A radical ELV proposal

Seeing as kicking is fast becoming the highlights of the game, I propose a tweaking of Law 18 be added to the ELVs to potentially reduce the number of kicks.

To quickly refreshen the memories of some:

Current Law 18 - Mark

To make a mark, a player must be on or behind that player’s 22-metre line. A player with one foot on the 22-metre line or behind it is considered to be ‘in the 22’. The player must make a clean catch direct from an opponent’s kick and at the same time shout “Mark”. A mark cannot be made from a kick off, or a restart kick except for a drop out.

A kick is awarded for a mark. The place for the kick is the place of the mark.

A player may make a mark even though the ball touched a goal post or crossbar before being caught.

A player from the defending team may make a mark in in-goal.

I propose the following changes:
To make a mark, [delete a player must be on or behind that player’s 22-metre line. A player with one foot on the 22-metre line or behind it is considered to be ‘in the 22’] the player must make a clean catch direct from an opponent’s kick and at the same time shout “Mark”. A mark cannot be made from a kick off, or a restart kick except for a drop out.

A free kick is awarded for a mark. The place for the kick is the place of the mark. Add The ball can be kicked directly into touch and the resultant lineout awarded to the kicking team at the place where it went into touch.

A player may make a mark ....cont.

In a nutshell, I'm proposing a mark can be awarded anywhere in the field of play. A free kick is awarded with the option of kicking the ball out on the full and getting the lineout. Open to debate ofcourse.

Interesting. It would certainly put paid to aimless kicks in general play and clearances would definitely go to touch, but it would also see the end of the up-and-under and chip-kick over the top. I am not sure it would reduce the amount of kicking though, just change it to low grubbers.

That reverts back to an old interpretation (from a foggy memory), before I played the game (make that very old). It was brought back to only in the 22 to avoid incessant 'marks' which made the play very like Aussie Rules.
Not sure I like the idea.

Yeah, I'm finding it hard to see the benefit too I must say sorry KQ.
I would be happy with the retained throw in for current mark however, I believe they should revert to the old rule that the player taking the mark must have his feet planted before, during and after the act of taking the mark.
The current definition is very quiffy and takes much of the hard nut element of traditional Fullbacks.
If you haven't experienced waiting under a high ball, seemingly with time to roll you last smoke, while fifteen rampaging try hungry bulls stampede towards you then you haven't lived!
I still have "nightmares" (and the scar) of a bearded, turban-wearing 20 year old bearing down and trying to take my 16 year old head off at the top lip on a tour match in Singapore haha
Ah, the good old days...

:lolup::lolup:

My nose still doesn't quite point to where I'm looking after an attempted mark :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Burgs

Yeah, I'm finding it hard to see the benefit too I must say sorry KQ.
I would be happy with the retained throw in for current mark however, I believe they should revert to the old rule that the player taking the mark must have his feet planted before, during and after the act of taking the mark.
The current definition is very quiffy and takes much of the hard nut element of traditional Fullbacks.
If you haven't experienced waiting under a high ball, seemingly with time to roll you last smoke, while fifteen rampaging try hungry bulls stampede towards you then you haven't lived!
I still have "nightmares" (and the scar) of a bearded, turban-wearing 20 year old bearing down and trying to take my 16 year old head off at the top lip on a tour match in Singapore haha
Ah, the good old days...

---

my blood still runs cold at the thought of the number of times I ran back(foolishly)into the 22 to cover for a out of position fullback & stand there & claim the mark as the belated whistle came too late to save poor old brokendown being smashed into the turf.
them were the days



not

Thanks guys, points noted and in response:

Andy--I think it will reduce the number of kicks considerably. The chip kick, I believe, will still have a place in rugby such as one-on-one situations or where, for example, the defense has moved up quick with the full back further down. Grubber kicks are risky and less reliable and I don't foresee an significant increase.

Hopep--Thanks for that, though I've watched quite a few games from the 60s-70s (golden era of Welsh rugby including the '73 classic) and not noticed the rule..so must be way back?

In any case, I'm assuming the rule will encourage ball in hands, reduce kicks and therefore would avoid the "incessant 'marks'".

Burgs--As with most scrum halves, I'd always envisioned myself as being capable of playing any position in the backs until my one (and might I add, only) attempt at fullback later in my rugby "career". A few garryowens in the first 5 minutes quickly dispelled any preconceived heroic fantasies of being the "last line of defense".

Finally, as with the chip kick, the garryowen will remain an option for a player who believes he (or his teammates) has a chance at challenging for the ball in mid air. The law would presumably eliminate or reduce mindless kicking and encourage a more realistic approach as just mentioned. I don't envisage this rule being introduced but what the hell, there isn't much else happening on the rugby front at the moment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KenyaQuin

Grubber kicks are risky and less reliable and I don't foresee an significant increase.

---

Define "risky". Under the ELVs, the risk of getting isolated or outnumbered at the breakdown has the players prepared to aimlessly kick possession away. What are they risking by trying to kick the ball hard and low instead?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KenyaQuin

...as with the chip kick, the garryowen will remain an option for a player who believes he (or his teammates) has a chance at challenging for the ball in mid air

---

With the chip kick maybe, so long as there was absolutely no risk of someone getting under the ball. I still think the garryowen would be completely off the menu. Another way of looking at your change would be to say that a mark, anywhere on the field, would give the marking team a penalty kick to touch. No-one is going to put up a kick if the 50-50 outcome is an opposition line-out back in your own half.

Thanks Andy..you're really making me work for this. By risky (re grubbers) I mean that the shape of the ball makes it a little unpredictable (ball might bounce straight up, keep rolling, take a bounce and head in another direction etc).

As for the garryowens, there will be much fewer (maybe as low as one or two a game if any) however if you have a shaky full back and teammates ready to chase the ball down..the option's there.

I did make provision for the marking team to have an option to kick the ball out on the full and receive the subsequent lineout. As you said, a player would be reluctant to kick a high ball and face the prospect of a defensive lineout in his half (unless they are prepared to challenge for the ball).

Sure grubbers might bounce unpredictably and you may not regain it, but at the moment they are not trying anyway - they're just playing forcies back. But don't get me wrong, I'm not saying you've got a bad idea, just one with side effects. I think the players are kicking a lot under the ELVs because they would rather hand possession over in the oppositions half than have it turned over at the breakdown in their own half. So long as that is the case, they will still find ways to dispose of the ball downfield. There would probably be a lot less kicking if the existing breakdown laws were retained, although I'd still like to see free kicks (taps) rather than penalties. Change the mark rule as you've proposed and the only kicking would then be clearances to touch from within the 22, positional kicking into open space behind the line, the odd grubber through and the even rarer chip kick. Not necessarily a bad idea, but maybe overkill.

its a good idea and it would reduce the number on kicks in the game but i like the kicks outside the 22.

Getting attacking kicks under presure perfect takes alot of practice and you should be rewarded for getting it right. There is already a big risk in kicking the ball outside your 22 i dont think it needs to get bigger.

who not we just rename sport 'forcings back'? I'm sure the force fans would like such name.