World Rugby considering 20-minute red card trial

Staff Writers
Press Association
March 20, 2024 5:03AM


World Rugby is considering a global trial of a 20-minute red card as part of a raft of radical plans to broaden the appeal of the sport.

The proposal, where the player sent off is replaced by a substitute after 20 minutes has elapsed, will potentially go before the governing body's council in Dublin in May.

Introducing a shot clock for scrums and lineouts, outlawing the "crocodile roll'' clear-out at rucks and lowering the tackle height in the elite game to the base of the sternum are among other possible rule changes.


More immediately, referees have been told to call "use it" earlier at breakdowns in a bid to speed up play and eradicate the use of "caterpillar rucks'', and also to crack down on water-carriers entering the pitch.

Get in front of tomorrow's news for FREE
Journalism for the curious Australian across politics, business, culture and opinion.

The recommendations follow World Rugby's "shape of the game'' forum held last month in an effort to enhance rugby's entertainment factor.

Twenty-minute red cards would ensure the offending player and their team are punished without spoiling the spectacle, particularly after an early dismissal.

The rule has proved popular in the southern hemisphere, where it has been trialled in Super Rugby Pacific.

In addition to potentially expanding the use of a shot clock, which is currently used for penalties and conversions, unions and competition owners will be encouraged to stage further closed-law trials.

These include the ball being played after the maul has been stopped once, not twice, further protection of scrum-halves at the base of rucks and scrums, and play on if a lineout is not straight but the throw is uncontested.

Meanwhile, a specialist working group will examine the impact of the lowering of the tackle height in community rugby in 2023 to consider its "appropriateness" for elite rugby.

The role of the television match official will also be evaluated, in addition to a review of how and when replacements are used.

World Rugby chairman Sir Bill Beaumont said in a statement: "Change is in rugby's DNA. Two hundred years ago we were born from a desire to change and we are harnessing that same spirit to excite the next generation of fans and players.

"The moves that we are making are grounded in our commitment to increasing relevance on a global basis and born from a desire to change for the better.

"That means being bold, embracing change by dialling up the entertainment value, making our stars more accessible and simplifying terminology and language used to explain rugby to those who are yet to fall in love with it.

"I look forward to the discussions."

World Rugby's council will consider a package of "shape of the game'' forum recommendations at its next meeting on May 9.

Some measures will take longer consideration.

https://www.perthnow.com.au/sport/ru...ial-c-14013346

With the time wasting "caterpillar", the easy remedy is a more flexible way of looking at when the ball is "out". Or simply, if the ball is clearly able to be picked up then call "use it" immediately. This pantomime of the 9 clumsily taking ages to toe the ball back should be pinged quick smart. There is no need to allow 5 seconds. Calling additional forwards to the caterpillar should also be pinged immediately. The same attitude should apply to not quickly clearing the ball from a scrum. Referees seem to be calling "use it" more quickly of late, but I'd prefer to see them enforce it more consistently. One of my pet hates (which is probably obvious :)) but also a player welfare issue.

JK made some interesting calls for rule changes a few weeks ago.

Here is some discussion around those changes including the "use it"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tk4SzC4NFLM

Don't agree with the "one stop maul" but most of the rest I can get around.
The ability to regather structure and go again is one of the unique parts of the Code that allows for various body shapes.
I believe there are existing Laws that need better enforcing, such as feeding the Scrum (meant to be a contest), the offside line and in front of the kicker at restarts (Half, 22 and Goal line). And agreed re "Use it". F'ing USE IT!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Burgs

Don't agree with the "one stop maul" but most of the rest I can get around.
The ability to regather structure and go again is one of the unique parts of the Code that allows for various body shapes.
I believe there are existing Laws that need better enforcing, such as feeding the Scrum (meant to be a contest), the offside line and in front of the kicker at restarts (Half, 22 and Goal line). And agreed re "Use it". F'ing USE IT!!!

---

Use it should not have a 5 second timer..Call use it, it should be used as soon as possible. Failure to do so call 'ball out'

Allow refs some discretion when to call use it, but basically the call becomes "use it" pause for effect "ball out" which means any faffing around causes you to have a bunch of angry flankers in your face.

Some refs will allow the ball to be slowed down in the ruck before calling, some won't.....welcome to rugby

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Burgs

I believe there are existing Laws that need better enforcing, such as feeding the Scrum (meant to be a contest)

---

Yes that is particularly irksome. Having a dominant scrum is its own reward. But it should not be a ticket to cheating on the feed relieving the hooker from needing to strike. This bullshit allows an easy pause to mount a pretty much unopposed 8 man shunt. How does that promote player welfare??

So in other words maybe we just can the halfbacks all together? Cheeky little bastards!!

World Rugby reveal plans to depower scrums and close ‘Dupont Law’ loophole

Jared Wright 19 Mar 2024
Planet Rugby

The World Rugby Council is set to vote on three crucial law amendments for global adoption in May.

In its pursuit of enhancing game continuity, rugby’s governing body has proposed these three law amendments.

Dupont Law

World Rugby look set to close the loophole in Law 10 in relation to players being put onside when there are kicks in open play.

France scrum-half Antoine Dupont has been known to exploit the loophole, leading to it being informally dubbed as the ‘Dupont Law’.

Law 10.7 states that “an offside player can be put onside when:
a. An onside team-mate of that player moves past the offside player and is within or has re-entered the playing area.
b. An opponent of that player:
i. Carries the ball five metres; or
ii. Passes the ball; or
iii. Kicks the ball; or
iv. Intentionally touches the ball without gaining possession of it.

The issue is created with 10.7.bi: “An opponent of that player carries the ball five metres.”

Scotland and France made use of this loophole during the 2024 Six Nations, which led to a prolonged kicking tennis duel with Thomas Ramos and Finn Russell barely moving and waiting for team-mates to retreat.

An adjustment in the law was quickly added as a trial in Super Rugby Pacific ahead of the start of the 2024 season. If it is voted on in May, it could be rolled out globally.

World Rugby plan to rollout ‘global trial’ of controversial 20-minute red card in disciplinary shake-up

Depowering scrums and binning ‘croc rolls’

Alongside the ‘Dupont Law’ amendment, the World Rugby Council will vote on whether teams will be able to opt for a scrum being awarded a free kick at a scrum.

If passed, a team would no longer be able to request another scrum if the referee awards a free-kick from an infringement by the opposition at a scrum.

This would allow for weaker scrummaging teams to concede a free-kick on the opposition’s feeds to avoid conceding a penalty or allow the opposition to wear them down in the scrums.

World Rugby’s statement adds that the change would reduce ‘dead time’ in matches.

The final amendment that will be put to a vote will be to outlaw the practice of the ‘croc roll’ at the breakdown.

The ‘croc roll’ or crocodile roll refers to a move at the breakdown to remove an opponent standing over the ball. A player performing the move would grab the opponent around the torso and use their body weight to roll them out of the breakdown – the name coming from the way in which a crocodile subdues its prey.

Hmm. I'm not happy with the current situation at scrum time. But I don't know if this is the answer. I'd prefer a directive issued to police cheating at the put-in & put a stop to trapping an available ball at the back. That some teams have dominant packs is a fact of life for various reasons which won't change during a match. Penalizing the weak one to defeat adds nothing to the spectacle and is contrary to player safety.

Removing the croc roll doesn't leave many options for attacking teams to remove defenders.

Is it better or worse than belting in at a million miles an hour towards the head of the jackler?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GIGS20

Is it better or worse than belting in at a million miles an hour towards the head of the jackler?

---

AFAIK that has been illegal since forever and seems to have been ignored for almost as long. All that's changed is that if you miscue a fraction and there's a head clash, you're in the do-do. Just the depth varies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shasta

...you're in the do-do. Just the depth varies.

---

Went searching "head up arse" to get a funny clipart comeback to post.
Safe search was off...
I'm a little bit traumatised... :S: :puke_l:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shasta

AFAIK that has been illegal since forever and seems to have been ignored for almost as long. All that's changed is that if you miscue a fraction and there's a head clash, you're in the do-do. Just the depth varies.

---

Granted, but there aren't many options other than "well he was there first, I guess I'll just give up and get in the defensive line"

I can't imagine most coaches will be best pleased on that case and they'll double down on the "belt in at speed and bash him off the ball" strategy.

Despite all it's issues with injuries to soft tissue and tip tackle-type scenarios, I think it's by far the lesser of two evils. (and no, I'm not talking about neck rolls, They should surely be banned)