White loves laws
12 Feb 2008
Jake White believes the new laws will benefit South Africa’s Super 14 teams.
The most fascinating aspect of the new variations to the laws in this year’s Vodacom Super 14 will be how coaches respond to the uncertainty of it all, wrote White in the previous issue of SA Rugby magazine.
Another of the unknowns is just how significant the law changes will prove to be in defining individual positions. For example, will the function of the fullback change? Or that of the No 8? There will be more opportunities to scrum from the increased number of free kicks, therefore will the tighthead become even more significant when there is more emphasis on scrumming?
I’ve focused on three approved changes: inside the 22m line, the scrum and sanctions.
Inside the 22m line
The new law states that when a defending player receives the ball outside the 22m and passes, puts or takes the ball back inside the 22, the following can occur:
1. If the ball was subsequently kicked directly into touch, the line-out would be in line with where the ball was kicked.
2. If a tackle, ruck or maul was subsequently formed and the ball was then kicked directly into touch, the line-out would be where the ball crossed the touchline.
I believe some teams would simply take the risk of an additional phase of play to ensure there is a tackle or a ruck or a maul, and then the rule change won’t apply. The kicker would then be rewarded, as he is now, for where the ball went out.
Practically, it would mean that from a set phase, such as a scrum or line-out, the team couldn’t just win the ball and pass it back to the kicker to find touch.
In the line-out, they would maul for a phase and then make the pass to the kicker. This suits South African teams, who like to maul and also back themselves to contest the opposition line-out ball once it has been kicked out on the halfway line, for example.
At the scrum, the option would be to set up a runner to take contact and kick it out from
the next phase. Again, this favours our teams; the defensive line-out would remain strong because of our ability to contest.
All I can see changing is when a player, having taken a pass in his own 22, is isolated and looks for touch. Now he must kick it infield, and that benefits the flow of play and the attacking prospects of the ball receiver.
A long-range drop-kick specialist such as Frans Steyn could punish a bad line kick with three points. Equally, a good counterattacking fullback could be more prominent because there might be more opportunities.
Scrum
The new law states the offside line is 5m behind the hindmost foot of the scrum for players who are not in the scrum and who are not the team’s scrumhalf.
I think fewer back-row moves will be made because the 5m gap will mean that the defender won’t immediately have to commit to the tackle. Some coaches might get the No 8 to put the ball in, with the result that the No 9 – packing at No 8 – would pass to the No 8 who would then run at the opposition inside backs, which would create space to attack either side of the contact point.
Sanctions
The new law states that the sanction is a free kick for all offences other than offside, not entering through the gate and Law 10 foul play.
This will challenge any coach’s selections because he could either go for mobility or a strong scrum. If it is the latter, he could choose to scrum all day from the free-kick advantage, but the converse is that the opposition might believe their strength to be mobility and playing a game that does not emphasise set-piece play, such as the scrum.
The law caters for two differing styles, and it will be intriguing to see how they play out against each other. Equally, teams might use two similar styles, which could translate into either a fast-paced game or scrumming all day.
This law change is intended to speed up the game (by replacing penalties with free kicks), however, I think it has the potential to slow down the game, especially if a team wants to scrum. What counts in South Africa’s favour is that they have players capable of employing either style on the same day.
Read Jake every month in SA Rugby magazine. In the new issue he discusses the coaching appointments of Warren Gatland, Nick Mallett and Peter de Villiers
74 Comments
12 Feb 2008, 15:45 pm
Players will need to think on their feet. Coaches who are thinkers will have a high success rate.
12 Feb 2008, 15:47 pm
Interesting…
12 Feb 2008, 15:52 pm
Seems to me the Laws are not all he “loves”
12 Feb 2008, 15:53 pm
It doesn’t matter wha the thinks anymore
12 Feb 2008, 16:00 pm
We will see on Saturday when the Stormers give the Bulls a run for their money!
12 Feb 2008, 16:00 pm
Stormers to win!!!!
12 Feb 2008, 16:05 pm
Jake must now go into farming…
12 Feb 2008, 16:06 pm
Stormers to win 26-18.
12 Feb 2008, 16:08 pm
Rassie should love the rule changes as it gives him mroe scope to use his ingenuity
12 Feb 2008, 16:09 pm
Sorry meant more
12 Feb 2008, 16:13 pm
Jake is looking at the best case scenario for the SA teams.
With these laws and what has happened in the past is that there has/will been no team that has dominated the opposition at scrum time.
Why try and centre a focus on trying to win the ball at scrum time..its a set piece and defensive lines are reset. Taking a quick tap will defensive lines are in disarray gives the team in possession great opportunities.
If the defenders are not back ten they cannot tackle the player.
In a tackle situation if the ball is offloaded/recycled a opposition player who is not in the ruck but is not back 5m…they cannot tackle the ball carrier unless they allow the ball carrier to advance 5m and then can make a tackle…but they have to get around and tackle from an onside position.
This is when teams are going to have mobile forwards.
Rucks and recycling happen more often than scrums in any game.
12 Feb 2008, 16:20 pm
Agree wallabie! It makes for faster more entertaining rugby!
12 Feb 2008, 16:25 pm
with the space allowed behind crums, it brings strong 8′s and big centres into the picture, so you have to look at both sides, wallabie
12 Feb 2008, 16:25 pm
#12 – faster more entertaining rugby…that just suits SOME teams, more than others.
12 Feb 2008, 16:25 pm
The new law states that when a defending player receives the ball outside the 22m and passes, puts or takes the ball back inside the 22, the following can occur:
1. If the ball was subsequently kicked directly into touch, the line-out would be in line with where the ball was kicked.
2. If a tackle, ruck or maul was subsequently formed and the ball was then kicked directly into touch, the line-out would be where the ball crossed the touchline.
Sorry but this comment is neither here nor there.
SA has traditionally kicked when in the 22. when kicking from the 22 generally the player is under pressure because the kicker has a couple of defenders on him.
In this situation the kicker is alone…how does Jake see that being an advantage to SA…somehow a forward is going to magically appear.
To set up mauls one has to have forwards, traditionally, by the time forwards appear in the 22m zone two defenders are upon the kicker who actually cant kick because of this new law.
If he does he has to keep it in play which gives it back to the opposition who will run back at the kicking team while their defensive lines are in disarray.
One needs to look at video footage of all kicks made from the 22 and find out how many forwards are in the near vincinity of the kicker, from an on side position, and see whether jake is making sense.
What he is basically saying RSA has to have more mobile and fitter forwards for all this to happen.
12 Feb 2008, 16:26 pm
Unfortunately the circus SARU and player defections to greener pastures will ensure that any benefit derived from the ELV’s will evaporate very quickly.
You don’t win the super 14 with kids.
The only SA team that looks likely is the Sharks and as a BB’s fan that leaves a terrible taste in my mouth. But I wish them well!
12 Feb 2008, 16:29 pm
#11 At tackle, ruck, maul there is no 5m offside line. The 5m only applies at scrums
12 Feb 2008, 16:29 pm
Michalak is injured and might not play on friday! Blessing or curse? Maybe Steyn will step up!
12 Feb 2008, 16:32 pm
14 atleast we will see good rugby! If other teams want to play forwards rugby then let them but I do think with the new rules you will see more total rugby which is a good thing!
12 Feb 2008, 16:33 pm
13 Bluebarb
With a reset it is easier to defend..you know where your opposite number is it will be very difficult to get past in these situation.
Sure using bigger forwards and centres will get you ground by doing crash tackles but then doing that all game with 2 people on their backs is mre tiring than just running with the ball alone.
The bigger players tend to be less mobile and will suffer fatigue as the game progresses.
What we will see in the next few years where there will be a proposal to make a number of substitutions in a agme…where you can bring the same player back on.
In league they allow 12 substitutions for the whole game…your impact players (bigger players) can go off and have a breather and you bring them back on at a strategic time.
12 Feb 2008, 16:36 pm
17
I dont think so…i read some where that if the ball is recycled from a ruck the ball carrier cannot be touched by anyone who is not part of the ruck but is in the 5m zone.
12 Feb 2008, 16:47 pm
Wallabie why do you want to change union into league?
12 Feb 2008, 16:48 pm
Who is Jake white’s mistress?
12 Feb 2008, 16:51 pm
Simon, I disagree with your statements:
1. I don’t think you understand the 22m rule. If they do recycle the ball through another phase in order to be able to kick directly into touch, they would need to do so behind the 22m line. Why would you want to recycle behind the advantage line?
2. You say fewer backrow moves? With the extra space, surely you want your ball carriers (Spies/Smith/Collins/Roussow) running at the small backs?
3. Yes, there will be a contrast in styles of play, I agree. I bet Aussie will prefer quick taps instead of scrums.
12 Feb 2008, 16:53 pm
turning rugby into a “moffies” game will fit the Wallabies game plan….12 subs might even help us with targets
12 Feb 2008, 16:56 pm
22
i dont…..i hate league but their substitution rule is brilliant.
It gives a team heaps of options during a game. It allows teams to have big forwards and allows them to have a rest and then go back onto the field.
With these new rules players will be puffed by the 30 minute.
It can allow RSA to have bigger forwards and keep to their traditional game…their is no place for big but not mobile forwards with the ELVs.
they will always be 2 m from the action all the time.
12 Feb 2008, 17:01 pm
priorites
While I dislike league I have see more brutal tackles from this game than Union…it is no moffie sport.
Union without ELVs is very similar to league…defensive orientated and too many stop starts and waste of time.
there is always a set piece to be had and that just wastes time. Scrums will only be utilised in this new set up if it is going to be an advantage to the team in possession.
We had scrums because thats what the law says…now it is an option or weapon when strategically used.
12 Feb 2008, 17:05 pm
Interesting to see how many Stormers supporters there are on keo, judging by the voting on the derby this weekend…
12 Feb 2008, 17:09 pm
I agree with wallabie’s comments, amazingly enough.
Once the full ELVs are implemented, it will make refereeing, for one thing, quite a lot simpler.
Forwards will basically have to remember only a few things: only come in through the gate, only play the ball while you’re on both feet, and once there’s a rolling maul, do your best to pull it down.
12 Feb 2008, 17:10 pm
wp
Noone is allowed to pull mauls down.
12 Feb 2008, 17:15 pm
wallabie
Under the full Stellenbosch laws they are, maybe not the current ELVs being trialled in Aus.
12 Feb 2008, 17:18 pm
The collapsing of the maul rule is to dangerous to implement it
12 Feb 2008, 17:23 pm
the collapsing of the maul…new law…has not been introduced.
RSA opposed this law so it wont happen…NZ and australia said it could work well.
When we trialled it a couple of the teams did mauls but constantly changed the direction of the maul while in motion…it was brilliant.
A maul at pace!!!
Their was some intelligence used to begin the maul which was the most difficult part.
12 Feb 2008, 17:25 pm
VetkopUK
Yes, but one has to remember that the maul may only be collapsed by the defending side if the forward momentum of the maul has been reversed or neutralised.
If the maul is still moving forward and they collapse, it’s a penalty to the attacking side.
12 Feb 2008, 17:26 pm
31
the other law that was opposed was th ehands in the ruck while on your feet.
brilliant idea…while you are your feet one can have their hands in the ruck.
while it may seem that this will lead to a bun fight it did not…because if a team commits to many players to the ruck, thinking numbers at a ruck is an advantage, if the attacking team recycles the ball there is overlaps aplenty.
12 Feb 2008, 17:29 pm
Here are the full Stellenbosch laws:
- Players may use hands in the ruck as long as they are onside and on their feet
- At the scrum, all backs except the scrum-halves must remain at least 5 metres behind the hindmost foot of the scrum
- You can use as many players as you like in the lineout, provided they fit inside the 15-metre line
- The opposing hooker in a lineout no longer has to stand between the 5m-line and the touchline
- On a quick throw in, the ball can be thrown in straight or backwards, but not forwards
- touch judges to police the offside lines
- penalty kicks given only for offside and foul play; all other offences will be free kicks with the option of taking a scrum
- if the ball is passed or run back into the 22 and kicked out on the full, lineout takes place from where the kick was made
- maul can be collapsed by defending sides without incurring penalty if the forward momentum of the attacking side has been neutralised or reversed
- the corner flag is removed
12 Feb 2008, 17:31 pm
wallabie
Allowing hands in the ruck will obviously mean a lot faster, more mobile loosies in a fetcher role.
I for one am quite for it.
12 Feb 2008, 17:34 pm
wp
The maul is a weird aspect of the game albeit always in the rule book.
why is it weird?
if one looks at the laws…a player carrying the ball must always be allowed to be tackled. This player cannot be obstructed from being tackled.
That law is the essence of rugby union.
i know of another game that allows for ball carrier obstruction…Grid Iron (NFL) which has its origins from league.
A maul is the only aspect of the game where a tackle cannot be made and the ball carrier is deliberatly obstructed.
rugby union is about flowing rugby…but without these ELVs it was becoming too much like league.
12 Feb 2008, 17:36 pm
whoever brought in the corner flag rule.
the new rule to remove the flag is a relief…how many good tries have been denied by the corner flag.
12 Feb 2008, 17:37 pm
wallabie
Valid point. I see no problem in a defending team being able to stop a maul, and then, once it’s stopped, pull it down to collapse it.
12 Feb 2008, 17:42 pm
Walla/wp
Very enlightening conversation you two are having. Great!
What worries me still is the fact that a player can run from a quick short arm tap and not be tackled.
I believe that when a team has taken a quick tap, he already used his advantage and should be tackled. Like you guys are saying, we all predict a quicker game with more players standing around.
Seems you studied this Walla. Is there not massive confusion with all the quick taps and who is allowed to tackle from where?
12 Feb 2008, 17:45 pm
I’m all for the hands in the ruck rule as their is absolutely no consistancy currently on how it is blown.
Thanks for that explanation WP
12 Feb 2008, 17:46 pm
Isigidi
As far as I know, that is more a question about good refereeing.
I agree with you, if a player takes a quick tap before the opposing side has been given reasonable time to retreat 10m, then he can’t have his bread buttered both sides.
Isn’t that how the current rules work (or at least are supposed to)? If a player takes a quick tap, he sacrifices the offside line if there has not been reasonable time given to the defenders to retreat. If reasonable time has elapsed, then the defenders will be blown offside.
It all comes down to proper, consistent refereeing.
12 Feb 2008, 17:50 pm
wallabie
Speaking of scrums, the trial games thus far have actually shown that teams under the ELVs will have a great deal of tactical options.
For example, teams with big strong forwards (Blue Bulls, for example) will tend to scrum down as soon as they are awarded a short-arm penalty (i.e. free kick) to try and grind down the opposition. Other teams again will try to use the free kicks to either box kick or run. The new rules have actually seen a great deal more “short game” or little attacking kicks not going into touch.
It creates a very exciting contestant experience, that’s for sure.
The last thing we needed in Union was a situation similar to NFL where there’s so many stoppages one game takes a few hours.
12 Feb 2008, 17:51 pm
WP
I think you’re referring to the law that “lazy runners” can be penalised. So if the scrumnie runs into a lazy runner, no more penalty and the onus is on the person who tapped quickly to avoid the runner. Still can’t be tackled.
12 Feb 2008, 17:54 pm
Well, it would be ridiculous to expect a defensive team not yet back 10 metres if there has not been reasonable time do so because the opposite scrummie took a quick tap, not to tackle the runner.
To be honest, I still think it is a question of proper refereeing.
12 Feb 2008, 18:18 pm
41 isi
The quick taps are different…these are free kicks. Ball is live on the tap.
I think the same rule applies…a lazy runner cannot obstruct and neither can the attacking player run into the lazy runner…. obviously depending where the lazy runner is.
If it is obvious that the attacking player is making a genuine move and the lazy runner is in the way then the referee must penalise accordingly.
It is upto the attacking team to utilise their quick taps effectively.
i will need to check if the quick tap law has changed or been altered.
12 Feb 2008, 18:23 pm
Jonty
I see slapchips was confirmed this afternoon as the new Bulls backline coach.
Lions head coach with cheetahs forward coach and now wp backline coach.
Only Wynie still hanging in there it seems. I bet Wynie comes from KZN.
Give us an article Jonty!
12 Feb 2008, 19:22 pm
wallabie
I hate to suck-up but you are not a dummy …..
you make more sense then White does !!:-)
12 Feb 2008, 19:25 pm
wallabie
Q What happens when a player noks on ….is that still a scrum?
12 Feb 2008, 20:10 pm
OK guys you can now join VOICE officially! SMS your initials and surname to 39119!
12 Feb 2008, 20:18 pm
this Wallabie knows his sh’t with these ELV’s, keo should get him to write up the pro’s and cons in his SA rugby mag rather than not.
12 Feb 2008, 20:18 pm
“21 Wallabie
Again there is no 5m zone at a tackle. Are you now an expert? Please don’t write your own laws.
Wrong again: at a ruck you can’t talk of a ball carrier
A ruck is a phase of play where one or more players from each team, who are on their feet, in physical contact close around the ball on the ground.
The ball is on the ground – no ball carrier please Wallabie. you got it wrong once again
12 Feb 2008, 20:33 pm
“52. Wallabie knows nothing about the ELV’s as a result he has confused all of you guys.
No flag or corner post will be removed. It will remain as is. The flag means nothing. If a player touches the flag and he grounds the ball and he did not touch the touch line – a try is scored
12 Feb 2008, 20:36 pm
“50 Knock on will be treated the same – scrum
12 Feb 2008, 20:41 pm
S14 will apply only 85% of the ELV.s
The pulling or collapsing of the maul will not be allowed.
Watch the Varsity Cup Maties vs. Tuks – the full ELV.s will be applied. Here the “Truck and Trailer is legal
12 Feb 2008, 20:50 pm
#49 Wallabie is actually a dummy…He has told you wrong things and you believed him.
At a ruck there is no ball carrier
12 Feb 2008, 20:54 pm
OK guys you can now join VOICE officially! SMS your initials and surname to 39119!
Comment by AB – RUGBY SUPPORTERS VOICE : February 12, 2008 @ 8:10 pm
12 Feb 2008, 20:58 pm
Sdwesh, this game between maties and tukkies, is it is stellies or pretoria? next monday eh, would like to go watch.
12 Feb 2008, 21:09 pm
Bulls sign up ‘Slaptjips’
12/02/2008 18:47
Johannesburg – Former Western Province, Stormers and Springbok wing Pieter Rossouw joined the Bulls on a two-week trial period after the mysterious departure of Nico le Roux and he seems to have passed his examination with flying colours, SuperSport reported.
In a Press statement on Tuesday afternoon the Bulls announced that the man so memorably dubbed “Slaptjips” will be in charge of their back play until October with responsibility for both the Super 14 side as well as the Currie Cup team.
The rubber-stamping of the tall former Bok’s position means the Bulls now find themselves in the astonishing situation of having a former Lion in Frans Ludeke as their head coach, a former Cheetah in Pote Human as their forwards coach and a former Province man (Rossouw) as their backline coach.
Rossouw, needless to say, is excited about landing a job with a team so blessed with talent.
“I started coaching when I was still playing because coaches like Gerrit Pool and Alan Zondagh gave a lot of the tactical responsibilities to the senior players,” he said. “In 2006 I coached Majuba men’s residence at Stellenbosch and last year I was involved with Western Province’s Vodacom Cup team as well as their Under-19s.”
Rossouw clearly made a big impact with the Bulls players in the two weeks of his “audition” because it was a poorly kept secret that Nico le Roux, the man originally appointed for the job, had failed to impress the like of new skipper Fourie du Preez and the rest of the Bulls Springbok-laden backline.
The Bulls drew a great amount from Australian Scott Louden in their march to last year’s title and it says a lot for their approach that they have decided to opt, in Rossouw, for a man known for his adventurous and imaginative approach.
12 Feb 2008, 22:05 pm
#59. Yes, will be at Stellies on Monday 18th. It’s a live broadcast Super sport 6.
Next monday 25th UCT vs. Tuks
12 Feb 2008, 22:07 pm
#59 time 18h30
12 Feb 2008, 23:00 pm
howzit
cheers supberbul for getting my into your pool on superbru.
about the new rules, and ive said it a few times now. im predicting some cynical tactics from the aussie department, well maybe any team with a weaker scrum in the fixture.
tap kicks can be taken as scrums. so strong scrumming teams will look to pummel their opposition pack into the dirt at every opportunity.
therefore the weaker scrumming team on the day has to look at alternatives and making their weakness an advantage when it comes to scrum time. so their more mobile front row cant cope with the heavy scrumming, and lets say their props get hurt and need to be replaced. they are replaced with a hooker and a loosie. hence forcing a non contestable scrum situation for the remainder of the game.
now scrum time has become an advantage for the weaker scrum, taking away the set piece advantage for the strong scrumming team. this will have a big impact with game plans and fitness levels for those teams depending on a stoppage for the scrum set piece.
any opinions?
12 Feb 2008, 23:38 pm
Tomsta
Read the first paragrapgh…I chuckled.
RSA has never dominated any other opposition scrum its a SAFFA myth that you think SA has dominated at scum time.
We will not be cynical at scrum time…the scrum laws have not changed. We will less likely have scrums but if SA wants them we will use them to catch our breath during them.
read this….”now scrum time has become an advantage for the weaker scrum, taking away the set piece advantage for the strong scrumming team”
Thats what you wrote..how can a weaker team dominate at scrum time when they dont have the scrum?
These new laws gives each team a chance to play at their strengths each time there is a free kick…aus maybe will be the quick taps. If its RSA strength to scrum then they will alays call for the scrum each time.
Rugby became a plodder sport and a waste of time with all the stop starts…to other sports I know that has too many of these…League and Grid iron.
Union is supposed to be flowing rugby!!!
12 Feb 2008, 23:41 pm
57
sdesh
I said if at ruck time the ball is recycled….go and read.
Recycled means someone has got the ball and as begun another pase…there is a ball carrier if players not in ruck are in the 5 m zone…they cannot tackle that player with the ball.
12 Feb 2008, 23:43 pm
54
what I said …is that the corner flag is not there to disallow a try. I did not mean it was not literally there.
You call me dumb…why dont you try and work it out you got half a brain…USE IT
12 Feb 2008, 23:47 pm
53
I said at ruck time…ball recycled…ball carrier…opposition players in 5m zone…cant tackle.
Read each step of the way!
Yes the ball is on the ground…but I spoke of an aspect of the game but emphasised what will literally take place from that moment.
I think you might just be the dummy!!!
13 Feb 2008, 02:39 am
wallabie
let me spell it out a bit clearer.
firstly, your aussie scrums are embarrasing. i wont mention a recent test match against england…
that said, not all saffa teams are strong at scrumming. in fact some of our supposedly strong scrummagers are regualarly owned by their kiwi or aussie counterparts. so dominance maybe is merely a perception held based on tradition/history.
now with the new ELV’s, the approach some teams take to playing free kicks could be very influential to the outcome and flow of the game.
i think that with the traditional saffa set piece love affair, the saffa teams who can scrum will want to set a scrum when they are awarded a free kick.
lets use the bulls as an example, and the bulls are playing against the brumbies. the brumbies we know from history are cunning and not the best of scrummaging teams. their props are a bit more mobile than the bulls team.
therefore the brumbies have set about a gameplan to minimise the number of scrums by rather tap kicking many more of their awarded free kicks.
the bulls notice this increased speed of the game, and hence try to add extra intensity to their scrums so that they can launch good attacking platforms and run some moves from their scrum. at the same time physically scrumming the brumbie front row into submission, and the bulls slowly squeeze the life out of the brumbies game plan.
so brumbies coach notices his front row is getting pounded. the brumbies props and hooker are substituted for the replacement hooker, prop and loosie (who are far more mobile and not strong scrummagers).
the brumbies front row is not filled with specialists which forces the ref to reduce the scrums to uncontested put-ins for the rest of the game.
the advantage now lies with the brumbies pack, as it is faster, more mobile, and will therefore be quicker to breakdowns etc around the field and more effective in broken play.
the bulls with their heavier pack is now lumbering around the pitch trying to keep up, but do not have as mobile replacements so their advantage at scrum time becomes a major mismatch in open field.
you catch my drift yet?
therefore teams with weaker scrums could quite easily manipulate this situation to their advantage. the advantage doesnt come into play around scrum time, as you know the footing is equal in terms of set play and the 10m of clear space to attack with. the advantage comes in way of being more effetive in open play and having more men around the park making positive contributions more often.
so in short, the weaker pack can be an advantage in this game with the introduction of the new ELV’s.
in the past the same scenario could have played out, but the impact of a more mobile pack might not have been noticed as much as it would be now.
13 Feb 2008, 07:44 am
You can only have uncontested scrums if the opposition do not have any front row players available to play.
That means that they have to have injuries and not just substitutions to their front row players in order for the ref to call uncontested scrums.
The ref has to be sure that they in fact have front row players injured and none available to play, before he calls uncontested scrums.
So what are you talking about?
13 Feb 2008, 08:21 am
wallabie
At a tackle there is no 5m zone – don’t you get it. Get keo to confirm this from Andre Watson.
NO 5M ZONE, NO 5m ZONE, NO 5m ZONE, NO 5m ZONE, NO 5m ZONE
At #39 “the new rule to remove the flag is a relief” that is what you said.
Also in rugby we talk of rugby laws and not rules.
Please don’t start again and tell people wrong things.
13 Feb 2008, 09:00 am
70 sdwesh
“the new rule to remove the flag is a relief…how many good tries have been denied by the corner flag.”
Comment by wallabie. : February 12, 2008 @ 5:36 pm
The sentence says it all…the rule to remove the flag to determine tries has been removed…not literally…but more so that a player can touch and place the ball for a try..it is a try as long as he is not out…feet, hand, boot, finger, strand of hair, left testicle is not touching the touchline or out of play.
Is that list long enough so I did not miss anything out.
AQbout the five meter zone….why is it then that the ‘scrumhalf’, I would assume it will always be the scrumhalf…that recycles the ball from the ruck…they cannot be touched.
They cannot be touched by the boys in the ruck and they cannot be touched by players within 5 meteres from the breakdown…players in this zone who are not part of the ruck cannot touch him until he has made the 5m…they then can tackle him from an on side position.
I will go and revisit this but I remember reading this law being interpreted as such explained above.
13 Feb 2008, 09:02 am
70 sdwesh
are you always this pedantic!!
13 Feb 2008, 21:36 pm
tight head
i implied the substitutions were because of injury. sometimes the meaning is lost when written.
14 Feb 2008, 07:17 am
So are you also implying that a team should fake injuries to gain an advantage?
Because your theory of a team with a weaker scrum gaining an advantage is not possible without them having injuries to their front row players.
Therefore the only way they can plan this advantage, as you have suggested is to fake injury!!
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.