What are the Laws/Rules that are being played to?

[The EnForcer]

I have not been keeping up with the rule changes, so if somebody can tell me or point me in the direction to find out it would be much appreciated.

In addition, are these Rules/Laws consistant throughout rugby? i.e. international, super, local, magners etc.

[beige]

My understanding is that it'll be the same as what was played on the Spring tours - and that it'll be like that everywhere until the World Cup - but someone will probably correct me.

[shasta]

I think Beige is right. The thing that probably differs from the NH at the moment is the directive to SANZAR referees to emphasise the rights of the player in possession at the tackle. They've been told that defenders must release the tackled player (law says that anyway), even if they are on their feet, before attempting to play the ball. Last year they were allowed to keep their hands on the pill, resulting in penalties for holding on, and the "kick it away" mindset.

[brokendown gunfighter]

"even if they are on their feet"?

when does it become a maul?

Eckey???

[AndyS]

As I understand it all laws are now consistent around the globe with no further experimentation, leading up to 2011. SANZAR has however given direction as to interpretation and application of certain existing laws, with the best summary I've seen being at http://www.rugby365.com/tournaments/...ws/2197340.htm.

[brokendown gunfighter]

I was getting confused(again/still!) between the tackler/tackled player on his feet


as you were

[shasta]

"even if they are on their feet"?

when does it become a maul?

Eckey???

When the ball carrier is still on his feet.

[brokendown gunfighter]

the tackler must release the ball.For an instant,one second ,two seconds?
the tackled player must play the ball immediatly--is that a nano second?
very much a grey area still

[GIGS20]

My understanding is, Tackler releases, regains his feet and plays the ball....unless of course a ruck has formed whilst he is regaining his feet in which case he must enter the ruck from an onside position.

The tackled player must release the ball immediately, I guess that'll be interpreted to be 'as soon as it's clear he's been tackled'

My concern in all this, is the concept of the ball carrier not being held. Surely as the season progresses tacklers will seek to release quicker and quicker in order to secure a turnover, This could lead to a tackler legally regaining his feet and continuing his run having not been held in the tackle.

Mark my words, that'll be the new holding penalty

[brokendown gunfighter]

next the ref will be yelling out "surrender"

[Burgs]

Only on the Continent...

[AndyS]

To be honest, I thought the laws were fairly clear on the tackle...

DEFINITIONS - A tackle occurs when the ball carrier is held by one or more opponents and is brought to ground.
15.3 BROUGHT TO THE GROUND DEFINED
(a) If the ball carrier has one knee or both knees on the ground, that player has been ‘brought to ground’.
(b) If the ball carrier is sitting on the ground, or on top of another player on the ground the ball carrier has been ‘brought to ground’.

I wouldn't have thought it will cause much more confusion than now - so long as he was being held when he hit the deck, he has been tackled.

[Lee Grant]

Somebody mentioned rule changes in this thread and I guess they are talking about the hoo haa on how referees are going to referee the Super14 come Friday.

They aren't rule changes or even law changes; they are announcements that certain laws which have been on the books for decades are actually going to be enforced by referees. It is an interesting concept.

Our game, at the professional level in particular, is being corrupted by referees observing some laws but not others. One of the laws they have deliberately ignored since the professional era started is the requirement for the tackler to release the tackled player as the first transaction of the tackle/ruck event.

We have seen superb athletes such as Marty Holah and Thierry Dusautoir (the best practitioners in the last decade IMO) tackle a player and use his momentum to stand above the ball carrier and then fish the ball out or get a penalty. We see that and hear the commentators say: "What a great player."

The thing is though, that they only managed that rotary momentum to get on their feet because they held onto the tackled player, otherwise their roll would have ended with them metres away.

To their credit the SANZAR referee bosses have realised that their refs are not conforming to the law as it is written and are now requiring them to do so. How did they realise this? They all ignored the release requirement themselves.

Perhaps by enabling the tackled player to present the ball fairly there may be a bit of continuity. Perhaps there can be other blitzes on laws one by one.

Will the S14 referees have the bottle to make sure this one law get observed? It sounds easy, but don't forget these are the same guys who cluck when a 15 metre lineout throw is a bit skew but allow 1M skew throws to the scrum.

---------- Post added at 00:42 ---------- Previous post was at 00:27 ----------

Good to see this in the Kiwi papers:

Rugby referees will be made publicly accountable for their decisions in the immediate wake of Super 14 rugby matches this season.

For the first time, referees will be available for media questioning of their performance, a move designed to make the game's whistlers and their decisions more transparent.

New Zealand Rugby Union's Lyndon Bray said there was a desire to take some of the mystery out of rugby's laws, while the referees themselves have agreed they would like to be publicly measured.

"They (referees) have probably always been slightly threatened in the past by the concept of facing up on TV after games," Bray told Radio Sport.

"We've all acknowledged this is probably an important step. It brings us into line with the coaches and the players, who also have to do this."

Referees have been in the spotlight in the leadup to this year's Super 14, announcing there will be an emphasis on enforcing breakdown interpretations more literally from the law book.

This, Bray said, should create a more flowing spectacle than the kick-dominated play of 2009.

He said yellow cards could be produced earlier in games this year to deal with players unwilling to adjust their attittude.



On another thread I mentioned that referees should be made more accountable by doing this and that, and it was not well received going by a few po-faced replies.

This is a good first step and let's hope that there are others. Let's all hope for the sake of the game that referees get promoted/demoted according to how they implement the laws as they are written and not on how they think they should be implemented.

There are not enough even ordinary Super14 referees to suspend them but giving the bigger games to the better performing refs will be better than nothing - and so will putting forward the names of those referees who get players to comply with the laws best, to referee test matches.

Doing this will help get rid of the aerial ping pong virus - but let's not go there right now.

[Burgs]

Consistency on Yellow Card offences is a big one with me, it shouldn’t matter if it is 5m out 2 points down with a minute to go, a 20 point margin just after half time or the first minute of the match, a Yellow Card should be a Yellow Card. If you have a few players getting Penalties while the match is rolling along and then suddenly out pops a Yellow to a first time offender, often a player who is just on the field, because suddenly the Ref feels it is impacting the scoreline then there is no wonder that players get frustrated.
I also get very frustrated with the discrepancy in the ruling on offensive and defensive Penalties. Both are having just as much impact on the flow of the match but when you ping the defensive team it invariably means a three point fine, even if as often the case the offensive team milked it.

[shasta]

out pops a Yellow to a first time offender,.

Depends, as always, on the situation at the time. Ferinstance, continually killing the ball under try line pressure. As long as there's been a clear team warning, the next offender MUST be carded. The big problem I see with yellow/red cards, in both Rugby codes, is their use for dealing with foul play without confirmation from the TMO. The on field refs get those wrong far too often.