of the players I am required to clean out it is an extremely useful tool and far from trying to crowd the ruck I am trying to clear the space to counter-ruck or get quick ball. I should be penalised for doing my job. (note i am talking about junior club rugby but the game remains the same)

I think multiple one-pass phases are the worst thing in rugby at the moment. No, hang on, scrums are the worst thing but multiple one-pass phases are very bad. Like taking the worst thing from league and amplifying it. Some commentators even look at how often teams hold the ball for 7+ phases, like it's a good thing! lol. Let me say this a positive way - tries scored within 4 phases are usually the most spectacular. Tries scored by wingers in first phase from set piece: awesome. And the more passes per phase the more entertaining the play. How can we encourage rugby with more passing & more tries from less phases? OJ - I like your idea of changing the defenders penalty in to a scrum feed. Except that scrums are such a bore at the moment. How about saying the Captain can choose between a scrum or a tap penalty (no kick)? I'd like to see more set penalty moves like the good old days...

I hear you - the administrators and referee panel need to come out with a hardline low tolerance level for infringement and then the referees need to be backed. Unfortunately many of the refs are not able to tell who is at fault. Al Baxter's last test matches are a case in point, Woodcock was collapsing to draw penalties, personally I think he did the Wallabies a huge favour in the long run as this then forced the pain of blooding new props and we are unlikely to have found Slipper as quickly as we did had this not happened.

Interesting idea. How about something similar.. Attacking team has a number of rucks to use the ball. What's that being screamed at me....? "It's just like league". Well, yes, but hang on... Just for brainstorming, consider... So.... say the attacking team gets 8 rucks and if it gets to 9 and it's a scrum restart, defending teams feed. Count restarts with every change of possession. The rule could have a clause: count restarts when the attacking team crosses the opp 22, to allow attack to build some pressure on opp line if they have used up their ruck getting into the opp 22. This would have all the advantages listed above (except nullifying slow halfbacks), but also allow the rolling mall and could easily be applied in the lower grades It would especially get rid of repeated one out hit ups. It would force them to make the most of them, instead of rabbit burrowing. Plus, if the ref called the ruck number eg. "ruck 2" at the exact moment the ruck formed, this would also make it clear to all players exactly when a ruck had formed and thus when ruck rules are in play. This IMO would reduce the number of penalties given by players who don't realise ruck rules are in play. FYI: the number of sequences that had greater than 8 continuous rucks for some games this weekend. Reds v Rebels: 1 set of 9 phases Tahs v Force: 1 set of 27 phases (22 one out hit ups) Cheifs v Hlanders: 2 sets - 11 phases, 14 phases Saders v Stormers: 1 set of 15 phases (brilliant game) Average number of phases is about 3, even excluding first kick plays...

There would be a lot more 'falcons' too, as players get sconned while looking up to check the clock.

jack / jeznez There have been a few games where refs tried to apply bthe laws, Dickinson does it. Also games where they yellow card as they should. What happens is there were a LOT of penalties, players keep infringing, and a LOT of yellow cards. Does ANYONE blame the players or coach? No the refs are bagged. The commentators, the public and coaches all blame the ref for penalising too much or too many yellow cards ruining a game. Then the ref has been demoted after this. I do agree the laws should be applied more stringently and more yellow or at least earlier yellow cards but I blame the administrators and public that it isnt being done.

Mitz is correct it is less about speed and more about certainty of possession and you are right that it can lead to defensive lines being more cluttered if the defence is electing not to commit any numbers to the breakdown. The critical point for me is that the breakdown has to be a fair contest for possession - the team with the ball should have some advantage to give them confidence to run with it but the defensive side needs to feel it is enough of a contest to commit numbers to the breakdown. The whole point of rugby for me is that it is a game of contested turn overs whether that is the set piece or the breakdown.

I still don't see you point. Flopping on top of the ball whilst off your feet does not help your speed of recycling and only slows the ball down and allow the defence to reset. Your arguement favours the defending team. There is plenty of argument on this website that rugby needs more tries to be scored to entertain the fans. The Force's game plan was very negative. They had plenty of chance to get the ball, they were slowing it down all game. If only they scored some tries when they actually had the ball

The big thing I have seen creeping into the game this year that I do not like is wrestling moves being applied at the breakdown. In the cleanout players are being consistently grabbed over the head and shoulders and then twisted and thrown to the ground. I think it is an infringement for going high in the clean out and as it results in two players losing their footing it is also a penalty for leaving their feet. I want to see strength drive and commitment to push players off the ball - if you can drive a man back off his feet while retaining yours that is a great piece of skill and something to celebrate. These wrestling moves seal off the ball, take players out of the contest are something I would like to see removed from the game.

Jack I'm not a believer that the hit is the problem. Yes some scrums collapse on the hit but many more have a hit, stabilise and then collapse after the ball is fed in. This is front rowers playing on the fact that many referees do not have a good understanding of scrummaging. I am completely with you however on correctly applying the rules as they stand. Do not get me started on scrum feeds - they are completely out of control.

Chester, attacking teams go off their feet all the time in order to seal the ball off and make it impossible to counter ruck. I think the attacking team leaving their feet to prevent a contest is at least as problematic if not more so than defences leaving their feet to slow down opposition ball. This is why there are consistent calls to bring back rucking - efforts from both sides will keep players on their feet much more and create a true contest at the ruck. Realistically I cannot see rucking ever returning so it is up to the referees to police and keep players on their feet. Unfortunately there is a lack of consitency in this area. I'm a Tahs supporter but think that the Waratahs should have been penalised multiple times on that drive.

There's nothing wrong with the rules of Rugby. There is a lot wrong with the way the game is refereed. The ref’s seems incapable of consistently applying the same interpretation for whole game let alone across refs for the whole season. At the start of last year there was a focus on getting the tackled player to roll away and for players to stay on their feet. Now it’s common to have 3 or 4 players off their feet at the breakdown sealing off the ball. Backlines are consistently offside and refs routinely tell players to get on side – after they have already influenced the play. Penalise players who are offside. The most important innovation when the Super 12 started was to yellow card players who committed professional fouls. This opened up the game. Now player are penalised 3 times, warned and then binned. That’s 5 potential tries killed. More if it’s a different player each time. There were 12 penalty kicks in the first half of the Brumbies – Waratahs game and no sin bin. The game was a boor – the paying customers were booing both sides. The Waratah players were giving each other high fives for a scrum penalty after three resets on half way. The players should look up at the empty seats and ask themselves whether high fives are warranted. Australian players and coaches have the Europe/Japan superannuation policy in their back pockets and don’t seem to give a damn for the paying customers in the stands. Club rugby is much better to watch and much cheaper – is that what the S14 clubs want us to do? Two small rule chnages. Set a tight time limit on the time to take a penalty shot (120 seconds from the time the penalty is called.) Pack the the front rows before the back row engages. It the hit that's dangerious and that's why the TPE nonsense was introduced. The srums will be stable, safer and quicker.

A shot clock in rugby is completely unnecessary. The reason it exists in basketball is because in the early days of the NBA sides used to take a lead and spend the rest of the game passing, which meant the only way the opposition could get the ball back was through fouling. The only time killing you see in rugby is at the end of games when sides try to run out the clock, which is an art unto itself considering how many times it results in a penalty to the side in possession. If I were to change one thing about rugby it would be that sides can only kick for goal when the defending team infringes. If the attacking side infringes, the defending side should be rewarded with a scrum. I don't think they should even get a territorial advantage.

Least the Tahs tried to score a try. The Force kicked it 44 times last night. Their game plan made the Tahs look like the Harlem Globetrotters. I am also perplexed by Mella's comment re the Tahs being penalised for being off their feet. Do you really think that we should penalise the attacking team when the defense is probably just as much to blame for slowing the ball down. I think their is nothing more irritating than a ref penalising the team on attack for going off their feet. Why would they want to kill the ball whilst on attack. Very similar to the penalty given against the Tahs when the had a scrum 5 metres out from the Force try line. Why would the Tahs want to collapse the scrum in this case. At the end of the day we should encourage teams to hang onto the ball rather than kick it away as this will lead to more tries

I think a "shot clock" as described for breakdowns would instantly turn the game into something pretty close to league. Like, it or not, the forwards' domination of possession is a time-honoured way of playing the game. Just look at the European game, or the Saffers'. But everyone's right in saying the breakdown should be policed more closely. What constantly puzzles me about rugby - the only footy code I care about - is why there isn't a shot clock on, er, shots for goal but more importantly on scrums. If the rule was changed effectively, that would hold pernickity refs to account also.