Thanks for your comment DaveJ
.
I’d wear that :), my only concern would be the big increase in 5 m lineouts / mauls
(and to fix that move the 5m line to 10m – also fixes the defending backs being back 10m, like the law says, not 5m as it currently is -ie consistency in the laws.)
.
I’m also OK with all penalties at goal from penalties only given inside 22 – somewhat like soccer. (the modern plastic ball, and superior field conditions have made penalties much easier to kick, when compared to the wet leather balls and mud heaps of yesteryear.)
.
I’m also ok with long range attempts at goal, via field goal – allow the tap kick and attempted drop goal – again, to increase the speed of the game and stop all the rest breaks.
.
Ideally, from most scrum infringements, the quick tap and run – also increasing the FF (fatigue factor). In this case it really opens the field up, with the defending forwards still in the scrum.

The dummy passes was done away with back in the 70s. This is also appied to faking throw ins at the linbeout

I’d like to change the definition of a ruck or maul to include a ‘receiver’ like a lineout (and a scrum) has.

Include the half as a receiver (or nearest player) as part of the ruck. All players must remain behind the last feet (of the nearest player to the ruck. It moves the offside line about half to a metre back and clear daylight between the players not in the ruck and those who are.

This also gives the added advantage of player fatigue, and when players are moving backward, quick ball into attack is an advantage. As well, there are no players for the half to hide behind. It also makes sure that no players are in an offside position in front of the half.

As it is a ref could pretty much blow offside at every ruck — there is nearly always, one person in front of the last player in the rucks feet on one or the other side. This law is rarely enforced and it would go a long way to opening the game up.

I agree whole heartedly with your comments.
.
However, I don’t see how we can walk back the 8 subs. A primary purpose of the bench is to maintain contested scrums. (and if I am noty mistaken a replaced front rower can return to the field if a front row is injured and cannot continue.) But, coaches have abused the reserve bench so it is no longer reserves, but tactical substitutions and now many forwards are playing on average half a game. somewhere between 50-30 minutes. However, your suggestions of 8 reserves with only 4 or 5 replacements is certainly worth consideration.
.
Now Fatigue is much less of an issue with the subs bench, than it was prior to these changes when the 30 players played a full 80 minutes. We also have pathetic situation of the forwards slowly ambling to scrums and lineouts, going down for fake injuries and constant water breaks — including a considerable recovery time every time the TMO is called upon.
.
And the bench trend will be to 8 forwards. Trend will be to 7 forwards and the 8th a forward that can play in the backs. This also makes it also easier to do as backs are becoming less and less specialized, and more often than not play several positions.
.
For me there is 1 simple reason that the game has slowed down.
.
A dominant pack can win easy / soft penalties by forcing an opposition to put a knee on the ground or point an elbow down. So the scrum needs massive men with aerobic capability of 30-50 minutes.
.
For me the fix is easy.
.
(And no I am at no stage suggesting changing or depowering the scrum to league scrums.)
.
1 / Reduce the number of situations when a scrum can be called. ~ Scrums only awarded for following 5 reasons (not 16 as current)
.
1. A knock on.
2. A player takes the ball into their own in goal and is made dead.
3. A restart after the ball is unplayable. (tackle, ruck or maul)
4. A reset scrum, where the ball has not been put into the scrum.
5. A restart after the ref calls a halt. (For injury or contact with the ball or any other reason.)
.
2 / Abolish all technical scrum penalties. All technical scrum penalties becomes a free kick. Penalties remains for foul / dangerous play.
.
It has the added bonus, of no more kicks for goal or lineout mauls from soft scrum penalties.
.
I believe these two simple changes will make a dramatic improvement to the game, speeding it up and bringing fatigue back into it, but still ensuring the scrum remains as a spectacle and an important part of the game.

Passit2me… Back in the early 70s the tackle law changed. Original definition was when the ball touched the ground. At times, players would roll as tackled, land on their back, and hold up the ball for their players, or move it around or hold it back on their chest if the opposition tried to take it.

The definition was changed to the player being off their feet. It meant the game was supposed to be played “on the feet.” It also stopped players on the ground playing the ball.

Being off their feet was determined that any player with any other part of their body on the ground, was off their feet, this included the hands. Now we hear tackle called when a player with the ball can get a knee to the ground.

In many respects your right, however, but it was open to abuse – 1 was the players reaching right over and placing their hands on the ground just as the clearer player arrived and the momentum of the arriving player allowed them to scoop the ball up as they were pushed back. So the refs now penalize for taking the space beyond the ball.

Also, players were deliberately going right over the top and placing both hands on the ground, with the ball underneath – a term called “bridging” at the time. It was coached by some sides, with them getting really annoyed when I would penalize the players who were not on their feet. It didn’t last long but it was there for a while.

I expect if the Laws allowed brief contact with the ground, it would end up being abused. and create even more arguments.

2 Agree Any kicks go out (without bouncing or touching a player) from a kick in the field of play lineout taken from kick
exception: Kicks from outside the field of play a.k.a the in goal area, can be taken from where the ball goes out as the kick is outside the field of play. Unlike current, the ball can be taken into the in-goal before kicking. (simplifies the rule – no need for ref to worry about ‘carried back.”

4. Move the 5m line to 10m. This makes the lineout 10m from the line. It’s 5m further to the try line, and the 10 metres give the defence a chance 5m more to stop it. Also, has a second advantage of keeping defenders back 10 metres in keeping with the lineout offside law.

~ In keeping line with 10m lineout go to 10metre scrums (instead of 5m) and

~ Change offside for scrums consistent with a line out. Backs back 10metres from mark, not 5 metres from no. 8 feet. It allows more open play, and keeps consistency with lineout law.

~ Scrums only awarded for following 5 reasons (not 16 as current)
1. A knock on.
2. A player takes the ball into their own in goal and is made dead.
3. A restart after the ball is unplayable. (tackle, ruck or maul)
4. A reset scrum, where the ball has not been put into the scrum.
5. A restart after the ref calls a halt. (For injury or contact with the ball or any other reason.)

Scrum penalties only for foul play. All the rest are mandatory free kicks, no re-scrum allowed.

Hows that?

W Evans, what was once an injury bench has become a tactical bench after coaches abused it.

(Remember, at one point there were no reserves for tests (which became only replacement with an independent doctors approval), and club games could only be replaced by a person who’d already played a game. ie Second grade were called “Reserve Grade” for the firsts.)

The abuse culminated in “bloodgate” where ultimately WR had to open up reserves to tactical subs. Google “bloodgate / harlequins / heineken / 2009”

We do need the additional players in case of genuine injury.

It could be an 8 bench limited to 4 tactical replacements, but what happens if a front rower is genuinely injured with tactical subs made elsewhere? Do we go with uncontested scrums? It will be open to abuse regardless, and we’ve already seen coaches pushing the limit of the law and occasionally stepping over the line and out right cheat.

We also have a situation where we are headed to a game of 2 packs. Saffas have indicated an intent in the past of 7 forwards-1 back. It will soon be 7 forwards and an versatile player who can play flanker or centre. Backs are no longer “specialized” and need to be utility players.

I favour treating the cause not the symptom. The cause is easy penalties from the scrum.

1 / Take away the number of scrums, by allowing olny scrums for knock ons and unplayable balls in rucks and malls, (no scrums for penalties or free kicks etc… )

2 / Take away easy soft penalties for scrum infringements. Award a free kick (no scrum option) instead.

Do that and I believe the balance of brawn & strength Vs speed and fitness will return to the game.

Mum always said that prior to the apartheid ban, the Boks had hard, hard forwards, and fast fast, backs.

I’m on the same page as you. The wallabies as a world power are dead. I can’t see a wallaby revival under any circumstances. And ignoring western Sydney is an insult to those Pasifika people who will go to follow and play league.
My No2 team is Fiji. My grandad played fullback for Fiji in the 1920s, although it wasn’t a test.
I also agree there should be a 2nd (and even 3rd division) with promotion and relegation – maybe a head to head last vs 1st challenge game at the end of the season for the right to go up or defend the right to stay up.
I too would have liked to see Le Bleu go through as well. Their joie de vivre when on song (en song?) is a joy to watch!

Defence, discipline and desire.

As mentioned fields can be valuable real estate, and established field can’t always change their size. There was a big change in the early 70s when fields went metric. 100 yards playing area (it was 110 yards including goal) to 100 metres playing area.

They had to find an extra 10 yards and fields in all parts of the world simply didn’t have that luxury.

I was told that the reason the 25 yard line or what was also called the “quarter-line” remained the same distance to accommodate this, instead of becoming a 25 meter (quarter) line.

Shorter fields were able to be shortened from the 22 m to the 10m line. Goal to 22 was the same. It was important that the half way to 10 m remained the same. They extended the 10 yard line a 10 metre line. But they didn’t go to a 25m quarter line, it was remained the same distance ie 25 yds = 22m.

The minimum length of a regulation field is 100m where the playing area would be 94m and with 2 X 3 metre in goals. I’ve seen a non-reg school ground where the 10m line is 10m from the 22. I was told the playing surface was 84 m, plus 3m in goals.

PSTU, a pet hate of mine. Do front rowers really need to be told the laws, every single game! Even regularly during the game? Do they not know the laws? I can understand Refs coaching U12s or U14… but professionals? If I’d have been that ignorant, Sister Mary would have had the ruler out over the knuckles the next lesson if I’d ignored her instructions.

I agree with you.

Keep blowing the short arm and DON’T allow for scrums off a short arm, otherwise the short arm defeats the purpose.

Get them running and chasing and they might have second thoughts about playing silly buggers at the scrum. They slow down the game enough, and on average only play have a game.

I’d be a lot happier about the scrum if the forwards played a full game, instead of half a game.

The abuse by coaches of reserves for injury reserves has mutated into tactical substitutions with a fresh pack coming on in the second half.

Saffas are leading the way with there 7-1 split. I expect that to soon become 8-0 with one of the 23 able to play in the backs.

and remove the option for another scrum to be called on a free kick (or penalty for that matter).

It’s a free kick after all.

I expect we’d see a lot of quick taps by the half, and a much faster game.

Hey KP

Remove the rolling mauls from lineout within attacking quarter.

That could work too.

I favour changing the 5m line to a 10m mark. Has the double advantage of the defenders not in a lineout being 10 meters from a lineout, not 5.

(The 5m scrum is getting less frequently called now thanks to the goal line drop out, adopted from league)

PS I note your reference to the attacking quarter. Been a long time since union had a quarter line — back when fields were measured in yards. 🙂

Hi Ben, yes you’re right. The reward for a dominant scrum is to get the ball.

Why would you want the ball?

Because “William Webb Ellis first picked up the ball and ran with it.” The single identifying moment of the game.

Barry, this is a timely post. I made a comment on theroar on the 21/10, which I will repeat below.

And to be clear I don’t want league scrums or no scrums and I only watch the league GF and Tests against England and New Zealand. I just want a better balance since several things have changed over the years – There are two forward packs per game; fatigue is no longer an issue. As well the balls are plastic so they are better balanced than leather and easier to kick because they don’t get sodden. The fields are also better drained and they don’t become mud heaps like yesteryear when a 20m kick on a wet field at the end of the game nigh impossible.

My post from the 21st is below

The fetish with the scrum is destroying the running game as teams bulk up to win soft scrum penalties.
.
Huge men that can’t play 80 minutes. Soon there will be 2 entire packs required for a game — where there will be 7 sub forwards and an 8th that can play as a back. (Saffas are already going this way.)
.
Smaller (aka tier 2 nations) will never be able to compete as they might rely on speed and guile which they can manage for 40 or 50 minutes , but as they tire themselves the new pack will come on fresh.
.
Reserves / bench has occured to make it safe for the front row, but now it has become abused by coaches so that now they have become technical replacements and safety is a secondary issue. (Remember the days when a forward would only come off on a stretcher?)
.
And the big men still slow the game down at every opportunity, walking to scrums, lineouts etc. We had to introduce a damn clock because they were abusing it. (Remember the days when forwards RAN to scrums and lineouts and they were over in 30 seconds.)
.
There is a simple easy fix for this.
.
1 / Scrums only for knockons and when a ball cannot be played in a ruck or maul. Stop allowing the calling of scrums for penalties, free kicks; ball kicked dead & lineout throws not straight, (yes a free kick, like 7s) forward pass, etc…how can you call a scrum for a mark in the 22 for ffs! A Scrum is won and still a penalty applies because the prop put their hand or knee on the ground. Absurd.
.
2/ Abolish all technical scrum penalties and change them to free kicks. Totally absurd that a knock can result in a penalty and three points result. The advantage is, you get the vballnote: Foul play penalties still apply.
.
Make those changes will speed the game back up and the big fellas will be run off their feet, allowing more smaller mobile players to return to the game. in other words a game for all sizes, not just paying lip service.
.
If it remains as is and deteriorates to 8 reserve forwards – a second pack – tier twos will fall further behind, and Australia rugby will be absolutely killed. Aussies have too many other pro football choices to watch.

And Jim, they have 2 packs (ie 15 forwards) per team now so the behemoths only play half a game. How long will it be before there are 7 ginormous forwards and a forward that can play in the backs from 16-23?

I note he didn’t answer the questions either.

I was wrong about my comment being narrow minded. Far too generous.

Closed minded would be more apt.

Hi Peter, it’s funny that there are so many people who seem to think I’m asking to abolish the scrum. At no point did I even infer it.
All I am asking is the scrum be made less important, basically just for knockons and restarts, which simplifies the Laws as well.
Want I want to abolish are soft scrum penalties and give free kicks instead. Which is why free kicks were introduced in the 70s!
Now the players have got bigger, the scrums have got bigger and it takes 2 sets of forwards and one set of back to play the game, as the game requires 15 forwards playing around half a game while the smaller faster men are made to play a full game. The new game has taken fatigue off the table for the big men, and a reason why the Tier 2 teams can match a half with the tier ones, but not a full game.
Unbalanced in so many ways.
Ironically with their comments about “watching league” as union now looks more like league than union.
eg Forwards with pick and goes of 1 metre, are just like the 2 yard gain from dummy half under the league unlimited tacke rule.
When I played there was an open backline of backs. All forwards were committed to rucks, not standing in front of backs or in the backline as they do today – so they can trundle up another 2 metre hit up, just like they used to do in league.

IFTS, There was a time when I watched it, I mean really studied a game. I would be up at midnight / 1am to watch a 5 / 6 Nations or the Wallabies on tour. I will never forget the Wallabies pushover try against the Welsh. Now I don’t. I go to bed. In fact I’ve gone to bed instead of staying up late to watch.

Exactly!

And the players ran to the lineouts and scrums, they were over in 30 seconds or so, and they played the full 80 minutes.

No international player would leave the field unless they were stretchered.

In fact, originally there were no replacements. Teams played short if there were injuries where they couldn’t continue.

Replacements only came in the 70s and then only after an independent doctor said they couldn’t continue.

Go back and re-read the post. The scrum is out of kilter with how the game was played and goes against the spirit of the game when teams put on players who don’t have to play half a game to earn soft technical penalties.

As I said, I played at a time when real forwards would only come off on a stretcher.

Please justify why a free kick, penalty kick, ball not in lineout straight, mark, ball kicked dead, are given the option of a scrum? I can understand a scrum for knock on and the ref halting play.

But why is the scrum an option for all the other parts of play? I’d really like to hear your justification – or anyone for that matter. Please.

At no point did I say get rid of the scrum or stop it being a contest.

For what it’s worth, this entity played rugby for 20 years. When I played as a teenager U14-16, I could play up to 5 games in seven days; for school, club (sat), district (sun) and occasional mid-week school games (wed). I have coached schools U19 and U16 for 7 years. I am a level 2 ref. I

So do try to say something more intelligent than “go and watch league.”

And actually, league was invented so players could be paid as professionals when they took half a day off on a Saturday to play. It wasn’t ‘invented’ to remove the contest at all, that is a modern twist. League used to have pushing in scrums, and hooking for the ball at the play the ball, and you could steal the ball in the tackle. The laws were adjusted over time to remove the contest, but it didn’t start out as their primary objective..

And 13 players was to open the game up to make it faster. Much like union’s 7, 10, or 12s.

Call me a troll all you want, it pretty much sums up everything wrong with union, when you can’t have an intelligent conversation without name calling.

Australian rugby will do really well as people continue to leave the game in droves Narrow-minded people like you make it that much easier.

No I’m a union man who’s stopped watching it. As have 5 of my friends. If oz rugby can exist when it’s only cauli ears watching it good luck.

At the moment front rowers and most fowards only have to play half a game. What would happen if they had to play 80??

Definition of a scrum by world rugby:
.
The scrum is a means of restarting play after a stoppage which has been caused by a minor infringement of the Laws (for example, a forward pass or knock-on) or the ball becoming unplayable in a ruck or maul. The scrum serves to concentrate all the forwards and the scrum-halves in one place on the field, providing the opportunity for the backs to mount an attack using the space created elsewhere.