Law trials and changes
-
World Rugby creates access to optional domestic law trials to further reduce COVID-19 risk
The World Rugby Executive Committee has approved 10 optional law trials which are designed to provide national member unions with COVID-19 transmission risk reduction options if required.
Temporary law trials relating to the scrum, tackle, ruck and maul were approved along with a package of best-practice match hygiene measures. Each measure aims to reduce individual cumulative exposure to these contact activities, which are generally accepted as presenting the highest COVID-19 transmission risk.
Unions can apply to implement one or more of the temporary law amendments as domestic trials at elite or community levels on a needs-basis in line with the World Rugby return-to-play guidance published this month.
Recognising the fluid global COVID-19 environment, implementation by unions will be entirely based on their territory-specific requirements and respective government advice and directives.
The trials are informed by World Health Organisation (WHO) guidance, which determines high transmission risk as being 15 cumulative minutes within one metre of an infected person. The important considerations for rugby are:
-
It is generally accepted that sustained close contact carries greater COVID-19 transmission risk than close proximity
-
It is also generally accepted that close proximity in an outdoor environment carries lesser risk that an indoor environment
-
As transmission risk during a game is related to both physical contact and proximity, further evidence-based risk reduction should be focused on contact activities
-
While individual exposure to contact activities such as scrums, tackles, lineouts, rucks and mauls are generally within 15 cumulative minutes, further exposure reduction is possible
-
Risk reduction can also be achieved via best-practice match management, including hygiene measures, screening, testing and implementation of World Rugby’s return-to-play guidance
-
Sport should only return when safe and appropriate to do so in line with government advice
Click here for the full package of optional temporary law trials
The law trials were considered by the specialist Law Review Group (LRG) comprising coaches, players, match officials, medics and law specialists, following a detailed analysis of 60 matches. The LRG decided against mandatory global application of the law trials given the wide variation in the presentation and management of COVID-19 across nations.
Comprehensive game analysis enabled an evidence-based approach to developing the temporary trials that limit scrum contact and time, lower the tackle height and speed up ball distribution from rucks and from mauls.
(...)
In addition to the on-field law and officiating interventions, a number of non-law hygiene measures are recommended for playing and training in line with WHO and World Rugby guidance:
- Mandatory hand and face sanitisation pre- and post-match
- Regular ball sanitisation before, during and after matches
- Single user water bottles/hydration
- Changing of jerseys, shorts and headgear at half-time where possible
- Prevention of huddles and celebrations involving contact
- Prevention of spitting and nose clearance
Recommended training measures
- Forwards units: high risk transmission activity such as an eight-person scrum should be undertaken against machine to limit exposure, packs should be trained separately
- Scrum and maul practice should take place at the end of a training session, preferably a day before a ‘down day’ to allow 24-48 hours before collective training
- High transmission risk training should be avoided within 48 hours of a game
-
-
I agree with the comments. It's a contact sport. I can think of risk-reducing options that don't involve changing the rules like this (or wearing crazy suits).
Fortunately, the trials are optional and for domestic use only.
What bothers me, also, in rule 5 is that a player can get an orange card for a "red card high tackle offence", but can't return to the field immediately if the TMO concludes that it's a penalty only.
-
i like a lot of those tweaks though
-
@voodoo The way I read the quoted text, the trials are only to reduce the ristk of COVID-19 transmission. It clearly says "temporary law trials" and they're not mandatory because the "presentation and management of COVID-19 across nations" varies.
So, unless WR/participating nations like the new laws and/or want to change rugby into league, we'll hopefully don't see a permanent change to the rules.
-
@mariner4life said in Law trials and changes:
i like a lot of those tweaks though
I only like the last.
I certainly don't like the idea of a team that can't scrum getting to opt out of the contest and play league.
-
@antipodean said in Law trials and changes:
@mariner4life said in Law trials and changes:
i like a lot of those tweaks though
I only like the last.
I certainly don't like the idea of a team that can't scrum getting to opt out of the contest and play league.
nah, fuck it. Scrums are meant to be a way to restart play. We've gone too far now, and it's become this blight on the game where it's all gamesmanship up front and trying to con the ref.
I also hate scrum after scrum on a goal line that always ends up with a prop binned. It's shit to watch.
-
@mariner4life said in Law trials and changes:
@antipodean said in Law trials and changes:
@mariner4life said in Law trials and changes:
i like a lot of those tweaks though
I only like the last.
I certainly don't like the idea of a team that can't scrum getting to opt out of the contest and play league.
nah, fuck it. Scrums are meant to be a way to restart play. We've gone too far now, and it's become this blight on the game where it's all gamesmanship up front and trying to con the ref.
restart play with a contest for possession
I also hate scrum after scrum on a goal line that always ends up with a prop binned. It's shit to watch.
Which is why people shouldn't be binned because their opponent is better. Keep a straight back and if your scrum gets rissoled, bad luck. If you want to fuck around, get binned.
-
@antipodean said in Law trials and changes:
@mariner4life said in Law trials and changes:
@antipodean said in Law trials and changes:
@mariner4life said in Law trials and changes:
i like a lot of those tweaks though
I only like the last.
I certainly don't like the idea of a team that can't scrum getting to opt out of the contest and play league.
nah, fuck it. Scrums are meant to be a way to restart play. We've gone too far now, and it's become this blight on the game where it's all gamesmanship up front and trying to con the ref.
restart play with a contest for possession
I also hate scrum after scrum on a goal line that always ends up with a prop binned. It's shit to watch.
Which is why people shouldn't be binned because their opponent is better. Keep a straight back and if your scrum gets rissoled, bad luck. If you want to fuck around, get binned.
i disagree with everything you wrote here.
-
-
WR please phone Dana White ffs
-
@mariner4life said in Law trials and changes:
@antipodean said in Law trials and changes:
@mariner4life said in Law trials and changes:
i like a lot of those tweaks though
I only like the last.
I certainly don't like the idea of a team that can't scrum getting to opt out of the contest and play league.
nah, fuck it. Scrums are meant to be a way to restart play. We've gone too far now, and it's become this blight on the game where it's all gamesmanship up front and trying to con the ref.
I also hate scrum after scrum on a goal line that always ends up with a prop binned. It's shit to watch.
I'm good with ending multiple resets. But after a single collapse, #1 looks like a free and easy option for the ref who doesn't really know whats going on in there, to simply say "collapse, no fault, free kick".
And I'm baffled by any support of removing the scrum as an attacking option when you win a penalty close in, surely that's an entrenched and quality part of the game?