It didn’t take long for the new World Rugby-approved Law Variations to surface on the opening weekend of the National Rugby Championship, and all in all, they seem to have been mostly well-received and reasonably well-utilised.
Some appeared more often than others, but in fairness, some lend themselves to more regular application.
Firstly, a recap. World Rugby this approved a tranche of six Law Variations for use in closed trials back in August, with a headline and focus of injury prevention the main motivator for their approval. Of the six, three were specifically listed as “Approved for closed trial in the National Rugby Championship (NRC) in Australia.”
But none of those were the injury prevention LVs, namely the high tackle technique warning, the reduction of the tackle height to around the waist, and an ability to review yellow cards for foul play and upgrade them to red while the player is off the field.
The three that were approved for use in the NRC were these.
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 lineout
Rationale: To create space by forcing players to drop back out of the defensive line in order to prevent their opponents from kicking for touch.
The awarding of a goal line dropout to the defending team when an attacking player, who brings the ball into in-goal, is held up.
Rationale: To reward good defence and promote a faster rate of play.
The introduction of an infringement limit (penalty and free-kick) for teams. Once a team has reached the limit, a mandatory yellow card is given to the last offending player as a team sanction. Rationale: To encourage teams to offend less.
Rob Simmons is shown a yellow card (Photo by Mark Kolbe/Getty Images)
What’s the last one, you say?
Well, it does what it says, but when push came to shove in the weeks leading into this season’s NRC, the implementation of this one was quickly consigned it to the ‘too hard’ basket.
My understanding is that it wasn’t coming up with the arbitrary number that would become “the limit” that was the problem.
Rather, it was a simple matter of who would keep count of all the infringements for both sides, and who would communicate what to whom that actually, that was indeed the first infringement beyond the limit, so you need to reach for the pocket if you don’t mind. And naturally, with a bunch of coaches in a room, as soon as the option of scrapping this particular LV was raised, it took all of several seconds for everyone to agree that was a sensible idea.
So for 2019, we’re left with the 50-22 kick, and the goal-line dropout for defending teams holding up the ball in-goal.
The 50-22 quick is, of course, modelled on rugby league’s 40-20 quick, but only much more generous.
Not surprisingly, teams were reasonably well aware of it and defended it pretty well, meaning there were only three or four attempts each game last weekend.
And they definitely worked in terms of turning defence into attacking opportunities. But some attempts were successful by accident, too.
NSW Country superboot James Kane broke clear down the Eagles left wing, chipped ahead into space, only for the bouncing rugby ball to turn square – Shane Warne-like to Mike Gatting – and go into touch. What felt like a play that had broken down was actually the start of another opportunity, because he’d accidentally pulled off a 50-22 kick, thus giving Country the lineout throw.
But rather surprisingly, we learned during the Brisbane City-Fiji game on Saturday that the opposite of 50-22 is also true. I’d heard anecdotally that the 22-50 kick option was also in play but couldn’t get it confirmed. And the World Rugby release about the LVs as approved made no mention of a lineout for a team who can find touch inside the opposition half from inside their own 22.
Mosese Voka of the Fijian Drua. (Photo by Matt King/Getty Images)
But here we were. Drua scrumhalf Seru Vularika kicked from the back of a lineout inside their 22, and found touch just inside the City half, on the full, as he’s well entitled to do. But by the time the Fijians arrived for the lineout, they were surprised to learn it was their throw-in.
Nic Berry could be heard talking to his assistant referee, “He’s kicked it from inside the 22, so it’s their ball,” before turning to the Fijian forwards who by then were already eyeing off the City jumpers.
“Fiji, it’s your ball. New rules, you kicked it out from inside your 22,” Berry said, confirming that not only does the 22-50 variation exist, but that you don’t have to kick the ball into touch on the bounce to earn the lineout throw.
In truth, I’m not sure about this part of the LV. The 50-22 part is there to reward tactical kicking, and will by default create counter-attacking opportunities for when kicks go awry. But I’m not sure that a team being pinned back into the 22 should be rewarded with a lineout throw just for bombing a ball out on the full beyond halfway.
I’m not sure the 22-50 part of the LV actually works to the intent of the variation. But this is why we trial these things, to find out how they work in practice. And I’m not sure this one does.
I do like the goal-line dropout for the defending team, however, and there was one standout example from the weekend.
Canberra had Melbourne on the backfoot early on in the second game of the weekend, leading 14-3 after fourteen minutes. Another attacking raid put them in try-scoring territory, but as their lunge at the line on the pick and drive was ruled to have been held up, suddenly there were players scattering everywhere, as the Rising realised they’d earned a goal-line dropout, and the Vikings forwards realised they needed to get up and get back into position, pronto.
The Rising rushed out toward the posts, but didn’t go all the way to the midpoint before launching a massive drop kick downfield, and when the Vikings finally brought the ball into the safety of their possession again, they were launching their next attack back near halfway.
I reckon this one has plenty of merit, too. For one thing, when the referee gets a clear view of the ball being held up, the game just gets up and gets on with it, with the defending team just desperate to get the hell away from their own try line.
And it will mean teams on attack have to be really sure when they make that lunge at the line. They can’t just charge in and hope for the best, knowing that they will get a scrum feed if they can’t get the ball down.
If that brings a bit more precision about the way teams pick and drive, I don’t necessarily think that’s a bad thing.
Again, this is why we trial these things, to see how they work in actuality. And on the first showing of the two LVs in place for the NRC, and notwithstanding the reservations above about the 22-50 kick, I think the two in play this season have some real practical benefits.
In brief
Guest
It is tinkering around the edges cause the most comprehensive review was done in 2007 from which the ELVs evolved. People who rewrite history claim they failed when in reality many were adopted. However some of the most integral changed were not -mostly hands in the ruck, removal of scrum penalties and the ability to sack the maul. These were great variations that worked really well. The scrum became the main attacking weapon as there was no incentive to muck around and milk a penalty. The breakdown was a genuine contest and ferocious. So you had the flow without losing the ethos of rugby.
Frank the tank
Roar Rookie
I was envisaging they would have a timekeeper like in the afl that stops the clock when the whistle is blown (eg when the ball goes out). Then restarting when the ball is thrown in. And therefore the clock is running only when the ball was in play. Therefore a fully 80mins of play.
Oblonsky‘s Other Pun
Roar Guru
It’d be more action though - as you’d probably save 10+ minutes from time being wasted setting up scrums and line outs.
Double Agent
Guest
I agree CS but stopping the clock is just an artificial way of doing it. Those resets will still happen. Spectators will still have to sit through them. Making people watch for longer to see the same amount of action is not the answer.
Phantom
Roar Rookie
Nrl has no line outs and no real scrums. Without those two items there is no need for lanky tall forwards or a place for strong squat props. Personally I like lineouts and scrums but would like more of a contest that exists at present. The same around the ruck. More contest for the ball would improve the game.
concerned supporter
Roar Rookie
Double Agent, Current ''ball in play'' time, Super Rugby 35 minutes NRL 55 minutes Spectators, in particular, casual fans seem to like more action rather than time ''wasted'' with many reset scrums. Rugby needs all the support & fans it can possibly get.
Double Agent
Guest
Same here!! :laughing:
Double Agent
Guest
"And don’t forget, at the point of throwing, the hooker doesn’t know the opposition won’t contest. So he has to start from the point of it being straight anyway…" So that negates the theory that a hooker could throw it straight to the 9!
ThugbyFan
Roar Guru
Agree with Brett that Round 1 of NRC2019 had some fairly good rugby and was interesting to see how teams worked with the Law Trials. Round two of the NRC2019 and lots of team rosters have changes due to internationals and Randwick's game against Argentina, but still plenty of good talent running around in this week's NRC matches. Teams and game times are: Saturday September 7 All time AEST 1pm - Fijian Drua vs Western Force, ANZ Stadium, Suva, LIVE on www.Rugby.com.au and Kayo Fiji Drua 1 Joeli Veitayaki, 2 Maikele Sivo, 3 Mosese Ducivaki, 4 Tevita Naqali, 5 Necani Nawaqadau, 6 Eremasi Radrodro, 7 Ulaisi Lawavou, 8 Johnny Dyer, 9 Seru Vularika, 10 Peceli Nacebe, 11 Levani Kurimudu, 12 Cyril Reece, 13 Poasa Waqanibau, 14 Nacanieli Narequva, 15 Osea Waqa. Reserves: 16 Ratunaisa Navuma, 17 Timoci Sauvoli, 18 Jone KoroiDuadua, 19 Epeli Radaniva, 20 Rusiate Nasova, 21 Peni Matawalu, 22 Ifereimi Tovilevu, 23 Setareki Raoba. Western Force 1. Harrison Lloyd, 2. Heath Tessmann, 3. Dom Hardman, 4. Fergus Lee-Warner, 5. Ben Grant, 6. Henry Stowers, 7. Tevin Ferris, 8. Brynard Stander, 9. Issak Fines, 10. Andrew Deegan (c), 11. Jonah Placid, 12. Nick Jooste, 13. Byron Ralston, 14. Kiti Ratu, 15. Jack McGregor. Reserves: 16. Feleti Kaitu’u, 17. Cameron Orr, 18. Chris Heiberg, 19. Johan Bardoul, 20. Carlo Tizzano, 21. Ian Prior, 22. Jake Strachan, 23. Grason Makara. From what I can glean, 7 players in this Fijian Drua team were members of the 23 who played in the NRC finals last year. Most of the lost players are now in the Fijian RWC2019 squad, so this team is learning, but still loads of huge fast-running forwards and backs in the team. For the Force after last week's try-a-thon win against Qld Country, they have opted for a complete new front row plus 2 other changes in the pack. Backs stay the same. 4:30pm - Melbourne Rising vs NSW Country, AA Bailey Reserve, Adelaide, LIVE on FOXTEL, www.Rugby.com.au and Kayo Melbourne Rising 1 Fereti Sa'aga, 2 Anaru Rangi, 3 Vaauli Faamausili, 4 Ross Haylett-Petty, 5 Esei Haangana, 6 Joseva Tamani, 7 Pat Morrey, 8 Ikapote Tupai, 9 Theo Strang, 10 Rodney Iona, 11 Lolohea Loco, 12 Semisi Tupou, 13 William Lewesi, 14 Nailati Ukalele, 15 Justin Marsters. Reserves: 16 Mahe Vailanu, 17 Matt Gibbon, 18 Jermaine Ainsley, 19 William Clift, 20 Maciu Nabolakasi, 21 Reece Fuller, 22 Michael Moloney, 23 Navarre Haisila. NSW Country 1 Matthew Sandell, 2 Aaron Blacklock, 3 Chris Talakai, 4 Connor-James Vest, 5 Tom Staniforth, 6 Pat Tafa, 7 Michael Icely, 8 Will Harris, 9 Jake Gordon, 10 Mack Mason, 11 James Kane, 12 Ofa Manuofetoa, 13 Nigel Ah Wong, 14 Mark Nawaqanitawase, 15 Tim Clements. Reserves: 18 Cody Walker, 21 Jack Grant, 22 Connor O'Shea, 23 Joey Walton. It looks like Melbourne Rising have combined their annual pi$$-up at Barossa Valley with a game of rugger. Joseva Tamani comes in at blindside and replaces Maciu Nabolakasi from last week's game against the Vikings, while 4 new backs start. Six changes to NSW Country with the halves pairing of Jake Gordon and Mack Mason to audition for the Waratah's pair in 2020. Sunday September 8th. Back to back games at Bond Uni for the Rugby nuts! 1pm - Brisbane City vs Sydney, Bond University, Robina, LIVE on www.Rugby.com.au and Kayo Brisbane City 1 David Feao, 2 Maile Ngauamo, 3 Josh Nasser, 4 Bradford Kapa, 5 Rob Puliuvea, 6 Adam Korczyk, 7 Fraser McReight (c), 8 Seru Uru, 9 Moses Sorovi, 10 Isaac Lucas, 11 Jordan Luke, 12 Isaac Henry, 13 Bradley Twidale, 14 Sefa Naivalu, 15 Teti Tela. Reserves: 16 Sean Farrell, 17 Dane Zander, 18 Ruan Smith, 19 Michael Wood, 20 Sam Wallis, 21 Nick Chapman, 22 Hunter Paisami, 23 Maaloga Konelio. Sydney 1 Rory O'Connor, 2 Ed Craig, 3 Shambeckler Vui, 4 Ryan McCauley, 5 Tu'itakau Kioa, 6 Lachlan Swinton, 7 Joshua Kemeny, 8 TBC, 9 Jacob Abel, 10 Tane Edmed, 11 Tailiki Nadredre, 12 Tyson Davis, 13 Cameron Clark, 14 Trent Winterstein, 15 Jaline Graham. Reserves: 16 Declan Moore, 17 Harry Rorke, 18 TBC, 19 Jack Digby, 20 Jordan Goddard, 21 TBC, 22 Ellis Abrahams, 23 Henry Paterson. Brisbane have loads of changes from last week's draw against the Drua, though most are swaps between starters and reserves. Big interest to see how Moses and Issac use their biblical magic in the halves. Sydney have lost 5 players to the Randwick clash against the Pumas so may struggle with combinations. 3pm - Queensland Country vs Vikings, Bond University, Robina, LIVE on www.Rugby.com.au and Kayo Queensland Country 16 George Francis, 2 Matthew Faessler, 3 Carter Ozanne, 4 Angus Blyth, 5 Harry Hockings, 6 Angus Scott-Young, 7 Dillon Wihongi, 8 Harry Wilson, 9 Tate McDermott, 10 Carter Gordon, 11 Joey Fittock, 12 Hamish Stewart, 13 Patrick James, 14 Filipo Daugunu, 15 Jock Campbell. Reserves: 1 Harry Hoopert, 17 Bronson Fotualii, 18 Gavin Luka, 19 Jeremiah Lynch, 20 Connor Pritchard, 21 Reuben Wall, 22 Tom Lucas, 23 Dan Boardman. Canberra Vikings 1 Fred Kaihea, 2 Connal McInerney, 3 Jake Simeon, 4 Darcy Swain (c), 5 Blake Enever, 6 Pete Samu, 7 Will Miller, 8 Angus Allen, 9 Ryan Lonergan, 10 Noah Lolesio, 11 Mackenzie Hansen, 12 Irae Simone, 13 Thomas Wright, 14 Toni Pulu, 15 Andrew Muirhead. Reserves: 16 Lachlan Lonergan, 17 Bo Abra, 18 Tom Ross, 19 Nick Frost, 20 Luke Gersekowski, 21 Seamus Smith, 22 Bayley Kuenzle, 23 Andrew Robinson. Match of the Round. Qld Country have done really well in the last two NRC comps but have lost loads of talent to the WB squad and overseas defections. Still have very good locks, backrow and young talented halves to contend with. On paper the Vikings look the strongest in the competition with loads of Brumbies and internationals in their side.
Double Agent
Guest
Frank how does actual game time viewing increase and give more entertainment by stopping the clock? We still have to sit through scrums and lineouts and resets. They don't just disappear. We'll just have to watch games for 30 minutes longer.
ThugbyFan
Roar Guru
G'day Brett and a nice thinking article. I quite like the "goal-line drop kick if held up" rule as it always felt the attack side kept too much advantage with a failed try. However I think the 50-22 rule sucks as it's too generous. Tries are always sought in the NRC, where a team's defence always has a hole due to too many players inexperienced or not up to the level. I believe that in high level rugby, it would turn the game into NRL-lite with ad nauseam "get to your 50m, kick for the 22 sideline and a lineout maul". But we will see. Conversely I see potential in the 22-50 kicks, but a 28m kick to the 50m line is too easy for high level kickers. Change that rule to (a) the kick must go 38m past the 22 line, that is make it a 22-60 rule and (b) the kick must bounce before going out for your team to get the lineout throw, otherwise its normal service. In essence if the 50-22 and 22-50 kicks were made to go 10m further, then I am OK with all the rule changes. Personally I see the 50-22 rule change was proposed because WR wants to fix the " ignore the ruck & fan out in defence" tactic of most teams. It doesn't help when refs just turn a blind eye to blokes laying all over the ball to seal off and ignore players coming in at almost 90°. Short of forcing teams to commit x numbers to defend rucks and incessant whistling to ensure legality of breakdowns, the only options I can see are either/and (a) bring in a 1 m (or more) offside rule by changing the ruck offside Law 15:4 to "Each team has an offside line that runs parallel to the goal line and lays 1 (or x) metres behind the ruck participants’ hindmost foot. .." {a problem is this would mean demanding at least 1 defender into a ruck}. Am not sure if that change would affect other Laws or (b) bring in the above 50-22 rule (though I prefer it as 40-22) BUT the ensuing lineout is on the 22m line even if the kick goes out 1cm from the flag. This would reduce the number of lineout mauls as only a totally superior team would try a 22m maul. Come to think of it, I would like to see both AND rucks cleaned up. But I am a fossil! :)
terrykidd
Roar Pro
My only problem with this LV is that we all know there are cynical penalties and then there are non-cynical where the referee interpretation becomes the defining point IE. a jackal over the ball believing he has done everything right but in the referee's opinion there has been no clear release, and the jackaql was given the opportunity because the attacking team were lax in defending their ball. Yeah I don't reckon this one should fly without far more consideration.
terrykidd
Roar Pro
G'day Brett I agree with all your comments. The 22:50 seems a bit dumb unless the ball has to go indirectly into touch ....... but straight into touch ??? Nah World Rugby need to scratch that one because a team should be rewarded for pinning an opposition in their own 22. No way should the defending team get to relieve pressure simply by kicking long directly into touch.
Oblonsky‘s Other Pun
Roar Guru
Yeah, fair enough, you could be right! I watched Perese debut for the Broncos - he made a very silly decision, as he looked like he forgot he was playing League and thought he was inUnion still.
Ken Catchpole's Other Leg
Roar Guru
Russell, the logic of daylight is that it requires no measurement or ‘estimation’ . There is either ‘air’ between the defenders and last feet or there isn’t. Simple really. This would result in (I’m guessing) a half metre self-imposed gap to ensure that daylight is maintained. Early in a game teams would get their bearings as they ‘find the line’. Later when they are tired there may be more attack space because defences are stepping an extra metre in defence (half back and half metre forward)
Russell Neville
Roar Rookie
Dear Ken I like this idea, but perhaps a measurable distance rather than daylight. For example, half a metre and the end result would be daylight. I also would like a Free Kick for the ball not in straight at the Line-Out and a Free Kock for a Knock-On and of course the scrum option is always there. I love a great scrum contest but I think most of us dislike the lottery that is scrum penalties.
soapit
Roar Guru
if youre hitting the head or neck youve got it wrong no matter what game. the difference is what happens to you if you get it wrong. there is a perfectly legal way to make a higher tackle in both games being penalised less for getting your high tackles wrong doesnt have a significant impact on whether they discourage low tackling style imo.
Oblonsky‘s Other Pun
Roar Guru
Well in my experience the best ways of tackling are high and low. If you go around the middle, you’re likely to get bumped off. If you can hit them high (especially if you’re allowed to use your shoulder more, as you are in league) it is easier to bring them down. Going low, you can chop them around the waist. If you hit them around the middle you’re likely to get bumped off. I also think, in league, stopping the offload is of paramount importance. I also think there are a lot of disgracefully bad league tacklers, on par with the worst Union flyhalves. It’s just a different sport.
soapit
Roar Guru
the problem i have is that theres not a clear criteria for whether the changes will be deemed to be a success. after the trials there needs to be a pretty decent review after of trends of the impact of the changes in the lower levels with attempts to extrapolate how teams will learn to manipuklate them in the future, and the impact of that. i dont like how it seems that they trial a law and then if it isnt an obvious failure it then gets introduced. i also hate the no conversion for a penalty try. unnecessary complexity for no clear purpose (plus robs the crowd of a chance to cheer)
soapit
Roar Guru
myself i dont think there much of a link honestly