SH rule changes incoming - not all thank goodness

[Neils]

https://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/300339879/world-rugby-set-to-approve-nrl-inspired-rule-changes-in-all-competitions?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

[DGP Wasp]

So in summary, one TV market is struggling to raise interest in RU due to the popularity of RL in that particular country, so are seeking rule changes to make RU more like RL.  The rest of the world where RU remains universally much more popular than RL just rolls over and say "Oh,  alright then".

These are the changes:

Held up over the line no longer an attacking scrum, from 1st Aug will be a goal line drop out to the defending team.  Designed to discourage repeated pick and drives due to the risk of losing possession.  I can see the logic, but time will tell if it achieves what it set out to achieve.

Introduction of the 50-22 kick.  Only explanation in the article is that it's similar to the 40-22 rule in RL.  Someone will have to enlighten me here as I have no idea what that is.

Also on the table was the 20 minute red card.  Player is sent off and has to stay off, but after 20 minutes playing a man down, a replacement can be brought on.  England and France blocked this one as they were concerned that it didn't act as sufficient deterrent for serious foul play.  Personally, the issue of deterrent can easily be addressed with suitable bans for the offender (and do away with arbitrary reductions because he's quite nice really), but as it stands, an offence in minute 1 carries a heavier sanction that the same offence in minute 75.  So I'd support this change.

[Rossm]

I've always thought that 'held up' should not be rewarded with an attacking scrum and another bite at the cherry. Failure i.e. not scoring should be a turnover and the defensive team should get the reward.

[coddy]

From The Rugby Paper

The new 50:22 rule allows a team to throw into a line-out if they kick from behind halfway and bounce the ball into touch in the opposition 22, or, alternatively, if they kick from inside their own 22 and bounce it into touch beyond halfway.

[Brandnewtorugby]

From The Rugby Paper

The new 50:22 rule allows a team to throw into a line-out if they kick from behind halfway and bounce the ball into touch in the opposition 22, or, alternatively, if they kick from inside their own 22 and bounce it into touch beyond halfway.

I think Umaga will be good at this.

You could potentially get to a 5m lineout with a  kick from 22 to just past halfway, ball off top of lineout into own half, pass, kick to 5m.

[Mellie]

The idea is teams will have to defend that scenario so will have to have more players in the backfield rather than strung across the pitch defending the gain line so more running options too.

[Neils]

Also out is the Captain's Challenge.

[baldpaul101]

The idea is teams will have to defend that scenario so will have to have more players in the backfield rather than strung across the pitch defending the gain line so more running options too.

but potentially more kicking?
Given the dross served up by some teams using a kick & chase strategy, I'm not sure that's something we want....

Also, it makes the game more complicated surely? If Rugby wants new audiences that last thing it should be doing is adding rules!

[MarleyWasp]

I think the 50:22 will significantly favour Wasps. Having watched a few matches from Australia it didn't lead to a significant increase in kicking.

[Shugs]

The held up and then scrum going is a good thing for me. But the kicking rule is a huge mistake I think. I can't see how it won't end up with more kicking. I also don't think the ability to simply leather it up the field (ok, so you've got to bounce into touch) should earn you that many yards and then get you a line out. I see endless ping pong until someone lands the touch finder. Meanwhile, those who seek to keep ball in hand to gain territory know that if they are turned over they could be defending a line out in their own 22 within 1 kick. Pretty brainless stuff for me.

[baldpaul101]

Having watched a few matches from Australia it didn't lead to a significant increase in kicking.

But is that because teams were more attack minded in general?
we have seen exciting running attacking games with minimal kicking under the current rules, just as we have seen dire boring kick fests.
The important thing is how teams actually want to play. If you want to play a limited kick/chase/defend style of game, changing the rules may help you.
Eddie J will still find a way to kick the leather off the ball for 80 minutes if he wants to!

[MarleyWasp]

Having watched a few matches from Australia it didn't lead to a significant increase in kicking.

But is that because teams were more attack minded in general?
we have seen exciting running attacking games with minimal kicking under the current rules, just as we have seen dire boring kick fests.
The important thing is how teams actually want to play. If you want to play a limited kick/chase/defend style of game, changing the rules may help you.
Eddie J will still find a way to kick the leather off the ball for 80 minutes if he wants to!

The reason was because sides actually realised it's a lot harder to pull off successfully then it sounds. This was because defensive teams changed their approach to kicks. Where as now a defensive team will not mind so much as they get the ball back, with the 50:22 they wouldn't regain possession and the attacking team would get a lineout in the opposition 22. Therefore they would guard the touch line more to limit the opportunities, which in turn would increase the difficulty of actually getting the ball to bounce once before it goes out. To do this they'd take an extra player out of the Defensive line to ensure the backfield was covered, thus freeing up a bit more space in the middle of the field and therefore creating more space to attack, meaning attacking teams were more inclined to keep the ball in hand. The number of successful 50:22 kicks were very low, rarely more than two per match.

[baldpaul101]

thanks Marley, I kind of got the principal, but this bit is really interesting

The number of successful 50:22 kicks were very low, rarely more than two per match.

reading the article it sounds like the trial has the impact they want, but also interesting to see that NZ weren't in favour of the drop out instead of scrum rule.

[baldpaul101]

end of the day it doesn't really matter what we think, sounds like its happening...

[andermt]

I've always thought that 'held up' should not be rewarded with an attacking scrum and another bite at the cherry. Failure i.e. not scoring should be a turnover and the defensive team should get the reward.

Agree with that, I find it very frustrating to have a great defensive set and despite 'winning' you have to go through it all over again.