As a rugby tragic, aficionado, alickadoo and former ref (I’m getting the cataracts fixed this month!), I always grimace when people talk or ask about the rules of rugby.
In our sport we don’t have rules – we have laws.
We don’t have umpires – we have referees. The apparent origin of that is that when gentlemen first played rugby on the village green, there was no umpire – the captains sorted out disputes. If they couldn’t, they referred the question to a local luminary on the sideline – either the vicar, the local PC plod, or the local magistrate – hence referral, hence referee.
But I digress, as usual.
Rugby has laws – can only assume that it is because the gentlemen who oversaw the development of our game were lawyers, or lawmakers. Who knows?
(Photo by Francois Nel – World Rugby/World Rugby via Getty Images)
Like much of rugby folklore, it is happily shrouded away in the mists of time, and nobody wants to disturb it.
I recently saw a doco on Kayo where a lot of rugby experts and ex-players were asked if they thought the William Webb Ellis story is truth or myth.
The overriding theme from all of them was “who knows, or who cares, or maybe, but let’s not let truth get in the way of a great tradition!”
So, back to the laws. I have seen a lot of misinformed comment about it over the years, but if you want to put doubts to bed, just go the relevant section of the World Rugby website and put all arguments to rest.
You can register and log in to the site. There, they have the most up-to-the-minute laws, plus the most up-to-the-minute interpretations, discussions and explanations of trial protocols, modifications, guidance for referees, the latest videos, guidance on the decision-making frameworks, policies, progress of working committees – you name it.
I reckon it is time that we, as Roarers entering the exciting new Rugby World Cup four-year cycle, owed it to ourselves to get properly up to speed so great, informed debate can rage, and The Roar can become even louder!
Who agrees?
Mr Fox
Guest
I agree. I did some referral work after my club days and was surprised at how much I did not know as a player. Always worth browsing the manual.
Chris
Guest
Sorry about the formatting, typed on phone and it didn't come out as I hoped.
Chris
Guest
Hmm, I think you are being a little kind on ELV experiment. The big ones as I recall were - Hands in the ruck - tested in the Mazda Cup, but not at Super rugby and above, not sure how it played out. Offside at the tackle - poorly thought through leading to a number of open play offsides if the ball was popped off the floor which was just plainly unfair to the defensive team. The deemed-ruck rule brought in two years ago is much better solution. Free kick for most of fences - could have worked, but refs at super level and above didn't adjust their sanction threshold lower meaning that cynical killing of the ball became widespread. Slowing of the ball after the free kick was awarded meant the team offended against had no real options but take the scrum, slowing the game even more. Of the changes accepted - Quick throw not having t best straight - positive overall. One less thing to worry about without changing the game. Offside line set back 5 meters from scrums - okay, didn't make much of difference because it has been poorly enforced. No passing back into the 22 and kicking out on the full - negative. Odd to enforce because the ref needs to remember where the last phase was. Also it made having the ball just outside of your own 22 a burden. Thats why you often see teams not even trying gain ground from kick offs or running out of the 22 because if you get caught in that no man's land part of the pitch your options are too limited.
Objective
Guest
Used to be mate but not anymore. Tackler now must also come through the gate.
Paulo
Roar Rookie
Fair call, So... I think you summed things up quite well though. I think it won’t take many games before we are all arguing about semantics and rulings of certain laws, and interpretations etc.
gatesy
Roar Guru
My final word - I hope that the 50:22 and the line dropout trials make it into the law book. Same with an offside line behind the scrum and lineout - would never want to see the League requirement for a 10 m separation, but some small separation might open things up a bit. The dropout concept is great - instead of endless 5m scrums on the spot, where the ball is held up, the defending team gets the kick from anywhere on the line and, in most cases, the attacking team gets it back (not a given) and can launch raids from anywhere - a great tactical challenge for coaches on both sides to get their heads around - never cease to be amazed how creative coaches can get and they are capable of changing the dimensions of the game. 50:22 is a good, but not necessarily great initiative. But the beauty of it is that Rugby administrators are trying to make our game more challenging and interesting but without dumbing it down or removing the contests, or negating the number one principle of it being a game for all shapes and sizes. That's a pretty big deal when you consider that Rugby League made most of its law changes to make the game understandable to the folks in the stands, and what they ended up achieving was to remove most of the contests and fostering a situation where everybody has to have a huge, fast athletic body shape, and many positions interchangeable. We celebrate the diversity of shapes and sizes. May that never change.
gatesy
Roar Guru
Stay on point, Paulo.
gatesy
Roar Guru
I wouldn't know if I am big boned or fat because my mirror stops at the neck! Though I occasionally see the same fat bastard in the same shop windows as I walk to work every day - even dressses just like me - imagine that!
In brief
Guest
The ELVs were trialed in 2007. They were the result of a very long well planned process involving some of rugby’s greatest coaches and experienced referees. The goal was to strip back the laws to the basic principles, without losing the spirit of the game. From memory there were 3 key offences two of which were offside and foul play. The ELVs worked really well in trials at all levels of the game - with overwhelming support of players and referees. They were trialed at every level in the south from club rugby to tri nations internationals. Unfortunately after several years of implementation the Home Unions refused to trial the laws at international level, largely a political move. This killed off the ELVs. Since then many of the trial variations appear to be a piecemeal attempt at achieving what the ELVs did in one go. NB: many of the original 2007 ELVs have been implemented, the corner flag being on example.
In brief
Guest
Thanks Gatesy - I see where you are coming from and agree the laws are evolving. I have read through the current trials. I just feel they are tinkering around the edges and the outcome isn’t quite what we need.
gatesy
Roar Guru
.. and they never will - therein lies the beauty of our game!
gatesy
Roar Guru
Don't even need a ball!!
gatesy
Roar Guru
To understand that, you need to understand the concept of the gate, which for the tackler can be anywhere in a 360 degree arc, but everyone else has to enter from an onside position. Am I right?
gatesy
Roar Guru
IB, the whole point of the article was that the laws are not in need of an overhaul - they are constantly evolving - just look at all the trials going on - the 50:22, the goal line dropout, etc - you might want to bring yourself up to speed, and a good place to start is the World Rugby site - which was the other point of the article.
gatesy
Roar Guru
Absolutely - we are all lovers of the game and there is no "rule" that says the ref shouldn't also enjoy his Rugby day out.
gatesy
Roar Guru
When I was coaching at Norths, one of the best referees in the Sydney comp, Flip van der Westhuizen used to come down to Tunks Park on training nights and do his own personal training. He always made himself available if any of the grades wanted him to assist. I used to see him on the bus from North Sydney to the city in the mornings and we used to chat. At Norths, we saw him as a great ref, because he had wonderful knack of letting a game flow and talking to the players at the same time. When Rugby went professional in 1995, he was on the outer and got relegated by the show ponies in the Sydney refs organisation, because he was a bit of a renegade. We, the little people, actually liked the renegades! He was so popular with players that David Campese asked him to referee his farewell game -I think it was Sydney v a Barbarian side - scoreline was crazy and a great night was had by all, at SFS, but that was the sort of esteem that we all held Flip in. Not the urgers who displaced him. See, the players don't necessarily understand the laws, don't want to, and just want to get on with the game, so the more knowledgeable the ref, the better the experience, not just for the players, but also for the spectators. Helps if the ref knows the laws. But as we get older, apparently wiser, we should try to understand them.
gatesy
Roar Guru
I prefer to watch it on TV - there is almost no way that I can work out what is going on in rucks, mauls and scrums when I a sitting high up in a grandstand.
gatesy
Roar Guru
As they should!
gatesy
Roar Guru
Welcome back, Carlos, I left and never came back - preferred to be in the sheds with the lads as a coach or manager, or just the shed sweeper - best place to be after a game
gatesy
Roar Guru
Check out my Rugby calendar - it's always half time or full time somewhere -