New laws proposed by World Rugby - to be tested in 2016 NPC

Well up until 2014 it would have been but since the law adjustment by World Rugby it is not. Hence why I said it is one of the silliest changes in law they have made.

Not too smart is it. They'll only be able to look one side at a time. Meanwhile we already have an extra official sitting doing almost nothing all game with a perfect view of the situation up in the Tmo box

Rolling players off the ball is not nott collapsing the ruck.

In Brief The scrum penalty as you mention, is the only option available to referees who identify, that one scrum is weak. It is the matter of identification, that is the real problem because, the scrum is a vital contest in this game. Your proposals are suggesting that a weak scrum is taking advantage of the rules by collapsing or taking advantage of the fact that they are being overcome by a better opposition scrum. You are correct to suggest it should be a technical battle but if one side cannot meet those technicalities than, that reason should not prevent the other side, from gaining an advantage through its ability to win the technical battle. IMO, you proposals will remove the scrum contest from this game and I don't really think that is a path we should go down otherwise we may as well just play league rules.

Where the sun don't shine? Where's that Bakkies? In the NH? Make your mind up!

Absolute nonsense.

Not so Jerry. They brought it in after George Smith dominated the 2001 Lions. I was playing flanker too and it got rid of all the advantage of being the first man there. Always made me wonder how much more dominant Smith would've been if that rule stayed.

One extra law I would like to see trialled is the removal of the 'reward' penalty for dominant scrums (this is actually an interpretation of the laws, as it doesn't exist in the rugby law book). This would stop a) weaker teams collapsing scrums to win a penalty by conning the referee and b) stronger teams pushing opposition scrums back until they disintegrate to win a penalty (and ignoring the possible attacking options) Essentially the scrum would become a technical battle for possession, not a cheating battle for a penalty. This is counter-intuitive for a lot of people who believe the scrum can be fixed by penalising the cheaters, which has been about as successful and winning the war on drugs through force.

For those interested or worried about how the 2 Ref system works, or what a mess it will be. It has been in place for a number of years in SA in Varsity. Watch any Varsity match on youtube or read how it works here: http://www.sarugbymag.co.za/blog/details/dual-ref-systems-been-successful The concept is to have the engaged and non-engaged / sweeper Ref. Its not clear if NZ would use another approach, but they could adopt something similar to SA.

The offside line is a good idea, but one of the linesman could police that law as they can communicate. What would the second official do apart from police the offside law, would he interfere with play? I believe this could lead to more injuries as you would get players clearing out from an angle rather than straight on through the gate. I am a firm believer that the tackler has full rights to the ball as he is the first one there, this is pertinent to try saving tackles on an interception etc.

Does hansen have any suggestions for getting that chip off your shoulder bakkies?

That qualifies for 'super smug'.

Touchie! And dumb... "the idea for the laws being to encourage counter rucking rather than attempting to pilfer."

gatesy : u forgot the comms. imagine listening to 2 guys talking at the same time over the commentary (if they decide to let viewers have access to the refs' comms.) as it is the present exchanges among the ref and touchies is rubbish.

coach / ref - same thing (iceberg Goldberg whats the difference :) ) im intrigued by this love the powers that be have to change things on a periodic basis , with or without reason. it is not just for rugger. this year the epl changed the offside law (not sure if it for all countries) and there have been many cases of either goals being scored or disallowed based on old law. it seems people have gone backwards, thinking more complex means more fascinating!!! it is not

Its not about one bloke but what an entire playing roster can do to utilise the new rules and NZ, gets a season's head start before WR considers the merit, of those new rules. I suggest that early exposure, is what makes the difference between opponents, playing under those rules - one has played a season under those rules while the other, is just starting.....but I'm sure, you knew that, dintya?? Oh and btw, it can be upsetting for someone like yourself if your player, is just starting to play those rules but it can be resolved quite easily.....just suggest to the ARU board, to promote the NRC, as the next guinea-pigs and your player, will have an advantage over his opponent. Easy-peasy mate cos it beats carrying that sad yoke you have sitting on your shoulders.....as for Richie's contribution - well, they shouldn't have chosen NZ as the guinea-pigs, in the first place. But who knows and who cares.....??

One season ahead? Richie has been employing and getting away with these tactics for years!

oh go and grab a grape...designed by Kiwis, more likely Aussies just so their thrashed WBs get a chance at winning the really BIG BIG games...

its the TRUTH, can you handle the TRUTH???

I think this ruling could come by itself in another 6 months time if mauls continue to blight the professional game.