THE END OF THE KICK TENNIS FARCE?! | Super Rugby Remove 'Dupont's Law'
Vložit
- čas přidán 12. 02. 2024
- There's been a lot of talk about the laws of rugby following the weekend when we saw the farcical situation of 26 men stodd still in the middle of the pitch whilst the remaining men played kick tennis between them. Have Super Rugby lead the way by removing "Dupont's Law"?
- Sport
Terrible rule and glad someone is trying to fix it. The caterpillar needs to go too. It will be interesting if someone pulls a hammy returning a kick or gets legally tackled and cant bring people onside. The opposition player will have clean unopposed run to the try line. I think an additional method could have been to also allow players to retreat 10/20m to bring themselves onside.
The problem with you last suggestion is, if there are 14 teammates in front of the kicker, the on-pitch officials now have to monitor 14 people to see how far they’ve retired.
@@langdalepaul Realistically they don't. They would only need to monitor the players in the vicinity of the ball carrier that get involved in the play. Plus this scenario would only come into play if the chasers aren't in position to chase. In most situations the 14 teammates will be brought onside by the chaser.
I just believe that rugby players are always looking for an edge over the opposition. Under the super rules smart players like Dupont will be telling teammates to follow legally follow through with the hit on the kicking player and hold on the ground an extra second. This would give the likes of Penaud and Bielle-Biarrey a clean run through the traffic.
No need to ban caterpillar, just enforce the 5s law in rucks. The referee should count 5s (like basketball referees do) when the ball is available.
Box kick rugby is exciting. Look at how Argentina demolished France twice in the 2007 RWC
Seems like you're grinding your brain to come up with a problem. Yeah it might happen but loads of things might happen and it's tough luck move on.
That is also why the Boks called scrum from the mark against France - make the pack leave that 10m area and come and scrum
Yep. Makes the move even smarter doesn't it!
@@EggchasersRugbyit's no wonder they won the wc back to back especially with the games they had clearly Jacques and Rassie had a clear tactical plan to win the wc rather than just score more points than the team they exposed their opponents strengths and used it as their weaknesses
@@Bennyy19True. Ironically it almost backfired against England both times. I bet if we can see SA in the final or the previous round again, we can take them out.
Spot on about the 'use it' call and the caterpillar ruck/box kick Tim...for a brief period a few years ago after the 5-second law was introduced, a few 9s did get pinged for taking too long and their teams lost possession. Now, it never happens. I'm not against (good) kicking but watching teams taking ages to set up before they kick is excruciating 😫
I don't understand why referees will say use it like 3 times and not penalise them. Shoukd only say it once. I have no issue with the caterpillar itself as a tactic to protect your 9. But it has to be done quickly
Completely agree
Use it should be called as soon as ball is available.
Scrums should be like mauls if it is stationary scrum half should be told use it.
Kicking simply remove the 5m caveat and make sure the players retreat.
"Law 15(17) When the ball has been clearly won by a team at the ruck, and is available to be played, the referee calls “use it”, after which the ball must be played away from the ruck within five seconds."
Refs only get around to calling 'use it' after the caterpillar forms, but the caterpillar doesn't form until the ball is really already won and available. If the scrum-half can get to the ball, it's available. The refs should be calling 'use it' much sooner.
@@Hiltok and often still ends up being more than 5 seconds regardless of when the ref calls 'use it'...
Very good analysis (and not just a rant!) - explained this very well. Thanks for the great content
Great video thank you sir! Those youngsters are blessed to have you as coach!
Saw the article yesterday and didn't quite understand it and you just laid it all out plain as day mate. Cheers
Beautiful analysis great work Tim
Reminds me of Italy is offside realisation about the ruck. And about Ireland’s choke tackle spotted by Les kiss. Some smart coach or player is going to spot another loophole in the other laws and exploit them.
That Italian offside event was a thing of beauty. Ref knew exactly what was going on, and the Italian forwards knew exactly what was going on too. Everybody else fans, England players, even some Italian players, just sitting there scratching their heads
thanks for a great video! this really helped me understand quite a complicated bit of law
Thanks for watching!
Well done good quality video man. :) keep the great vids coming
Great and relevant content Tim! Us South Africans are used to being accused of 'challenging' the rulebook and exploiting loopholes, so I'm glad its the great Antoine Dupont this time. By the way, I agree that Dupont was pretty sharp to spot that and play it, but its bound to be removed I'm sure. You're right though, its like watching a Tennis game. We need these issues to be exposed in order to have them removed from the rulebook. So I say go ahead and challenge the rules! I see charging down conversion kicks isn't called 'unfair' anymore too...
I don't recall a time when charging down a conversion was unfair whatever that means. It's legal or it's not. it's legal to charge down a conversion attempt.
Never has it been unfair to charge down a conversion . Make it make sense dude ..
Well explained Tim. Have you thought about doing a rules playlist of similar videos. Because i have noticed it is so difficult to try and find a good explanation of a rugby rule for a player or casual who doesn’t understand. I would imagine there would be a large amateur rugby audience who would lap it up
@Eggchasers Rugby another great vid, thank you.
My humble 2 suggestions re law changes both concern scrums...
1) PUT THE BALL IN STRAIGHT - a novel suggestion i know! This will get hookers actually hooking again, and genuinely make the scrum a method of contesting possession, rather than just a means of re-starting.... and
2) I would also call time off as soon as the whistle goes (say for a knock-on) and time remains off until the ball is out or the ball is kept in but has gone through the mark. This will a) stop the moaning minnie Ben Kay's of this world (maybe you are one of them?) continually going on about how long the scrums are taking and how the game needs to be speeded up (no it doesn't, but that's a discussion for another day) and b) stop teams running down the clock with either continual resets or just keeping the ball in the scrum - we see a lot of the former, not much if any of the latter, but the law would be there just in case anyone tries to get smart.
Anyway, thanks again for the channel and good to see you back doing some tv coverage; was very sorry to see you disappear from BT Sport and not be picked up by TNT.
🙏 appreciate it. And good suggestions.
Who needs TV now...with this audience 😉
100% agree - stop the caterpillar! There are quite a few laws that if they were referred according to what is written, then we’d have a better game. 5s on rucks and shoulders above hips being just 2!
The 'Shoulders above hips' law is unfortunately worded to actually be 'not below hips'. This should change. And refs need to enforce it because it is a safety issue. Not enforcing it (and I've never seen it called in a pro match) is against the grain of wanting a safer contest with fewer knocks on heads.
@@Hiltok completely agree!
I think 5s on rucks should start at tackle not even ball secured (except when a defensive team turns it over and it stays in the ruck). So I'm more extreme. Teams should have to play fast and work to keep possession. 20 phases with caterpillar is not exciting. A team doing that while not being able to set their forwards and having to clear the ruck really well is exciting and impressive cos every ruck is a risk. Stricter on defense slowing the ball down would come in too to balance it
Great work, Tim, you clearly know your stuff!
Thanks for the detailed breakdown tim, you explained this very well and clealry took many time to present this in a lucid way for us fans
Great video! Extremely helpful.
Those clauses have been in the laws of the game since at least 1871!
I needed this explained after this weekend. . Thank you.
My pleasure...thanks for watching
Great explanation. Really useful, thanks.
Thanks for the video that helped clear things up!
Tim, thanks for critically analysing this loophole in the kicking law. The graphics and clips are very descriptive
When the Boks won the '95 World Cup they used the tactic of kicking the ball dead so the opposition had to take a 22 and kick back to them, kept the opposition out of their half and out of kicking range for penalties. They changed the law after that to scrum from where the ball was kicked
Great knowledge. I didn't know that
Not just that, they did it from the kick-off, which was allowed. They would gain heaps of territory by a simple restart, putting their opponents on the back foot, immediately. Andre Joubert had a massive boot, that is why he handled the restarts, and not Joel Stransky. I actually did wonder at the time, why teams did not just do that, and Voila! WC95 final.
And people still wonder why the Boks called a scrum in the 1/4 final😝
See, was a very positive play from the Boks. They opted not to take part in this nonsense🤷♂️
That was to milk a scrum penalty.
Not exactly positive play.
@@DavidSmith-yi8ou Bigger picture, it stopped France trying the negative tactic for rest of the game, stopped the shenanigans immediately. Very positive impact on the rest of the game. Was the reason for the Bok tactic itself. Wasnt expected to be something repeated, but instead a msg to dictate gameplay going forward, to make France rethink their approach
@@matthewvanrensburg3824 fair point.
@@DavidSmith-yi8ou’milk’ No no no, they don’t milk anything, they dominate scrums fairly. And they didn’t do it for the penalty, they just did it to make France not kick like that.
@@jameswyatt4443 they dominate some scrums sometimes. SA definitely milk the clock to slow the game down. Front rowers taking a knee… more than any other side. But if it they can get it a past the ref, go for it. Suspect those days are coming to an end though so SAs big boys will need to get fitter.
Brilliant topic for a channel like yours- comments are very knowledgeable too- will be interesting to see the unintended consequences- the legit tackle and slow release of the tackled player sound plausible and then there would probably be a pen by offside as no rugby player is going to let the opposition winger just run it in or a huge loss of territory ??? the 5 second rule should be on a counter (either ref or TMO) from the point of clear possession IE when the ball is won in the ruck- use it or lose it 1,2,3,4,5 PING- players will get less rest and more space will be available to attack.
Shouldn't even be when won. Should be immediately on tackle for the team in possession but the refs should be strict on defensive teams slowing it down.
small point, but its not 5m forward, its that they have to run 5m in any direction. nobbled a few wings this year by being miles offside for a grubber to go down the wing, letting them pick it up while chasing backwards and smushing them after theyd taken 3 steps back and 2 to the side
You are quite right
ha ha i can imagine that happening! out of interest, does the 5m in any direction mean a 3 one way and another 2 going in a different direction you think, or is a 5m radius so to speak? :)
Thanks for the explainer mate!
Good point mate, cheers from Brazil
You’re a maestro mate, best commentary ever. Better than all the pundits, if u had Merts humour you probably would be the best commentator ever in the history of the game 😂
Great points Tim, great channel, Hopefully the beautiful game isn't on a fast track to becoming farcical. Like Soccer for instance
Football has decent rules but the people imposing those rules are crap at it. Watching rugby officials is refreshing. Like how can you apply rules so well.
You're a funny guy.Rugby referees are utterly bent,particularly those north of the equator.@@chubs2312
Great talk again 100% agree with you they need to simplify the laws. Can't stand watching a referee tell a scrum half to use it 3 or 4 times. Call use it, he puts his hands on the ball and goes there and then. What happened to when you on the ground you are out of the game. What's the difference between passing of the ground and off loading in the tackle, after you have hit the ground
The referee should be told to count down the five seconds: "Use it .. 4 .. 3 .. 2 .. 1 ... (whistle)".
But they are also told to whistle for feeding in the scrum. See how far that got us?
Thanks for clearing this up. As a casual American rugby fan who follows Super Rugby, I didn't understand what the new rule change was about.
I feel they should ensure offside players have to retire towards their goal line immediately after the kick until they are put onside. Similar to the 10m law. While we are looking at laws, allowing a player to reach out from the back of a maul and play the scrum half is another one that slows the game down. All of these laws existed when I played but we didn't abuse them because we played within the spirit of the game. These coaches are clever but to detriment of the game.
Seems logical to me!
Would love to see a video on England A, the players, their position / club / face / who they might have beaten to the shirt
Totally agree. Unfortunately teams without ideas, depending on how you use it, will resort to kick volleyball or tennis if you like.
Kieran Crowley when with Italy had an onside winger way out wide on the other side of the field from the kicker who would then sprint unopposed up the field putting all his teammates onside.
I think it’s great that players/coaches are studying the laws to find ways around them, 1. It can add an innovation to play 2. It helps iron out laws which are in need of correction, but we have to be careful not change the laws so much as to restrict teams to one or two boring styles of play?!
The 5m law has existed for years. I remember it was cited as the reason Mike Brewer was not penalised for tackling Gavin Hastings in the NZ v Scotland 1990 2nd test in Auckland, despite being 30m in front of the kicker!
Hastings was penalised for not releasing, which Grant Fox kicked to level the score at 18-18. NZ scored one more penalty to win the game. Felt like an injustice at the time.
Spot on 100%
Been watching rugby since 1982, played for years, and always thought it was simple. Offside player must retreat until they're onside. Not just stand stationary like a gimp. Agree on the 5 seconds and caterpillar ruck comments too. I just don't get how a halfback can advance beyond the hindmost foot of the caterpillar and draw that ball back himself while not being part of the ruck. Shouldn't be legal imo
I like the law breakdown, it'sgood to have a discussionof why we see what we do on the pitch.
I do also like caterpillar rucks, box kicking and even to a certain extent, "kick tennis".
Watching paint dry has a certain charm too, I suppose.
Great video, very informative; it’s a disgrace this kick tennis. Offside until the receiver runs 20m
Thanks Tim, another excellent video. You are my go-to rugby channel now - I enjoy your presentation style which, added to your knowledge and enthusiasm (passion, even!), makes your videos so watchable and entertaining as well as informative.
Really nice of you to say. Thank you for watching
Don't forget his Valentine rose
"The Law of Unintended Consequences!" You nailed it.
once ruck is formed and the ref calls it, no more players allowed to join (attack and defense) - no more caterpillar?
I think a really simple change to the laws would be allowing the ref to call a ‘Mark’ if the kick receiver stays static in their 22. Wouldn’t have to try and enforce anything new. Just the presumption that if you’re not going to act then a ‘Mark’ is called anyway
I love this "implicit mark" idea.
I think this would only deal with the situation where the kicker just stops and doesn't do anything until time runs out. Would not stop the tennis
Good to see kudos given to Super Rugby regarding making positive changes
You're absolutely spot-on. With more laws there are more opportunities for nonsense like kick-tennis. And as you rightly say, anyone new to the sport would be put off by it. I certainly am.
Great topic. Agree rugby needs to go back to basics. Thanks
Standing still and waiting for the kicker to pass you or for the opponent runs towards your line making 5m you can move
This has been a rule for 50 plus years
Yes kicking duals are just part of the game the 10 meter law keeps it safe (he didn't mention that). The one example he showed with the receiver just standing still will still apply for Supper Rugby I think there will be more kicks to find touch more line outs what have fixed. Also the laws were changed over 10 years ago now to stop the caterpillar it just need to be enforced.
Good explanation - thanks
Don't be sorry, I'm glad you go into the minutiae of this because I am one of those casual fans. I only watch the occasional 6N match so I had no idea what was going on and was so bored/confused.
One unintended consequence I could see arising from the removal of the law, is a situation where the furthest back player is the one kicking the ball, and becomes unable to advance and bring anyone onside because of being tackled while kicking, or by injury (I imagine this is why the law was written in the first place). You could see kick chasers committing themselves to tackles earlier to try get the kicker on the ground post kick, instead of attempting to block down the kick.
And there lays the problem when the receiving player is unable to advance or kick with no support because they are all motionless up the other end of the field, and the opposition are in his face because their team mate who kick the ball has run 5 metres.there by putting them all on side and a big advantage..
Excellent explanation for someone not close to the rules - now understand why there is so much aerial ping pong
Great video. I grew up playing Rugby in the 80s. A lot has changed since then, some for the better, some not. However the seemingly ever increasing number of rules and the method by which they’re interpreted and applied by the on field officials has made it unbearable for me to watch. So much so, that I gave the most recent World Cup a miss all together.
I hope things turn around enough to get me back as a casual viewer but I’m not holding my breath.
Hello Tim, I think even Damin Vilimusa of South Africa called for a scrum after the French winger had started kicking tennis. i think that's an option already in the law that is meant to minimise the kick tennis
Damian Willemse 😂
More of that please Tim
Thank you for a magnificent show. Thank you mate, you are unbiased and professional.
I can continue for at least an hour about how much I appreciate and enjoy your analysis and show.
Thank you brotha!!
Now, I definitely do not agree with ADP been the best rugby player now, or ever.
Really mate.
I am from SA and a Bok fan forever.
There are many smart and definitive players that are milestones ahead of RDP.
Sean Fitzpatrick
Richie McKaw
Francious Pienaar
Alan Wyn Jones
Gary Teichman
Just to start with, many more, that had the ability to not only influenence a current game but how rugby would change because of their various manners of leadership and tactics on a field.
These guys were formidable and turned things around.
"Fitz" used to piss you off so badly and draw a penalty and laugh at you at a crucial time in the game.
I respect your opinion, but no bro, Due Pont is no where near the best player at the moment. Definitely not!!
I'm certain Dupont didn't invent this. There must have been people and analysts doing this before him. Seems convenient to give the credit to Dupont.
He is just someone who has exploited it, therefore bringing it to wider attention.
Jerome Garces has worked with the France setup since he retired from reffing. "Discipline and refereeing advisor". I'd say there's a very good chance that his fingerprints are all over finding this loophole and smartly taking advantage.
No, he didn't invent it. But it's mainly because of him that we're talking about it.
What happens when the rearmost player, who had probably just received a kick, kicks long but is knocked over by a charge-down and unable to put the rest of the team onside? I guess someone has to retreat behind the fallen player and then advance to put everyone else onside. It probably means if you can get close to a charge-down against a single back field player you have an excellent attacking opportunity as everyone is offside until a winger runs behind the fallen kicker and then forwards gain.
i know you won't want to hear this but in League it is called the down town rule off side if in front of the kicker and cannot get involved until the kicker puts them on side now being more stringently enforced in the NRL this season
Next one to get rid of is the ridiculous ‘choke tackle’ followed by 15 players swamping the players and ball, Primary school football style, then awarding the swampers a turn over!
What you refer to as a "box kick" is actually a Garryowen or Up and Under. A genuine box kick occurs when the kicker identifies an area where there are no players, a box, and kicks the ball into this area in the hope/expectation that one of his own players will chase and retrieve the ball.
Brilliant idea to change it.
I noticed Bordeaux doing the kicking and keeping players forward against the Bulls at Loftus as well, even the Lions were doing it a week later at Loftus. They would kick onto the wings while their players were very close to the wingers and never retreating, staying as close to the wingers as possible. It stopped any chance of a counter attack and the only option was to kick it back or out. I thought at the time that the ref was allowing them to get away with offside play and a quite a few supporters got frustrated in the stands. Never realized that there was a loophole until now. I definitely think the kicker should put his team onside and that his teammates should make a concerted effort to retreat towards their own goal line when a kick is made. That is how we used to be taught to play as well. Fully agree on the 5 second rule as well, its there, so use it.
Great vid thank you
Having read all the laws of rugby, for referee studies, I can honestly say that there aren't...that many. At least not compared to traditional laws, though there are definitely quite a few. Especially surrounding kicks.
Further, there seem to be a ton of rules not enforced, think of the rule that the player who took the ball into touch may not touch or tamper with it in any way. Pretty sure there are a number of outside backs who never got the memo.
Overall, this is a good change, but perhaps the answer is not to change more laws but instead to enforce what exists. Tennis rule most definitely needed to change.
I am a fan of this rule change in general but after the Scotland France game I was actually wondering if it would even be necessary. Sometimes in sports a loophole is identified but then when people get a better understanding they find a tactical solution that makes the loophole irrelevant - and I wonder if we are seeing that process starting now already. Are teams that are behind realistically going to keep trying this when they risk the opponent who catches the ball standing still until full time? Given the rule of unintended consequences perhaps it would be better to give the game a bit more time to try and solve the problem itself rather than tweaking the rules and risking something even worse. But I agree with you, its a lot less risky to remove rules than add so let's see how it goes in super rugby.
I don’t understand why referees allow a player not bound in a ruck , the half back, to play the ball in the ruck with his foot ?
Thank God the powers that be have taken this law back to the way Rugby is classically played! It is meant to be a running passing game!!
There is a potential problem if the law is changed that your team can only be onside if the player who just kicked the ball runs past you. What if the kicker is tackled as he's kicking it? By the time he wriggles away from the tackler and gets to his feet the opponent has already caught the ball and is already sprinting forward. What if the player who kicked the ball stays down or gets injured in the tackle? He'll still be the offside line so every player on the pitch will be sprinting backwards. Teams could be going out to injure or take kickers out of the game for this purpose.
When I was playing rugby in the 90s it was always the case that the kicker had to spring forward to get all his teammates onside after kicking. The implication was that this was the only way to get onside. Maybe you're right and that the laws about 5m, the catcher kicking/passing existed back then but what if they didn't and were made amendments or additions since then to counteract my example in the first paragraph.
Thanks for this. I didn’t understand it
Not fair to put Dupont's name on a law that makes the game boring
I stress how much rugby IQ he must've had to spot the opportunity. But I hear you!
@EggchasersRugby It wasn't Dopont I was the x referee that works with France Jerome Grace's.
I dunno maybe as a fullback im biased but I like the kick tennis. Games within games.
Back at school (80s) if we didn't have enough players for touch football. We'd play a game called forcings-back. Which this kick tennis reminds me of.
2:01 don’t watch rugby but this law popped up now I am interested lol
Great video, and you are right about some of the problems. I love rugby but it seems to be getting very boring with the same moves all the time. People want to see running rugby. Get rid of Jackalling and go back to having to use your feet to get the ball out of a ruck. Get back to scrum halves putting the ball in straight, so that hookers have to hook properly. Rucking, in its present form, is dangerous with men crashing into the ruck from the back to batter a player out of the ruck. Something certainly needs to be done to improve the game.
Get rid of the mark as well,and charging down a conversion following a try.Also 30 seconds to throw the ball into the lineout,that would stop board meetings before the lineout is formed.
Kick tennis isn’t a scourge in and of itself. Kick tennis where the forwards are able to just sit in the middle of the park is the scourge.
Because Kick Tennis in and of itself is a way of gaining ground and attacking but the problem is the forwards just sit in the middle of the park watching the ball.
Your opening analysis of how non rugby fans might respond to these ridiculous decisions is totally on point.
I never really watch rugby but happened to be watching that match live, the fact the decision remained as a non-grounded ball after OBVIOUS evidence to the contrary totally put me off watching again.
I've heard this a number of times this week!
I think that if you, DuPont and Fin got together the three of you could write a better game.
I enjoyed it, but as a boy I played a kick game with friends where you got to take steps if it was a fair catch etc. If the team does not put players on side then yes its ridiculous, rather say you have 5 seconds to use it before all players no matter where are on side
New rugby laws have alienated new fans for years. Even ex pro commentators cant offer explanations sometimes
I've had this argument with a good mate who played for years and has also reffed at junior level. He was adamant that players have to retreat when the ball is kicked past them, but I couldn't win the argument because he is a player/ref and wouldn't listen. But I totally agree, the current patterns of play just turn off fans. But think back to ruck-gate with England and Italy. While Italy didn't invent it, it was the highest profile example. But it doesn't happen anymore because teams have sussed out the counter - usually to pick and go against a defence lacking a few players who are hanging around on the "wrong" side of the breakdown. Hopefully the same might happen here - some imaginative coaches will come up with a counter.
Would he be thinking of the ‘within a 10 meter circle’?
It doesn't really fix it though does it? It just means you have to have a back 3 +1, where one of the back players runs forward and one of the half backs fills in the hole, then repeat. If this law were changed, every top team will have this drill down well within the first year. Scotland were doing this anyway in the given clip (which is a good indicator as to whether this change would reduce kicking); it is only France that were not putting the forwards onside with a chaser. The old rule said that players offside after a kick had to actively retreat. Perhaps bringing that one back should be considered?
I'm almost sure it was always stated that you had to be put onside or "make an attempt" to retreat onside
I remember my dad complaining about jumpers getting lifted at the lineout, and now I fully understand what he meant. You learn one thing and 10 years later it's a whole different game.
We should really go back to the basic rules of the sport.
Well, I wonder how long it will take players to realise that removing the 5-metre rule actually makes it _easier_ for them to play kick-tennis.
Man. Law 10.8 already addresses this.
We talked a out it as a club last year.
Not sure how it's mis-interpreted
I would re-introduce the mark for a kick at goal. This would stop the box kicking.
I would also introduce a law where if you catch a kick in your 22 that came from the opposition's half, as long as you choose not to mark, if you drop kick the ball from your own 22 into touch then you get the throw in at the lineout.
A disgrace that players do not understand just how much money spectators are paying to travel then watch the game at the very highest level.
I always hated it but I came to realise that it's an opportunity for a break for the forwards who can just chill in the middle of the field. It usually ends with a line out which the forwards can just jog over to. I would assume that if we get rid of it then you will see more kicking for touch straight away especially for the team kicking from inside the 22.
I agree with some comments suggesting explaining other laws in the game. What about a series that is an intro to the sport that is for the casual rugby watcher or those completely new to the sport. It might be a different audience to the current CZcams following. Perhaps it is already done by someone?
What really is ridiculous is that a player that is millimeters in front of the kicker is sometimes called offside and a penalty is awarded to the opposing team at that specific spot, while the WHOLE team is ALWAYS offside when the fullback kicks the ball!
100%!!! Great point
I also think the recent law change that gives teams a goal line drop-out after holding the ball up over the try line should be reverted back to a scrum to the attacking time, like it was in the past. I understand they wanted to speed up play, but the unintended consequence is that now teams practice to not tackle or defend the line, but rather just get underneath the ball and even at times drag the attacking player over the try line to win the drop out. In my opinion, it is awarding negative play.
When Russell stood there for a few seconds they were up 16-10; I would have loved to see him stand there and just wait for the french to move. As you say, just stand there until the games over ;)
Great Stuff Bru... Imagine if it was a SA Team that did that constantly? LOL
This was the law when I played school rugby in the 70’s. It hasn’t changed. What HAS changed is that standard tactics back then were to kick for touch, so the 5m/pass/kick was only relevant on a mis-kick. It’s only when kicking with no intention of seeking touch became standard that this arose as an issue.
But after that, they made it so you couldn't retreat or pass the ball back inside the 25 yds (as 22 m was then) to get the benefit.
It doesn't surprise me that this originated in France, where huge forwards are the norm, it allows them to have a rest whilst the ball is kicked over them and they can just stand around and not have to retreat.
Beyond all those you said, when calling The Mark, actually be on the ground like they used to and catch the ball standing, that means that it is much less likely that only two players can cover the whole of the 22. Not saying that you can't jump to take the ball, but if you are not standing still when you catch the ball, you can't call the mark. This means more players need to be back to cover the 22, or that the ball is in play more and you don't lose 2 minutes waiting for the forwards to stroll back to the 22.
WR say the want to promote attacking rugby, but just about every law they bring in or change, ends up favouring the defending team. Kicking is a real part of the game, it needs to be there. Don't force players to retreat onside, but they are out of the game until they are brought onside.
If they want to keep the 5m part of the law, they need to enforce it, Russell was standing about 3m inside the 22, and he kicked the ball from inside the 22, but the French were moving forward when he kicked it. The ref actually waved them forward after he had taken a few small steps. If you have the rule, enforce it properly.
What is interesting about the kick tennis is if a player is in front of the kicker he is offside, hence standing still, and if he moves forward the ref will give a penalty for this offside movement. This happened in the England v Wales game last weekend.
However it appears that you can move when offside if you are in front of your teammates running with the ball, which seems a total nonsense. Any player in front of the ball is in an offside position and thus should stand still but some teams have got this “offside running” down to a very fine art - just look at Ireland.
Maybe this should also be addressed by actually having the same interpretation of the offside rule for kicks and when running & passing.
With that rule in place instead of standing in the middle they should advance when on side in order to gain territory incrementally