LAW CHANGES | WHAT'S GOING ON?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 22 бер 2024
- Previous video I mentioned: • LAW CHANGES | TO HELP ...
World Rugby have some immediate changes, some likely changes and some possible changes. I agree with some strongly, and similarly disagree with others...what do YOU think? - Спорт
THE PREVIOUS VIDEO I MENTION. I covered some of these topics a few months back, here: ua-cam.com/video/z4G89rQ-mGY/v-deo.html
The last RWC finals from QF to Final were close games.No lopsided victories.South Africas last three saw a winning margin of only 1 point.Fine tune but do not water down the scrum.
Tim I think you made it onto Chasing the Sun 2, well I’m pretty sure I heard your voice in episode 1
Scrummaging is at the heart of what makes rugby union, rugby union. Why not just convert to league if you don’t value the scrum?
100%
More rugby, better players and why not ???
@@johnnypickles5256 Ahh yes, seeing 1 player try to break the other team's line by himself is very interesting. What a team sport.
The problem is scrums are hit and miss these days and have been for a very long time
Scrums have been hit or miss for a long time
Time off on the scrum as it forms - time back on when they set - time off if they have to reset - repeat
Only issue with that is that rugby isn't football. In a lot of countries, they will struggle to get that proposal past broadcasters as it makes the length of games unpredictable. If the rugby will get 1 mil viewers, and football afterwards gets 4 mil, broadcasters will prioritise the football. That means they will not broadcast the rugby, or they will switch over before the game has finished, due to delays, to show the football.
You describe stop clock as in basketball. Have you seen how many times the clock stops in certain situations, it’s outrageously manipulated by the best of coaches, I did a series of BB coaching certain and you are taught how to do that. It would go on for ever.
This. This is why I think people say scrums take up too much time. Its from people watching a scrum go down in the final 10 mins of a half and say your team is down 2 points. And then everyone realisises that at minumum a scrum will take up 3 mins but final 10 mins its going to go down. so that turns into 5 mins. And this team who should have had to defend there lead with 10 mins to go end up only having to do it for 5. No one says "damn that scrum at the 20th min took way too long. Its slowing down the game too much". Its basically from watching it in the final mins of the game. Same with the shot clock. Basically time off when a scrum is called. Time on, set, push, goes down blows and time off for a scrum reset. if its a pen or free kick, they cant take it quick anyway so its just "Ok time off, heres what you did wrong and why it was given (They could even have a slow mo of what was called out) back 10 ect, Time On." All is good. Don't listen to the others in the thread. you've hit the issue right on the head with that one
Even better, keep the clock going if they must, but have count down timers to receive penalties if a team delays getting to any set pieces. That’s the one thing from league they should be looking at, not getting rid of scrums. Look at old footage of scrums, they just ran in and got on with it. Yeah, give them 10-15 seconds now to get set properly with the improved modern techniques, but penalise the time wasting. Cherry on top, teach referees how to scrummage themselves, so they know how it works and they can make the right calls!
Make the scrum half put the ball in straight instead of practically putting it in to the second row as they do now.
I am an old man of 73, and played my rugby in the Royal Navy all over the world, I was of slight build but I agree, the scrum IS rugby , the ball should be fed straight and contested, Love your channel
i watched a Top14 France game on 30 March 2024 and saw how a scrumhalf nearly put the ball in under the eight-man's feet, whats use of a scrum then,
Crooked in [“very crooked”] seems to be ok now….?
Removal of the scrum option for a free kick leads to situations where a team is rewarded for infringing (because it means they don't have to face another scrum that they may not have enjoyed facing). Obviously that's stupid.
I love the varied strategies that can be explored and used in rugby because of all its different competitive elements. Scrums, lineouts, goal kicking, drop goals, mauls, pick and go, punting, box kicking, running rugby, 7-2 bench splits. You can build a successful team in so many different ways and focusing on strengths and avoiding your weaknesses as much as you can. Having more options to restart play when the opposing team either infringes or make a technical error is what makes the game so interesting in my mind.
I'm Irish but I love Rassie. He clearly knows how to strategise and play to his strengths. I don't want the game to devolve and become more simple in this sense. I like the complexities and different way people approach a game. League is boring, in my opinion.
EXACTLY! One yteam has success one way and then the game evolves in response. I LOVE that aspect. South Africa changed so much 2019 to 2023 as well...that's WHY they won again.
@@EggchasersRugby Too right. One thing I'd be interested in your (and others) opinions on.
I think the only real law that was CRYING out to be binned (aside from croc rolling) is the attack and momentum-killing 'goalline dropout' reward to the defensive team for holding the ball up when an attacking team crosses the try line. I never understood that change originally. Looking at that certainly makes more sense than most of these changes in my mind.
League is like basket ball. Great athletes and display of athleticism but boring to watch.
Is there really that much variety though? International rugby is basically some form of rush defence, lots of kicking from both sides, attempts to gain penalties from a breakdown and then kicks to the line & maul drives. The only major deviation from that pattern over the last 8 or so years has been the creative strike plays various teams and coaches have developed where instead of being a first phase strike it develops over several phases. But the majority of strategy has devolved to most teams playing pretty much the same way - its a far cry from what things were like in the 90s.
@@JimmyKipa far cry from the 90s? when defences were pretty much non existent, over 50 lineouts and over 100 kicks per game (most were aimless or to touch) was a regular occurrence, scrums were dangerous, general play was messy and unstructured, where ball in play was significantly lower and “skillful” attacking play was mostly passing through the hands quickly enough to get around a non-existent defensive structure or giving it to a quick bloke who can run a bit faster around his opposite number? Those 90s?
Do yourself a favour, go and actually watch the FULL games from the 90s (not just the flashy highlights). It really wasn’t as “amazing” as many people think it was.
in regards to the scrum, why is the ball never put in straight?
That's the worst thing with scrums,all the rest is just people gurning because they want rid of scrums.Yes,resets are annoying but get over it,it's not rugby league.
It used to be
Totally. I think the ball should left dead centre on the ground, and, inverse to how the ref shouts "use it" at rucks, neither hooker should be allowed to compete until the ref is satisfied that it's sturdy. The argument that there is then no advantage for the team who wins the scrum is moot, because the only way currently is if your front 5 are SA and are so overwhelming it becomes a penalty, and there'd be shenanigans if they did have it passed into the middle regardless.
It was kinda ignored at the same time as scrummies and 8ths were allowed to reach into a scrum to pull the ball out.
Both benefit the weaker team.
There has been plenty of effort put into depowering the scrum (and maul).
If they put the ball in straight, the scrum will be more contested which would be better too.
Players, especially props, spend their entire lives honing their skill and techniques in scrummaging. Rule changes like this makes obselete decades of strength training and thousands of hours of scrum machine practice and thus will destroy many honed careers.
They'll be replaced by smaller lighter players. Of course that will make attacking harder because the field's more crowded, but that can be solved by getting rid of two players.
This is the best thing that could possibly happen to South Africa. I'm not kidding. The Boks are at their best when their backs are up against the wall and nothing puts their backs up against the wall quicker than a World Rugby initiative that disproportionately effects them. Rassie couldn't have drafted a better script for his team talks. His team will work on a series of on-field strategies to adapt the SA game and come 2027 the Boks will be a much changed side from the 2023 vintage. Thanks, Warren. You've outdone yourself again.
💯💯💯💯💯
Yes but we now need to get rid of these totally unqualified administrators ruining OUR sport. It’s not their sport.
Administrators know nothing about the game one of the SA representatives is a woman for God’s sake.
@@Wolf-hh4rvI knew an ex springbok who actually chased one of the most famous anc protea types out of the vip box at Newlands for insulting some female bystanders .. 😊 these days though, good luck getting rid of the dead wood.
Nothing stopping SA fielding 8 loose forwards if they're not going to allow scrum resets.
Well said.
Tim, we need more commentators like u in Rugby Union! The appreciation for scrums isn't taught to fans, it's so fundamental to the game. Rugby Union is Rugby Union. Why are we so ashamed of physicality, the collisions, the Scrums. No other sports tinkers so much with its rules as Rugby Union because we say it should be more like League.
Thats why League is the better spectator sport! Its faster, fewer breaks in play, very few kicks, only at the 6 th tackle. And scrums don't take 20 minutes to sort out possession. Crouch, hold, bind, set, kiss! WTF!!!!!
@@ianhaynes3127Actually rugby league stops at every tackle. Strictly speaking when the ref calls tackle, the game is stopped and the ball carrier has to restart the game with a "play the ball".
A scrum is supposed to restart the game so the clock should stop as soon as a scrum is called and start again automatically at the bind.
If they want to disallow an attacking team taking another scrum because the defending team commited an offense at the scrum and gave away a free kick, then they need to change that free kick to a full penalty. Otherwise teams that play teams like the Spingboks will delliberatelly give away a free kick at a scrum so that they dont have to scrum against the Boks.
Also the changes that brought in "crouch, touch, pause, engage" has created more problems. They need to go back to the "crouch, set, engage" method. Players know to grab onto their opposition when they are getting set. Scrums are inherently unstable untill you get that hit from the other side to settle it. Fewer pauses in getting the scrum ready will mean fewer unbalanced hits and players going to ground.
Why'd they ever institute "pause" anyway? If the opposing packs are set in the appropriate places, there should be no excess momentum going into the meeting of the front rows, so the pause is superfluous at best.
PK is the answer. Make it hurt the offending team and you’ll soon see it being coached properly.
@@goodmaro Just change "pause" to "set" and you have your answer.
I vote for Tim as new head of WR !!
Who are the people at World Rugby? They need to be answerable to us the players and fans. No one is interested in their ambition to get Mexico playing rugby
Du you hate him that much? :-P
Got my vote too.
I hope the US gets big in to rugby in time for the world cups they are hosting. Then I hope they become the biggest player in WR by virtue of $$$.
Then I hope they sort this nonsense out.
The Best Rugby Pundit Around. Between Tim and Ian Hamilton. I enjoy them both immensely. Knowledge, objective, unbiased, informative, and pleasure to listen to. Unlike those 3 stooges on the Breakdown show at a 100 X the budget. Tim puts them to shame as does Ian Hamilton.
From a Bok Supporter
He hates Wales though so no.
South Africa does XYZ:
World Rugby bans XYZ in new law changes.
From 1995, X brought the 22 kick rule and so on...but we good, we will continue being Boks for rugby not for IRB
There is no conspiracy here.The motives are exactly what they say, the world rugby council have three south africans, Mark Alexander (2016) Vanessa Doble (2019) Rian Oberholzer (2023). South African Mark Alexander sits on the executive board also, in addition to many other South africans within the governance structure. I think if there was a conspiracy going on, there would be plenty of people that would be speaking out.
That's not really what's happening. That's just Tim playing devil's advocate. They're trying to minimise scrummaging because it's boring and results in 10 minutes of resets and no one really likes watching it.
@@David-ud9ju Well that was a lie
@@David-ud9ju rugby league then. I'm out!
If the ball is put in straight in the scrums like the lineout you give the opposition a chance. Why straight in the line out but not on the scrum. It's just stupid. Also you may not advance if you are in front of the kicker until you are put onside. Again a simple rule and easy on the referee. In just about every kick off the players are on front of the kicker which greatly reduces the possibility of a counter attack. Simple rules make for a better game. Great show
Absolutely agree with you on the first rule re. Scrums. A team should be able to call a scrum whenever they want to wherever they want to. If teams complain then get better at scrumming bro! Once ref marks the scrum both sets of props should be at the mark in 10 seconds and then the ref can call a 15 second count for his next call of bind. If any team’s not ready then a free kick.
Your last remark defies it all...teams who do not want to scrum will on purpose give away a free kick.
The ammount of effort and technique forwards put into set piece lineouts and scrummaging is enormous.. the scrum is a brilliant display of brute strength like 2 bulls locking horns seeking dominance through raw power.. it's gladitorial that rugby union fans love ..
Sorry to hear about you being burgled, it's a very shitty feeling for your whole family.
Sorry to hear about the scrotes burgling you and I hope they find them! Love the content and agree that the laws are designed to disrupt SA.
Thanks. A major ball-ache but the channel is back again! Appreciate you watching.
@@user-nk9cw5md8lthat’s hardly a surprise.
@@user-nk9cw5md8lI’m sure you can focus purely on athleticism when you don’t also need to be durable
Hi Tim couldn’t agree more about speeding up time around the scrum set. However as an ex-prop its is necessary to clear the mud and grass from your studs as otherwise you reduce your grip and this can lead to collapses. Love your content keep up the great work!
Stop the clock for 15 seconds at start of scum when the time is up the teams must be ready straight away..
World Rugby bias against South Africa clearly on display.
You are 100 %correct.
Sore losers. This was to be expected when team and country has entitlement issues. Somebody did say then that we should expect changes in law to suit ... you know who.
That's what makes rugby great each nations plays a different brand of rugby unique to that country if everyone played rugby like New Zealand the game would be boring not to mention that the all blacks are the best at playing an expansive game so they will almost always come out on top if you try and beat them at their own game.
World rugby must not fall for this and change the rules in oder to promote a more expansive game in the hopes of attracting more viewers as they have done in the past it will only strengthen New Zealand rugby and handi cap teams like the springboks who play a more forward oriented game
AMEN! Exactly this. The different range of styles and approaches is what makes so many games.
I feel that Irish rugby club and international is the next closest to New Zealand’s rugby
I'm a kiwi and from my perspective, the game has been slowed down with clock stoppages etc. I don't think it was to inhibit NZ specifically, but fatiguing opponents has always been part of NZ strategy and that's not possible ATM. So NZ has been handicapped in the last 8-10 years. I agree with you re the scrum laws, I just want the stoppages gone, and otherwise, leave the game alone
Anyone remember the old Springboks matches where they actually played entertaining rugby? Just me? Okay.
@@icefarrow7959 Yeah just you mate
Leave the scrums alone!
Agree.
No scrums - No Union
I’m worried World Rugby are letting themselves be influenced by wider societal issues. Society in general is moving away physicality and confrontation. It seems they are trying to distance the game from what is seen as ‘toxic masculinity’ and the traits that go with it in a bid to appeal to those individuals. Let’s not forget that the jeopardy and potential consequences of devastating collisions make the footwork, deftness and ability of players like Chelsin Kolbe to avoid the hit is just as exciting, impressive and inspiring as the hit itself.
It sure seems like it, especially with this mixed bag of laws being trialed yet doomed to fail IMO instead especially on the scrum being affected as an option.
WR has been sweet fakol these days with laws coming out of their arses like farts these days.
I'd say you are right that World Rugby are letting themselves be influenced by wider societal issues. So they should. Sport is part of society. It serves social functions, and can also have negative social consequences. Historically, a lot of the more violent sports were basically poor people harming each other for the entertainment of rich people, and that's a legacy worth moving away from. From that point of view, it makes sense that player welfare is getting increased focus. And I think it's a good thing that most contact sports are trying to put measures in place that will mean less former players suffering life-long after effects such as CTE or spinal injuries. BUT, I think there still has to be an option for people who wish to knowingly take the risks to play contact sports. It would seem a bit contradictory if any contact sports ended up ruining its spectacle in an effort to remove any chance of concussion, while society still allows boxing and other combat sports where people are literally trying to concuss each other.
I suspect that as professional athletes, rugby players will not want to accept water bottles from people outside of their teams. There are risks of supplement contamination, transmission of viruses, sabotage and players can't specify their preferred isotonic drinks etc.
Why not just ban Neil Jenkins? Most other water carriers bring water/instructions onto the pitch and manage not to abuse the referee!
As professional athletes, they should be able to play 40 minutes of rugby without needing water.
@@David-ud9ju really???? You go and tell them!!! Even tell that to a cricketer on the boundary after he has bowled his over. Really dumb comment. Rather just go to your dunce corner
@@David-ud9juNo. As professional athletes they know it's essential to keep their hydration at optimum levels. Don't be a numpty, go and study some human biology and sports science.
With water and neutral water carriers provided by the sport's organising body, I don't see why contamination would be a significant risk. And the players can have their special isotonics etc. at the breaks - water should be adequate for hydration during play.
@@BenDRobinson there is no such thing as "Neutral Water Carriers". Whether we like it or not be all have our individual biases and one such bias could get a player a 4 years suspension. This cannot work.
Hi Tim no matter what they throw at us as South Africans on the rule changing in Rugby. I can promise you that when the next World Cup comes, we will still be the champions three four five or even six times in a row. You guys wanna know why ? We got Rassie and he is by far a Rugby genius guys do yourself a favour go watch chasing the sun and chasing the sun 2 and you will understand why i say what i say. Even if they wanna hurt us by changing the rules we will find a way to use it at our advantage and make it work for us. Go Bokke champions for life. thanks Tim for a great channel.
oh no sorry to hear about your burglary - hope nothing irreplaceable was taken or destroyed. Excited to know you have a new venture! Thanks again for another cool vid - very much agree with you about the new / proposed law changes.
A real mixed bag.
The scrums were some of the most memorable and iconic moments of the last WC and it wasn't just when South Africa played.
Might as well kiss and make up with Rugby League and unify.
I will also add that various big law changes since the 90s have disadvantaged South Africa.
As a former prop im biased but i think we need more FASTER scrums
Totally agree with faster.
With reference to the scrum. In the last 20 or 15mins of a game, if a scrum is called the clock stops and restarts when the scrum is set.
Scrums are essential and a massive part of the game.
One of the things about rugby is, it’s a game for all, big and small.
Doing away with scrums will be a sad day.
Unfortunately for Wales, they are saddled with Warren Gatland, who inmo doesn’t inspire, harbours grudges and has pent up, dam busting negative energy, which is contagious.
I have said since the Lions tour to SA when he was trying to play mind games where he lost. He is a bitter and twisted old grumpy man and he needs to just go away
Are you thick? Rugby is not for all, big and small Dr Seuss. That's football. Rugby has 95% of pro players over 6ft tall and less than 1% under 5'9"
@@dxfifa...oh. I didn't realize only pro-players play rugby! I went to a rugby school with 13 open sides. Brother...big and small.
Its not the scrum thats the problem, its the biased refs + the way they interpretate to favour the particular team
Scrums are great and an important part of rugby, but they should be used to restart the game. Why should a team with a weaker scrum be in a position that every scrum could result in a penalty against them, even if it was their put in? That's why England lost to SA. A penalty should be awarded for an offence, not simply because you're stronger.
IMO, the scrum should be over once it has moved 3 metres and the ref should call use it. The same applies to the fiasco of the rolling maul, where 7 men basically shepherd the ball carrier - let it go 3 metres then it's over. Otherwise, allow the defenders to pull the maul down.
I would also like to see the rule regarding putting the ball in straight applied as it is in lineouts. Why are we so strict on one but not the other?
I totally agree that the setpiece related changes are to target SA. As a former loosehead i guess i have a bias, but i think its bullshit. As a chubby little kid i was never picked to play football, but rugby always had a spot for me. I also think it takes away from the game. I mean who doesn't want to see 16 behemoths with a combined weight of ±1.7 tons pushing each other
I don’t want to see it, that’s who
@@thecuttingsark5094 well not to be rude but rugby league is always an option
Then unfortunately you my friend only identify as a man.@@thecuttingsark5094
@@thecuttingsark5094 well rugby league is the code for you then, bye
Go watch league bro lmfao@@thecuttingsark5094
I played loosehead. The aggression and power you get to exert, and sometimes have to face, is exciting. I also agree that the collisions are a major part of why I played rugby.
Another issue with the new proposed scrum change is that it may completely get rid of scrums. I think this was hinted at in the video but if i wanted to game the system i would simply not play with props. At scrum time i would scrum down but cause a free kick and than i woukd have a massive advantage by not having props being slow around the field
Same shit different day... Imagine this happening in another sport? We had some of the best games in the RWC that we have ever seen, why on earth change things ???
If you dont line scrums watch rugby league rather than union. rugby is a contact sport we all know the risk before stepping on the field play. I have broken bones, torn muscles and my fair share of concussion while playing however if going back i would do it all again. I love this sport its by far my favorite.
Universally agreed the SA/France and SA/Ireland were the best games at the World Cup. One apparently best ever game…..the scrums, the legendary Willemse fists … part of the theatre. The NZ/italy and NZ/Argentina semi blow outs were totally forgettable. And Foster says the semi was a “advert” for the game
WR shooting themselves in the foot here. Games in a great place
Someone else said that when a caterpillar ruck is formed the scrum half is technically entering from the side to roll back the ball. Enforcing that they must enter from the back could reduce the usage of caterpillars
A few years ago in the Premiership a referee told the props that he would yellow card them both if the scrum collapsed for the third time and bring on new props to replace them. The scrums did not collapse after that. So many referees get the calls wrong and rather than reset will offer a full penalty not really knowing who's at fault. It does need sorting but I agree scrummaging needs to stay.
Always enjoy your channel & comment! I fully agree with you regarding the scrums. I cannot help but wonder what influence senior coaches & pundits have with world rugby...names like NZ's JK & Gatland
Speed up the scrum resets but don't depower it by giving struggling scrummages an easy out. They need to fight their way out of it if they are being beaten in the scrum. By avoiding giving away scrums or scrummaging better. Scrum penalties I don't know enough about to comment if they are always fair/right calls?? Or does the ref in crucial moments go with who they think is the dominant scrum? Dunno. Totally agree one of rugbys biggest strengths is you need all shapes and sizes of player to make an effective team. Love that aspect. The other is the jeopardy of impact and physicality. We just love it.
Thanks for an amazing channel Tim. I think that's a balanced prognosis of the issue. I do think largely the law changes are positive, I think there are better ways to manage the scum. You didn't mention the analysis of subs. Between Matt Walsh, John Kerwin and Warren Gatlin they've been very effective at swaying world rugby's opinion. The game is great because of the contrasting styles you can use to win. They are sanitising the game this will backfire.
Yes I agree they are poisoning the game just for the sake of snying Rassie and then secondly to do the Boks in because of their own weaknesses. By the way (sarcastically) who is the dumb fool matt williams who is also calling for this
The scrum is Union's USP. Always seems world rugby changes the laws if a team is very good at specific aspect of the game. Same with exeter and their latching around the try line.
World Rugby is corrupt. Period!!!
Thank you that you are so honest. Certainly not the rest of the UK. Get rid of the Springboks at all cost but don't underestimate Rassie. He will find a way around it
How is the rest of the UK dishonest/corrupt?
Very good Tim , thanks for doing a video on these new rules 👏🏻 sorry to hear about the burglary.
There is no point or purpose in having a scrum if there is zero chance of a heel against the head. I cannot recall seeing a heel against the head in internati9onal Rugby in the professional era. In the amateur era the "tight head count" was a key statistic of the game and the opportunity,. two or three times in a game, to attack with "surprise" possession (and to defend against such an attack) was an important skill for a three quarter line. Rugby is a VERY physical game. The scrummage is the most physical (and therefore most dangerous) aspect of that very physical game, and front-row play is the most dangerous specialism of the most dangerous aspect of a very physical game. I wholeheartedly welcome the substitution rules having been adjusted to ensure that only those properly equipped to play in the 1 - 2 - 3 positions are allowed to do so, and I would welcome, at international level, further developments along those lines, perhaps with an additional three "front row specialist" substitutes allowed in order to make absolutely certain that correctly trained people occupy those positions in the vent of any possible combination of red or yellow cards, or injury. All that said, can we please restore the put-in requirements of the amateur era in order to give a distant-but-possible chance of a tight-head strike once or twice in the course of a game?
If you want to speed up scrums take the set up time off the clock
Only start the clock once the ref says “set” in the sequence just before ball is put in.
When play stops for a knock on stop the clock, turn it back on when ref says set.
Scrums, rucks and mauls are the very HEART of Rugby Union. The only thing wrong with scrums is the amount of game-time that is eaten up with re-sets.
This can easily be cured by stopping the game clock as the first scrum breaks down until the ball emerges successfully. Easy-peasy.
Rucking is completely gone from the game
The scrum issue is easy, when a scrum is called you turn the clock off, when the ref shouts set the clock restarts
NO. Setting up the scrum is part of the game.
Great video. I would be interested to know your view on reducing the time it takes to put the ball into the scrum. Once the ref calls set, the team putting the ball in waits in the hope they get a penalty but also the ref may blow up as the scrum spins, collapses etc. the latter wastes time. A new rule should be the player has two secs to put the ball in from when the referee calls set and the ball must be put in straight, drives me mad it goes in on the 45. If the ball does not go in on time the opposing team get the ball.
see my longer comment for suggestion re feed - feed straight but no rucking the ball until its second bounce
I like your water stations and water boys suggestions! I want to add that the play should not stop when a team wants to make replacements. Instead the team may only make replacements once play stops (for a try, penalty, injury), not during scrums and line outs.
I do agree with the time it takes to form a scrum and depending on the ref ,it can take an age to set and reset. I feel if a scrum isnt set 1st time ,clock has to stop everytime as teams are purposely doing it and knowing certain refs isnt strong enough to stop the clock. And "use it" I do agree needs to be enforced.
I THOUROUGHLY agree with the all shapes and sizes argument. I would add « skills ». We need to protect and defend all aspects of the game : the kicking, scrummaging, running, etc. because they represent this diversity.
I love games having this diversity, including diversity of ways to win. For offence, it means many ways to success, but importantly it also means that for defence you need to cover all those different forms of attack that you might come up against, and as a team you need to have the depth and diversity in your squad to pick the right players for whatever you come up against. All of which makes it more interesting! And yes union has a wonderful diversity of skills compared to league... as someone from a more kicking-oriented game (Australian Rules) I like that union has much more reward for kicking skills.
The problem with scrums is there are too many rules. If it gets twisted, so what, a team in control will make it an advantage. In the good old days it was not penalised because the team with the ball ends up with all their forwards behind the ball with the opposition forwards all off side behind them. If another team rolls across the top of their opposition it doesn’t need a penalty that is a huge advantage in itself. If a prop puts their arm on the ground so what you have a more stable scrum. If an opposition prop pops up smash him backwards it’s a huge advantage. We are awarding penalties which are an overwhelming advantage for dominance which is its own advantage. We award penalties for scrum dominance which to me is like awarding a penalty to a winger who burns their opposition on the outside with speed.
Bring on more scrum mayhem, now that will really make the game interesting.
Suggest clock STOP when ball is in touch until play restarts. This should apply even after a try, goal kick or kicked out during general play. More game time and gives players chance to recover and regroup. Stephan from Australia.
Completely agree with the scrum law change - I played tight head prop and winning a scrum penalty was better than scoring a try (probs cos they rarely happened...). Add a stop clock to scrum setups if need be to speed that up but stopping a pack who know they're dominant the chance to either gain territory through the scrum and subsequent set piece move or win a penalty is unfair
If you want to get rid of the messy delays at scrum time - you need to change the process of engagement. It has never made sense. Every ref calls out the orders at a different pace, meaning there is never any consistency, and let's not forget that three word sequence was introduced to stop the problem of uncoordinated clashes as the two packs bang into each other. The thing is, the two packs still bang into each other and often in an uncoordinated way.
Just get rid of the 'lunge' as the packs engage. Get the front threes bound and engaged with each other - should take seconds to get a stable foundation - and you remove that 'pre shove' element that causes so many delays as the packs vie for any advantage before the ball goes in.
But I have a feeling that the 'rutting snort' of the initial clash is what turns some people on, so I doubt that idea would gain traction.
?????????
@@derekallan1341
what don't you understand?
Future law changes, no teams with antelopes on their emblems.
The EFF would love this change though.
@@ThatGuy-sw2xe 🤣🤣🤣🤣 The EFF would have worse law changes. If it was up to them Rugby as a sport would be disbanded in SA.
Ironically, it is the scrum that attracts new people (the what is that factor).
Whenever the springboks are number one all the laws must change for others to catch up!
I agree but they also did change breakdown and offside laws because of McCaw and abs
Actually they pretty much wiped out mauls when the All Blacks were dominating the game, so welcome to the club.
Yes and that’s only fair…..😂
@@skibbitybopmdada no it was because Heinrich broussow was dominating McCaw in 2009
@wilfredsmith183 and then he disappeared into mediocrity
…one of your most significant videos éver Tim…THANK YOU
The focus on scrums and ‘rugby for all shapes and sizes’ being at the core of it…
This world rugby move on scrums is a witch hunt‼️
🪖
Love your opinion on almost all of the proposed changes. Would love to see a ref telling the players to do something and then they actually listen. Use it means “use it”! Another thing which bothers me is if the kicker going for touch indicates the “correct” spot to which the ref agrees to and then when the ref looks away the kicker oversteps the mark by almost 3-4 metres!!!
Thank you for your experience and explanation of the rules. Totally agree with scrum rule. Rugby offers players of all sizes opportunity to enjoy they game. With this rule change you will start seeing teams basically picking 15 wing built players. Running rugby is great to see but do you really want to watch 15 guys play 7s style rugby.
this we do not need
Hey teacher leave the scrums alone.Lol
100% agree regarding scrums. It is one of the special elements of the sport which combines both the technical and power elements of the game. I do wish we could get birds-eye view shots of the scrum on the coverage though.
Agree, scrum is one of the fundamental parts of union.
I agree with everything you said. Keep scrums as they are (with or without the straight put in, I'm happy either way) but just make sure players set quickly.
Scrums were always allowed but were just not taken. It could have been interesting to see more teams take the scrum option. Come on World Rugby you are better than that!
Agree with every point you made; and there’s probably a hint of getting at SA in the scrum one
The chances of the marginal law change satisfying any critic have to be near zero. Why not run the game for the people that like it, not the hypothetical would-be convert currently rejecting rugby because of the rules. The statement from Bill Beaumont was ridiculous in implying rule changes will bring in more fans.
I note you touched on the issue of feeding the ball straight into scrums. I was shocked to watch some rugby recently and see the feeds going straight to the second row just as you mentioned. It appeared there was no rule about feeding it in straight at all. (And that was the start of the end of scrums in rugby league. Once it was automatic possession to the team with the feed, the whole thing became pointless and now rugby league scrums don't even engage and push. I've seen where the second row don't even get around to bending over!) I think line-outs are a brilliant part of rugby because they strike the right balance of providing a genuine contest while still favouring the team with the throw, and ideally scrums should strike that balance too. So here was an idea I came up with for scrums... (i) absolutely enforce the feed going in straight, but (ii) the players in the ruck are not allowed play the ball until it has either bounced and hit the ground a second time, or it has become clear that it is not bouncing (i.e. it has broken into a roll or stopped altogether). The idea is that it should be possible to put the right skew on the ball to have it bounce towards your players, hence providing an advantage, but that this advantage is nowhere near as generous as the current lassitude allowing the feed to go straight to your own team. One drawback I see is that in muddy conditions there would be little or no bounce, negating the advantage. But especially at higher levels of sport, grounds are maintained so well now that mudbath games are not so common.
Great job again Tim, I agree wholeheartedly - take kicks and scrums and impacts out of the game and what have you got left? I can't imaging it but I'm sure it will be one-dimensional and relatively dull.
Dead time is the time it takes to set a scrum. It's difficult to speed up scrums because of safety. It's not so easy to say we can speed it up.
Why not just stop clock from moment whistle blows until “crouch…” is called or lineout set?
Totally agree. I really don’t mind waiting couple of minutes to get the scrum right.
All aimed at the Springboks.
It seems there are two issues at play. Running down the game clock - which is easily fixed by stopping the game clock as many have observed, and slowing the actual spectacle for the viewer, which is not so easily fixed. And the pace of the entertainment can be an issue with sports. But, compared to many other sports, I don't think RU suffers from too many pauses in play so I don't think it's time to panic on that front just yet. (Compare watching tennis or cricket or NFL... which people still do apparently.)
I totally agree. World rugby will not stop Rassie from innovating. I am sure he has anticipated the rule changes. This is precisely why Jaco Peyper has been appointed as the rules coach.
BTW Egg Chasers, in Hong Kong Sevens this weekend, they have introduced automatic 7 point try if you score under the posts. No conversion needed.
I appreciate you talking about the tackle height changes. Here in scotland, it has ultimately changed a lot about the game. The inability to target the ball in a tackle massively changes the offload game. Over the last year, it's something we have all had to learn to adapt to. Much less ripping of the ball in a tackle, much fewer mauls in open play. Watching the six nations feels like watching a different game.
Also, i do not want a stop clock on scrums. If we're changing the game so much for safety to the point where lots of good competitive technique is now illegal, i have no idea how they can claim that speeding up the setting of a scrum, especially a repeat after it already slipped, is good for safety. By all means, stop the clock for 30 seconds to let everyone clean their boots, and get rebound. But several refs have really pushed us to get bound quicker, and im like, this is eight people who need to get bound in a very specific secure way, hold back on the push and then start it at a certain time. If any of that is rushed through, that can be one persons spine taking the shove of the whole opposition in a poor posution. As a hooker, please give me time to get bound, and get my second rows in before shouting crouch.
Height changes? Do they no longer allow tackling up to the shoulders?
@@goodmaro nope, in scotland at amateur level, it has to be below the sternum. Usually that means below the ball. You can't target the ball in a tackle if you are the first tackler. A second person is allowed to target the ball during a tackle but they mustn't share headspace with the attacker. It obviously really changes the kinds of defence you can use on the try line. And it has really encouraged more offloading.
Really good point about scrum safety. The scrum is a beautiful feature of the game which would be great to preserve, but it is certainly dangerous and rushing the preparation seems like a bad idea! Avoiding scrum collapses does seem to be an enormous challenge. I can't see how the refs can work out who is at fault. No easy solutions there.
Why not just give the Ref the power to stop the clock at the scrum if teams are taking forever to form up or if it needs a reset. This would allow time to used for play rather than set-ups. If the scrum is neutered then it will go the way of League and just be a quick method of restarting with no jeopardy. But please, please, please get No.9s to feed the ball straight :)
100%!
I have always thought that the clock should stop when a scrum is awarded and only re-start when the ball has been put in straight!
@@guypenrose5477and line outs
Well said Tim. Agree with all of your points.
I am a bit more dubious of the use it once change. It will just kill good sustained mauls unless the refs are quite lenient on the concept of a stopped maul.
In theory I can conceive of there being a type of free kick that couldn't be converted to a scrum, but certainly NOT for scrum related offences.
From the point at which a scrum or lineout is called we need a timer. If both a slow the penalty goes to the attacking team otherwise the delaying team gets penalised.
We also need to enforce the ball down the middle in scrums, it would make them even more interesting.
I think the scrum should stay as is, but just implement a timer. That way, even teams that struggle at scrum time can gain the upper hand if they're fitter. You'd think twice about calling a scrum as often as possible if it didn't also give your huge pack all the time in the world to catch their breath. Obviously, it'd be better to watch too.
biggest load of bull. Those players are fitter than you. Stop reading the sh;t i the newspaper
Looking forward to why you were in SW of France... and in particular in my hometown's club changing room... 😉
Would love to know your thoughts on the TMO in the Sarries game Tim, caught admitting he can hear commentators and letting that affect his calls
A shot clock for scrums especially would be bizarre - there are 16 players that need to get safely set up and having a time pressure on that will lead to poor quality and unsafe scrummaging
So I'm sitting in the stands having paid a weeks wages to watch the game and I get scrum reset, scrum reset scrum penalty. 15mins of ball in play time gone, I rest my case.
The ABs dominate rugby for a century, so Bill Beaumont and co at IRB change the rules to slow the game down, which suits the Northern Hemisphere and its ponderous referees. The game becomes a boring kickfest, with 20min video referee meetings, where the players spend more time standing around than playing. The day fitness and speed were negated, was the day rugby lost its core values....
Never heard a fan complain about time on scrum set-ups. These people are changing the game to get soccer fans to watch the game. Crazy. Next step is contact free rugby., the safety shit is out of control
Except that never happened. Ball in play time has been the same on average for thirty years. Actually a slight increase over time. ABs lost because they weren’t the best team anymore not because of maw changes
@@markwairepo2871not a century boks up until 98 had a positive record vs nz
The most annoying thing in rugby is the ref shouting "use it" I hate it. The ruck is an arm wrestle. If you have control at the back why should you use it? The opposition should commit more player and come and get it or shut up. That would open up more space for attacking rugby... My opinion is the ref can shout "available" and then no one can join the caterpillar.
If you want to speed up the game allow the team that scored to take a quick kick off if they wish.
My main gripe with scrums and line outs is how they've reduced the competition element. Putting the ball in diagonally to the 2nd row is essentially what happens in league. On lineouts i'd remove the lifting players and let them contest it equally. In the (very) recent England-Wales ladies game every Welsh throw went into the chest of the lifted player. How can that be straight?
If they want to reduce dead time around Scrums, the first one to drop his bind gets penalised. Once heard a suggestion that a Props jersey should have a handle on the side to bind to. Combine the two and you'll speed those scrums right up.
Excellent Tim. You’re the man. Mr Common Sence!
Always excited for the first scrum!
As the caterpillar forms, as soon as the 9 touches the ball, it’s out! Simple.
Great video, Tim! Love the candid analysis of the rules. My view is a little different. I love scrums too... was a forward and it is part of what makes rugby so unique as a contact sport for all sorts of body types. However, I wouldn't call it 'dead' time, either... but a free kick takes 10 seconds for a game to restart, and a scrum 2 minutes! So, with these rule changes we'll continue to see a scrum when a ball is knocked on, forward pass, crooked throw etc. but not if it's a free kick or penalty that should take 10 seconds to restart. I agree that scrums need to be hurried up too.
I used to love scrums when they were genuine contests of strenghts, seeing the Irish scrum steamroll the Scotish scrum in the 6 nations seemed a blast from the past but I was genuinely expecting the ref to give a penalty against Ireland because the modern scrum always seems to end in a penalty for some flip of a coin reason.
Exactly, why can't one team just bulldoze the other and continue with play. Why do we need to stop for a penalty or for some bizarre reason award the penalty against the team that clearly has the upper hand in the scrum?
@@burncarlowfirst one is safety reasons I believe. If you ever played as a prop (or hooker) and lost a scrum you know that being pushed back just a meter can really hurt a lot. Second one just modern rugby idiocy
@Bolognabeef you're right. Don't know what the answer is, but a penalty after every scrum is the reason people don't like scrums, not the scrum itself.
Referee already has the option to stop kickers standing around running down the shit clock. Law 7.9d would allow the referee to call it as time wasting. I've been at games this year where the kicker has stood talking to the ref rather than setting up the kick - just tell them to get on with it
We had an interesting one in Australian Rules last year. Players kicking for goal are allowed 30 seconds to take their kick, or so we all understood the rule. But apparently the umpire does have the discretion to call "play on" before that 30 seconds is up if they think the player is deliberately time wasting. I don't think anyone realised this until an umpire did it one day, and a player suddenly had tacklers rushing at him. In a way it was a bit unfortunate, because now players who want to systematically run down that 30 seconds still can, but we will have the farce of them acting out little movements that they can pretend are part of their kicking routine. On the other hand, none of us want to see what happens in US football, where systematic running down of the clock is such a big part of the game, and an utterly dismal thing to watch.
100% agree with your point at 3:00 mate. Would love to see WR limit how frequently a medic or water runner can come onto the field, or potentially even make it up to the referee to invite them on. When you rewatch a completed game you find yourself constantly skipping ahead 2-3 minutes every time a scrum is called because it takes so ling to set the thing.
Agree entirely with your view on scrums. Scrums are and always should be a fundamental part of the game. As you quite rightly point out, the current game offers all physical sizes and shapes an opportunity to play. The removal or weakening of the scrum will inevitably lead to a rugby league style scrum with 15 players of similar size with no room for those who don’t the standard sizes.
I do think the thinking behind calling a mark from restarts may encourage competition. Fly Halves will tend towards shorter kicks with longer hang times allowing more competition for the ball by the side kicking off.
9 gotta be the safest position on the pitch, behind all the big dudes
Not really, they're always close to the ball so every time us big dudes are too slow they need to do our job and clean the ruck, support the ball carrier...
Not sure about that. Always in the thick of the action at number 9.
So the protection is only to the player designated as halfback ???? What if a prop plays to pass the ball (which happens all the time) is he not now a halfback??? I don’t get that one
Interesting decision to change the laws.
There seems to be a concerted effort to neutralise the Springbok dominance in scrums and their ability to dominate teams physically.
Rassie and his team of coaches will find a counter to all these changes.
Mr Gatland and a few other coaches will find it very difficult to counter the incredible ability of this world cup winning team of Rassie.
He is an absolute genius.
They only won because 14 against 15 the green captain should of been sent off also and the disallowed try the ref broke their own rules so everything was in there favour
@@lesmondk3376The green captain was sent off idiot. And that in itself was a marginal call, it was nothing like the shoulder charge to the face of Cane. The Springboks only had a 1 man advantage for around 30mins of the game for all the red and yellow cards that were given. And credit to the ABs they atarted playing better when they were a man down so the red card actually help them. Up untill that point they were being battered by the Boks. The first "try" was rightly ruled out because of a AB misstake. The second "try" wasnt rulled out as it should have been. That ball was lost forward and then picked up by Smith, clear as day for anyone to see, but the refs were clearly told to favour the ABs in the second half. Game should have ended 11-3 to the Springboks because that was the total dominance they brought.
I'd like a different set of changes around the free kick law, including the mark behind the 22. Allow a free kick to be kicked directly into touch for a lineout (oh and keep the scrum option). Basically making it like an indirect penalty kick in soccer. Additionally, more infractions should be changed to free kick infractions, such as offensive ruck infringements (in the side, diving over, not releasing the ball), as well as most scrum infringements (I find it frustrating that a scrum penalty on a technicality can result in 3 points and swing a game). Categories that should stay as full arm penalties are foul play, offside infringements (including at set piece), and defensive ruck infringements (not rolling away, in the side, playing the ball on the ground, etc). Basically if more offensive infringements are free kicks instead of penalties, then attacking rugby carries more of an incentive and teams will be less incline to kick the ball away. Some kicking is great, but the caterpillar rucks and endless kick tennis are killing the game. Sorry for the rant.
It’s very simple, the matter goes to court and a judge decides if the changes are rational and determine if there is any bias , which is very easy to prove
Wish instead of targeting SA and intentionally trying to weaken them world rugby would enforce the laws we already have. For example why are scrummies allowed to basically put the ball in under the flankers legs instead of in the middle so it's contestable
100% agree. It's infuriating
They ain't removing the scrum just removing it for a free kick option
but that removes any tactical options teams have when they have won a free kick. just means more lineouts and those are not as interesting as scrums.
Exactly@@stanedgie5910 but less scrum time more game time maybe,
think to reduce the number of scrums@@stanedgie5910