Law Changes trial from 1 January

[Enzedder]

From the World Rugby site

Law amendments recommended to go to global trial

* Reduced conversion time: Conversion attempts limited to 60 seconds, aligning with penalty kicks and quickening game pace.
* 30-second scrum and lineout limit: Scrums and lineouts must be set within 30 seconds, managed by the referee.
* Marking inside the 22m line: Players can now mark the ball inside the 22-metre line from a restart, encouraging more contestable kick-offs.
* Single-stop mauls: The ball must be played after one stoppage in a maul, improving game flow.
* Play-on in uncontested lineouts: Play will continue if the ball is not thrown straight during uncontested lineouts, reducing unnecessary breaks.
* Protection of the scrum-half: Enhanced protection for the scrum-half at scrums, rucks and mauls encourages fluid open play.


With trials continuing across the globe, the World Rugby Executive Board unequivocally endorsed the programme, noting widespread approval from players, coaches, referees and fans alike, as well as statistics which strongly suggest a positive impact on the sport in line with the objective. Headline results include:

Increased ball-in-play time: Up by more than two minutes and 30 seconds, reaching more than 33 minutes per match.
Shorter total match time: Reduced by three-five minutes due to fewer stoppages.
Higher restart contestability: A 45 per cent increase in contestable restarts.
More dynamic mauls: A 10 per cent increase in ball-out time, with maul durations shortened by three seconds.
Fewer lineout infringements: Play on from not-straight throws led to increased lineout success and contestability.
Quicker set pieces and kicks: Scrum and lineout set-up times dropped, and goal kicks are 15 seconds faster.
Television Match Official protocol and simplified red card sanction process endorsed

The Executive Board also endorsed updates to the Television Match Official (TMO) protocol, empowering officials to spot clear infringements in the final phases before scoring. A simplified red card process featuring standardised sanctions and the ability to replace a red-carded player with another player after 20 minutes, was also supported for further elite game trialling after successful initial trials in World Rugby competitions.

Next steps

The trials will go out to union and region consultation ahead of the World Rugby Council meeting on 14 November. Subject to approval by the Council, World Rugby will work closely with member unions, competition owners and key stakeholders to finalise the timeline and processes for trial adoption at a global level with implementation from 1 January.

World Rugby Chairman Sir Bill Beaumont said: “This is another important step forward for the Shape of the Game programme. As a package, these trials demonstrate our commitment to making rugby as enjoyable as possible for audiences, while maintaining the integrity and competitive nature of the game. The positive outcomes from the trials reinforce our belief that these adjustments will bring lasting benefits to both players and fans.”

Summary

60- second conversion shot-clock
30-second scrum and lineout limit, managed by the referee
Marking inside the 22m line from a restart
Single-stop mauls: The ball must be played after one stoppage in a maul
Play-on un-straight line outs when uncontested
Protection of the scrum-half at scrums, rucks and mauls.
Television Match Official (TMO) protocol, empowering officials to spot clear infringements in the final phases before scoring.
A red-carded player can be replaced with another player after 20 minutes

[Sandstorm]

“more protection for scrum half ”

Fine, protect the little shits. But what about the bloody centipede they still get to hide behind??

[JM2K6]

Yeah, not keen on that one.

The twenty minute red card is only acceptable if they stop being absolute chicken shits about handing them out

[Biffer]

So basically from kickoff, everyone will kick long, hope the mark is taken, then you either get a line out or the ball in hand around halfway.

[Kiwias]

Television Match Official (TMO) protocol, empowering officials to spot clear infringements in the final phases before scoring.

Vague BS. The laws need to clarify and specify exactly how many phases.

[Gumboot]

Television Match Official (TMO) protocol, empowering officials to spot clear infringements in the final phases before scoring.

Vague BS. The laws need to clarify and specify exactly how many phases.

This. Too many RWC games were blighted by the continual reffing by TMO. Gotta keep those bastards on a very short leash.

[Jim Lahey]

Television Match Official (TMO) protocol, empowering officials to spot clear infringements in the final phases before scoring.

Vague BS. The laws need to clarify and specify exactly how many phases.

Agreed. This one will be a shit show and lead to more replays, more dramatic gasps and boo's from the crowd, and more bitching from fans/coaches after each game.

Spent the last week in the US with work and watched a few NFL/college games on TV. Their approach is really freshing. No fucking about, make a quick call and keep the game rolling. However they need about 6 onfield refs it seems to make this happen.

[Biffer]

Television Match Official (TMO) protocol, empowering officials to spot clear infringements in the final phases before scoring.

Vague BS. The laws need to clarify and specify exactly how many phases.

Agreed. This one will be a shit show and lead to more replays, more dramatic gasps and boo's from the crowd, and more bitching from fans/coaches after each game.

Spent the last week in the US with work and watched a few NFL/college games on TV. Their approach is really freshing. No fucking about, make a quick call and keep the game rolling. However they need about 6 onfield refs it seems to make this happen.

I’m strongly in favour of another, on field, assistant referee in rugby. Means you would have one ref either side of the scrum, looking at defensive and attacking sides of each breakdown, both directions for offside, etc.

[Big D]

From the World Rugby site

Law amendments recommended to go to global trial

* Reduced conversion time: Conversion attempts limited to 60 seconds, aligning with penalty kicks and quickening game pace.
* 30-second scrum and lineout limit: Scrums and lineouts must be set within 30 seconds, managed by the referee.
* Marking inside the 22m line: Players can now mark the ball inside the 22-metre line from a restart, encouraging more contestable kick-offs.
* Single-stop mauls: The ball must be played after one stoppage in a maul, improving game flow.
* Play-on in uncontested lineouts: Play will continue if the ball is not thrown straight during uncontested lineouts, reducing unnecessary breaks.
* Protection of the scrum-half: Enhanced protection for the scrum-half at scrums, rucks and mauls encourages fluid open play.


With trials continuing across the globe, the World Rugby Executive Board unequivocally endorsed the programme, noting widespread approval from players, coaches, referees and fans alike, as well as statistics which strongly suggest a positive impact on the sport in line with the objective. Headline results include:

Increased ball-in-play time: Up by more than two minutes and 30 seconds, reaching more than 33 minutes per match.
Shorter total match time: Reduced by three-five minutes due to fewer stoppages.
Higher restart contestability: A 45 per cent increase in contestable restarts.
More dynamic mauls: A 10 per cent increase in ball-out time, with maul durations shortened by three seconds.
Fewer lineout infringements: Play on from not-straight throws led to increased lineout success and contestability.
Quicker set pieces and kicks: Scrum and lineout set-up times dropped, and goal kicks are 15 seconds faster.
Television Match Official protocol and simplified red card sanction process endorsed

The Executive Board also endorsed updates to the Television Match Official (TMO) protocol, empowering officials to spot clear infringements in the final phases before scoring. A simplified red card process featuring standardised sanctions and the ability to replace a red-carded player with another player after 20 minutes, was also supported for further elite game trialling after successful initial trials in World Rugby competitions.

Next steps

The trials will go out to union and region consultation ahead of the World Rugby Council meeting on 14 November. Subject to approval by the Council, World Rugby will work closely with member unions, competition owners and key stakeholders to finalise the timeline and processes for trial adoption at a global level with implementation from 1 January.

World Rugby Chairman Sir Bill Beaumont said: “This is another important step forward for the Shape of the Game programme. As a package, these trials demonstrate our commitment to making rugby as enjoyable as possible for audiences, while maintaining the integrity and competitive nature of the game. The positive outcomes from the trials reinforce our belief that these adjustments will bring lasting benefits to both players and fans.”

Summary

60- second conversion shot-clock
30-second scrum and lineout limit, managed by the referee
Marking inside the 22m line from a restart
Single-stop mauls: The ball must be played after one stoppage in a maul
Play-on un-straight line outs when uncontested
Protection of the scrum-half at scrums, rucks and mauls.
Television Match Official (TMO) protocol, empowering officials to spot clear infringements in the final phases before scoring.
A red-carded player can be replaced with another player after 20 minutes

Not keen on many of those tbh.

[Brazil]

“more protection for scrum half ”

Fine, protect the little shits. But what about the bloody centipede they still get to hide behind??

Having played scrum half for many years I'm massively opposed to this. It's essentially depowering the ruck further, leaving only jackling as a means to contest the ball since rucking over will most likely take a dawdling scrum half out.

Whilst I'm almost certainly becoming a miserable old bastard, I can't help but feel that amending the laws to increase the spectacle risks losing some of the fundamental elements of the match in favour of emphasising others that are deemed more exciting. Ultimately it ends up cheapening the game as a whole, and that's before you look at the unintended consequences of increasing in-field kicking to even further levels. I dislike the 20 min red card for similar reasons - why shouldn't a team be collectively punished for the dickheadry of one of their players? If you've got sent off for foul play then you've failed in your responsibility as a team mate and they're going to have to bear the brunt because of your actions, in the same way they'd benefit from your good play. It's a team sport and it should work both ways.

[inactionman]

Television Match Official (TMO) protocol, empowering officials to spot clear infringements in the final phases before scoring.

Vague BS. The laws need to clarify and specify exactly how many phases.

Agreed. This one will be a shit show and lead to more replays, more dramatic gasps and boo's from the crowd, and more bitching from fans/coaches after each game.

Spent the last week in the US with work and watched a few NFL/college games on TV. Their approach is really freshing. No fucking about, make a quick call and keep the game rolling. However they need about 6 onfield refs it seems to make this happen.

I'd argue the infractions/events the US refs are looking for are a little more clear cut and in a single phase from standing start, so can be quite quick to isolate and view, but it is certainly something they've made into a very slick, quick process. Getting the tape measure out to see if someone made a first down always seemed excessive, mainly as the decision of where the ball is considered to be grounded is relatively subjective in the first place.

In rugby we just need to make the scope a bit clearer and in particular not re-ref things - too many marginal calls overturned with little evidence. I'm left wondering if there's any mileage in a cricket-like review system, where the captain can ask for a TV review a limited number of times (noting in cricket the number of reviews is limitless if they are shown to be justified). The opposing team knows if there's been a forward pass or an offside, so give them some leeway to challenge. Make it so they lose their right to appeal if they make unfounded challenges, so they only call the clear and obvious.

One thing I do like in US sports that I'd like to see copied is the delay of game penalty in basketball. Essentially, if you unnecessarily touch the ball when the opponents are trying to regather and restart then you get penalised. I'm seeing more and more players wandering back to their defensive line ball in hand just to frustrate a quick tap. (Eta: but we've enough laws already, not sure we need to do much more than actually referee this one)

[Sandstorm]

I’m strongly in favour of another, on field, assistant referee in rugby. Means you would have one ref either side of the scrum, looking at defensive and attacking sides of each breakdown, both directions for offside, etc.

Another salaried official on the field per match? Sounds expensive....

[inactionman]

I’m strongly in favour of another, on field, assistant referee in rugby. Means you would have one ref either side of the scrum, looking at defensive and attacking sides of each breakdown, both directions for offside, etc.

Another salaried official on the field per match? Sounds expensive....

My only slight reservation to that idea is that we can't realistically do it at amateur level - for the same basic reason you mention - and we'd end up with separate approaches to on-field officiating. But that's a small issue, and the pro game has 4th officials already.

I'd think having two pairs of eyes to keep two teams in check would be a good idea - the touch judge on the opposite side is not near enough to really do much more than offside lines and forward passes. Although they barely seem to do that.

I vaguely recall some ideas 10-15 years ago about a second ref brought on for scrums, as they were in such an utter mess and the ref could only watch one side. Also, the scrum ref could be an ex-front row fattie who knew all the tricks but didn't need to wheeze around the pitch all game.

[Biffer]

I’m strongly in favour of another, on field, assistant referee in rugby. Means you would have one ref either side of the scrum, looking at defensive and attacking sides of each breakdown, both directions for offside, etc.

Another salaried official on the field per match? Sounds expensive....

My only slight reservation to that idea is that we can't realistically do it at amateur level - for the same basic reason you mention - and we'd end up with separate approaches to on-field officiating. But that's a small issue, and the pro game has 4th officials already.

I'd think having two pairs of eyes to keep two teams in check would be a good idea - the touch judge on the opposite side is not near enough to really do much more than offside lines and forward passes. Although they barely seem to do that.

I vaguely recall some ideas 10-15 years ago about a second ref brought on for scrums, as they were in such an utter mess and the ref could only watch one side. Also, the scrum ref could be an ex-front row fattie who knew all the tricks but didn't need to wheeze around the pitch all game.

Yeah, I understand that but like you say, we don't have TMOs, fourth officials etc at amateur level either. Tbh you get games at the lowest levels where it's club officials running the lines rather than trained refs.

American Football's team of refs works well because they all have clearly defined responsibilities as well, and that would have to be laid out, rather than having indvidual refs decide who is to look for what, which happens at the moment. If you have a reffing development route where your next step from touch judge is a focus on scrums and breakdowns on pitch, it may help improve focus on those areas too.

[Paddington Bear]

Club officials as touch judges was/is standard in the national leagues to a certain level, not sure it’s just the 3rd XVs. I used to get £20 and a half pint for doing it for my club in National 3/South West 1 as a teenager

[Kiwias]

One site I watch has a decent analysis of these law changes.

[LoveOfTheGame]

One site I watch has a decent analysis of these law changes.

I agree with most of what Tim says. (Including getting rid of the bloody goal line dropout. I absolutely farking hate it.)

[Sandstorm]

I agree with most of what Tim says. (Including getting rid of the bloody goal line dropout. I absolutely farking hate it.)

Agreed; and if you're going to speed up scrums, then we restore the 5 meter scrum for "player held up over line"

[ASMO]

Bring back old school rucking i say!!!

[Hal Jordan]

The ruck laws are turning it into a quicker version of the tackle rules for League - one defender tackles, another attends the ruck to stop anyone picking and driving and everyone else fans out across the pitch shutting down the space.

The powers that be want more exciting play and ball in hand, but seem not to join the jots between tying up players in breakdowns that are a contest, also wearing them out doing so, and there being space and mismatches on the pitch. When props have 80 minute engines and all the players from 12 out are the size of old school backrowers to ensure they win the collisions, it's little wonder everything turns to stodge.

Also, whilst NFL refereeing crews might come to quick decisions, don't think for a minute they are any more respected by the fans for flag happy refball.

[Chilli2]

A red card for foul play should result in an immediate 8 week suspension. No appeal.

[Biffer]

A red card for foul play should result in an immediate 8 week suspension. No appeal.

Regardless of what the actual length of ban is, the punishment needs to be such that clubs don't renew contracts / contract offers are lower when you're getting suspended regularly.

[Chilli2]

A red card for foul play should result in an immediate 8 week suspension. No appeal.

Regardless of what the actual length of ban is, the punishment needs to be such that clubs don't renew contracts / contract offers are lower when you're getting suspended regularly.

Ja, serial offenders should be almost unemployable.

The punishments should harsh for a foul play red.

[Uncle fester]

One site I watch has a decent analysis of these law changes.

I agree with most of what Tim says. (Including getting rid of the bloody goal line dropout. I absolutely farking hate it.)

Was unsure about it but it has stopped endless pick and go on the try line. Teams actually have to pay a bit of rugby now.

[Niegs]

So is the scrum half protection thing only for the designated scrum half or for a player at the back of a ruck going to play the ball? Would be sad for a game that thrives on contests to give the 9 and 21 only ultimate protection. What about if, like I think the Boks have done on occasion, a winger is your backup scrum half?

As Tim said at the start, there are laws in the book that barely ever get strictly applied. Stop cheats coming through illegally, or let them come through legally and play whomever is there. That sometimes seems inconsistent, esp. if the 'ruck' has collapsed and most seem to interpret the pile of bodies as impassible, yet there are moments when that's not the case. If that's confusing for refs, then clean up the bloody language to be more explicit.

[Niegs]

Count on the French for protests!

[laurent]

Count on the French for protests!

rightly so in this case.

[Enzedder]

It's so weird that the same offence can lead to a side losing a player for 1 minute or 75 minutes.

Make the deterrent in the sentencing at the judiciary hearing.

[average joe]

Ja, and it's also strange how one player gets 6 weeks, and another gets 2 for the same offence. If only the judiciary was consistent in their rulings.

[Enzedder]

Ja, and it's also strange how one player gets 6 weeks, and another gets 2 for the same offence. If only the judiciary was consistent in their rulings.

World rugby can take that over with video conferencing. I'll put my hand up.

[average joe]

Ja, and it's also strange how one player gets 6 weeks, and another gets 2 for the same offence. If only the judiciary was consistent in their rulings.

World rugby can take that over with video conferencing. I'll put my hand up.

I'll suggest they start at a standard sanction and look to increase due to aggravating factors instead of starting at the max and looking for any mitigating factors they can find to decrease. Also, being an apologetic cunt does not afford you a week off. And professional players who has played 100s of games don't get a week off for attending a tackling/ref course.

Starting standard: 2 games
Was it intentional: + 1 game
Was it dangerous: + 1 game
Did it cause grievous bodily harm to the other player: + 2 games

The section must be served at the same level as the game where the infraction occurred. Any games the player might have played at lower levels will not count towards serving the sentence. The player cannot play any games at any level until the full sanction is served.

[Enzedder]

That last sentence would get overturned by every court in the world though.

[Sandstorm]

That last sentence would get overturned by every court in the world though.

Why? He can train all he wants, but can’t play a match.

[Tichtheid]

The 20 minute red card is about the most stupid idea since, well I don't know when, maybe since getting rid of rucking.

Are we really going down the road where the occasional watchers who might bring in sponsorship via tv or whatever are more important than player safety or the integrity of the game itself?

The game has always about playing hard but fair, you step over the line then you get sent off, for the duration of the game - it's not a difficult thing to comprehend.

Learn to tackle low you dolts.

And coach them to tackle low you sphincters.

[Enzedder]

But we don't need to wreck the game to "teach someone a lesson". That's like giving sentencing to the police instead of the courts.

I am definitely for increasing penalties with no mitigation, but increasing the penalty according to severity and frequency.

[Certain Navigator]

But we don't need to wreck the game to "teach someone a lesson". That's like giving sentencing to the police instead of the courts.

I am definitely for increasing penalties with no mitigation, but increasing the penalty according to severity and frequency.

Exactly. The 20 minute red is a no-brainer. The only one I don't like, and that's as a former halfback, is this idea of more 'protection' for halfbacks.

[Guy Smiley]

It's not about teaching a lesson, it's a sanction for an illegal act.

I'm roughly aligned with Homer here... start with a set penalty and grade up depending on seriousness. Get rid of 'mitigation'. Get rid of mealy mouthed pr exercises like attending tackle school or whatever.

Commit a foul worthy of a RC, pay the price. Don't fuck around with it.

[Biffer]

The twenty minute red card is absolute bullshit. It’s again something pushed by Aussies because they feel they have to keep up with NRL and the big hits there.

Why any of us let ourselves keep getting steered down these paths by a union that can’t even set up a domestic competition is beyond me.

[SaintK]

It's not about teaching a lesson, it's a sanction for an illegal act.

I'm roughly aligned with Homer here... start with a set penalty and grade up depending on seriousness. Get rid of 'mitigation'. Get rid of mealy mouthed pr exercises like attending tackle school or whatever.

Commit a foul worthy of a RC, pay the price. Don't fuck around with it.

Quite. Well put!!!

[Uncle fester]

The 20 minute red card is about the most stupid idea since, well I don't know when, maybe since getting rid of rucking.

Are we really going down the road where the occasional watchers who might bring in sponsorship via tv or whatever are more important than player safety or the integrity of the game itself?

The game has always about playing hard but fair, you step over the line then you get sent off, for the duration of the game - it's not a difficult thing to comprehend.

Learn to tackle low you dolts.

And coach them to tackle low you sphincters.

Irfu have said no.