the new proposed 50:22 rule

Forum for the discussion of other Teams and Clubs as well as General Rugby chat.

Moderator: moderators

the new proposed 50:22 rule

Postby MylesNaGapoleen » March 22nd, 2019, 10:21 am

One proposal that has gained traction has been borrowed from Rugby League and rewards kicking to touch.

If a player kicks from their own half and the ball bounces into touch inside the opposition 22 the team of the kicker is awarded the lineout throw and potentially a dangerous attacking platform. Currently the rules award the throw to the defending team.

The theory is that sides will have to drop wingers into the backfield to cover the kicks to touch with the scrumhalf also having to fill in the midfield area behind the defence to cover balls kicked over the defensive line. The idea is to take players out of the defensive line to provide more space for attacking rugby and possibly reduce the number of collisions.


https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/new-rugby-law-changes-will-not-be-trialled-in-ireland-1.3834446

Not so sure about this....

Won't it lead to more ping pong...and lineouts followed by rolling mauls as a result?
User avatar
MylesNaGapoleen
Mullet
 
Posts: 1048
Joined: September 18th, 2009, 11:04 am

Re: the new proposed 50:22 rule

Postby FLIP » March 22nd, 2019, 11:35 am

If they want more exciting attacking rugby, they need to do the following which involves no rule changes

1 - Actually police offside, swimming up the side of mauls, and rolling away from the tackle. Equally.
2 - Actually penalise repeat offences with yellow cards. If an offence warrants a red, don't palm off the decision onto the citing commission. How often do we see foul play which takes a player out of the game be cited after the fact, but for the duration of the game at hand they don't suffer any more disadvantage than a yellow?
3 - Employ referees who actually understand scrums to prevent the messing around seen there.
4 - Go back to refereeing based on equality of application of the laws, not based on impressions, reputations, and the occasion at hand. Especially don't give teams favourable outcomes in refereeing based on past "injustices" - how long have Wales had favour due to Warbutons red card, or New Zealand for the Michalak forward pass?
Anyone But New Zealand
FLIP
Mullet
 
Posts: 1826
Joined: May 22nd, 2009, 1:00 am

Re: the new proposed 50:22 rule

Postby fourthirtythree » March 22nd, 2019, 11:36 am

Yes. I can't see why it wouldn't. Three kick strategies to get wingers out of position to get your maul try.
Datta: what have we given?
My friend, blood shaking my heart
The awful daring of a moment's surrender
Which an age of prudence can never retract
What the thunder said to Brian Lenihan
User avatar
fourthirtythree
Cian Healy
 
Posts: 9317
Joined: April 12th, 2008, 11:33 pm
Location: Eight miles high

Re: the new proposed 50:22 rule

Postby LeRouxIsPHat » March 22nd, 2019, 12:28 pm

I don't think it'll work but I do think it's worth trialing it, although there are plenty of other things they should be doing first IMO. I think it'll lead to a lot of kicks being booted straight down the pitch towards the posts because the two guys hanging back will need to stay close to the side. So they'll just kick it out and you'll get a lineout well inside the opposition half anyway.

I find the timing of it strange too. I'd have thought that the amount of kicking we saw from England against ourselves and France would make people want to reduce the amount of kicking, in fact I think those games could be a big problem going forward, especially the French one. I know the idea is that there'll be more space for people to play ball but in reality they're giving an incentive to kick as much as an incentive to move the ball.

I'm honestly not sure if they've factored in a little thing called weather. If it's lashing rain then there'll be a massive incentive to kick for position. Also if you build a small lead against a good team then wouldn't you just control it by booting the ball away?
User avatar
LeRouxIsPHat
Leo Cullen
 
Posts: 12931
Joined: January 22nd, 2009, 8:49 pm

Re: the new proposed 50:22 rule

Postby The Doc » March 22nd, 2019, 12:50 pm

FLIP wrote:2 - Actually penalise repeat offences with yellow cards. If an offence warrants a red, don't palm off the decision onto the citing commission. How often do we see foul play which takes a player out of the game be cited after the fact, but for the duration of the game at hand they don't suffer any more disadvantage than a yellow?


One of the other things being discussed is that when a player is sin-binned, the citing commissioner can review the tape and upgrade to a red during the 10 mins
I like your right leg. A lovely leg for the role.
I've got nothing against your right leg.
The trouble is ... neither have you
The Doc
Mullet
 
Posts: 1820
Joined: August 11th, 2006, 2:59 pm
Location: Location Location

Re: the new proposed 50:22 rule

Postby The Doc » March 22nd, 2019, 12:53 pm

MylesNaGapoleen wrote:
One proposal that has gained traction has been borrowed from Rugby League and rewards kicking to touch.

If a player kicks from their own half and the ball bounces into touch inside the opposition 22 the team of the kicker is awarded the lineout throw and potentially a dangerous attacking platform. Currently the rules award the throw to the defending team.

The theory is that sides will have to drop wingers into the backfield to cover the kicks to touch with the scrumhalf also having to fill in the midfield area behind the defence to cover balls kicked over the defensive line. The idea is to take players out of the defensive line to provide more space for attacking rugby and possibly reduce the number of collisions.


https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/new-rugby-law-changes-will-not-be-trialled-in-ireland-1.3834446

Not so sure about this....

Won't it lead to more ping pong...and lineouts followed by rolling mauls as a result?


You'd have to defend it by having 2 back covering both sides rather than 1 - remember, it isn't for balls kicked straight into touch. So the defending team should reasonably be able to reach the ball before it goes into touch in most cases. But will leave them exposed in the main defensive line.

It would certainly make it more tactical as teams try to bluff whether they are running or kicking - or what defensive shape they are taking
I like your right leg. A lovely leg for the role.
I've got nothing against your right leg.
The trouble is ... neither have you
The Doc
Mullet
 
Posts: 1820
Joined: August 11th, 2006, 2:59 pm
Location: Location Location

Re: the new proposed 50:22 rule

Postby dropkick » March 22nd, 2019, 12:56 pm

I think its a good idea. The theory looks sound.


I don't think there'll be too many more kicks. Its hard to make that kick usually. If there are more kicks teams will adjust. They'll put another man back and one less in the defensive line will result in more counter attacking opportunities.


If it doesn't result in taking extra defenders from the defensive line then it should result in more space to kick into so an extra attacking option.


Its worth trying and would be interesting to see from a tactical point of view.
User avatar
dropkick
Mullet
 
Posts: 1603
Joined: January 2nd, 2007, 1:27 am
Location: Cork

Re: the new proposed 50:22 rule

Postby The Doc » March 22nd, 2019, 12:59 pm

dropkick wrote:I think its a good idea. The theory looks sound.


I don't think there'll be too many more kicks. Its hard to make that kick usually. If there are more kicks teams will adjust. They'll put another man back and one less in the defensive line will result in more counter attacking opportunities.


If it doesn't result in taking extra defenders from the defensive line then it should result in more space to kick into so an extra attacking option.


Its worth trying and would be interesting to see from a tactical point of view.


I'd say ROG is half thinking of making a comeback though :D ... he's probably one of the few players who would have the level of accuracy, range and deception on his kicks that could make full use of it
I like your right leg. A lovely leg for the role.
I've got nothing against your right leg.
The trouble is ... neither have you
The Doc
Mullet
 
Posts: 1820
Joined: August 11th, 2006, 2:59 pm
Location: Location Location

Re: the new proposed 50:22 rule

Postby LeRouxIsPHat » March 22nd, 2019, 1:22 pm

I really don't think that's how it would operate, very little ground to find near the touchline if there are two players back.

It could change how a back three works/is selected. You could have the ten dropping back every time you don't have the ball, and wingers like Nadolo might be redundant.
User avatar
LeRouxIsPHat
Leo Cullen
 
Posts: 12931
Joined: January 22nd, 2009, 8:49 pm

Re: the new proposed 50:22 rule

Postby MylesNaGapoleen » March 22nd, 2019, 2:20 pm

dropkick wrote:I think its a good idea. The theory looks sound.


I don't think there'll be too many more kicks. Its hard to make that kick usually. If there are more kicks teams will adjust. They'll put another man back and one less in the defensive line will result in more counter attacking opportunities.


If it doesn't result in taking extra defenders from the defensive line then it should result in more space to kick into so an extra attacking option.


Its worth trying and would be interesting to see from a tactical point of view.


Worth trying I suppose but...here is my reasons not to run with it.

1. Why attack from your own half if you can simply kick it into the opposition 22 and get a lineout if ROG type guys are on your team? Attacks from deep are one of the most entertaining sides of rugby....for me, anyway.
2. Rugby is (usually) a wet weather sport played in winter (often windy) which lends it self for teams kicking the leather off the ball in the hope of getting a lineout and gain yards quickly. That will increase, not decrease kicks imo.
3. Can you imagine the amount of TMOs needed to see if a ball touched a line or bounce out on the full? It is a huge yardage gain or lost based on small margins. For internationals with lots of cameras, that could work but In most rugby clubs, you can barely see the touchline in a lot of cases. And the touch judges at smaller clubs are usually fat forty year old farts like me who have been dragged out of the club bar to man the line.

I can see the logic that kicking downfield for a 50:22 carries the risk of gifting the opposition lots of time and space to respond with same and I see your points about extra space, but, am just not convinced.
User avatar
MylesNaGapoleen
Mullet
 
Posts: 1048
Joined: September 18th, 2009, 11:04 am

Re: the new proposed 50:22 rule

Postby Peg Leg » March 22nd, 2019, 2:43 pm

dropkick wrote:I think its a good idea. The theory looks sound.


I don't think there'll be too many more kicks. Its hard to make that kick usually. If there are more kicks teams will adjust. They'll put another man back and one less in the defensive line will result in more counter attacking opportunities.


If it doesn't result in taking extra defenders from the defensive line then it should result in more space to kick into so an extra attacking option.


Its worth trying and would be interesting to see from a tactical point of view.
Munster man supports rule change that rewards kicking to the corners? Im in shock.
What's that I hear you say... you always rated Ross Byrne as a better talent than Joey Carbury?

We'll have to barricade the M7 if we're to have any chance of keeping Ross Byrne when this passes.
"It was Mrs O'Leary's cow"
Daniel Sullivan
User avatar
Peg Leg
Cian Healy
 
Posts: 9277
Joined: February 1st, 2010, 6:08 pm
Location: Procrastinasia

Re: the new proposed 50:22 rule

Postby Peg Leg » March 22nd, 2019, 2:44 pm

The Doc wrote:
FLIP wrote:2 - Actually penalise repeat offences with yellow cards. If an offence warrants a red, don't palm off the decision onto the citing commission. How often do we see foul play which takes a player out of the game be cited after the fact, but for the duration of the game at hand they don't suffer any more disadvantage than a yellow?


One of the other things being discussed is that when a player is sin-binned, the citing commissioner can review the tape and upgrade to a red during the 10 mins
I believe this is being trialled in mega-city 1 at the moment.
"It was Mrs O'Leary's cow"
Daniel Sullivan
User avatar
Peg Leg
Cian Healy
 
Posts: 9277
Joined: February 1st, 2010, 6:08 pm
Location: Procrastinasia

Re: the new proposed 50:22 rule

Postby dropkick » March 22nd, 2019, 9:12 pm

The Doc wrote:
dropkick wrote:I think its a good idea. The theory looks sound.


I don't think there'll be too many more kicks. Its hard to make that kick usually. If there are more kicks teams will adjust. They'll put another man back and one less in the defensive line will result in more counter attacking opportunities.


If it doesn't result in taking extra defenders from the defensive line then it should result in more space to kick into so an extra attacking option.


Its worth trying and would be interesting to see from a tactical point of view.


I'd say ROG is half thinking of making a comeback though :D ... he's probably one of the few players who would have the level of accuracy, range and deception on his kicks that could make full use of it



Indeed. I don't think many players will be able to take advantage of it.
User avatar
dropkick
Mullet
 
Posts: 1603
Joined: January 2nd, 2007, 1:27 am
Location: Cork

Re: the new proposed 50:22 rule

Postby dropkick » March 22nd, 2019, 9:13 pm

Peg Leg wrote:
dropkick wrote:I think its a good idea. The theory looks sound.


I don't think there'll be too many more kicks. Its hard to make that kick usually. If there are more kicks teams will adjust. They'll put another man back and one less in the defensive line will result in more counter attacking opportunities.


If it doesn't result in taking extra defenders from the defensive line then it should result in more space to kick into so an extra attacking option.


Its worth trying and would be interesting to see from a tactical point of view.
Munster man supports rule change that rewards kicking to the corners? Im in shock.
What's that I hear you say... you always rated Ross Byrne as a better talent than Joey Carbury?

We'll have to barricade the M7 if we're to have any chance of keeping Ross Byrne when this passes.



We're all for innovation down in Munster. :lol:
User avatar
dropkick
Mullet
 
Posts: 1603
Joined: January 2nd, 2007, 1:27 am
Location: Cork

Re: the new proposed 50:22 rule

Postby dropkick » March 22nd, 2019, 9:20 pm

MylesNaGapoleen wrote:
dropkick wrote:I think its a good idea. The theory looks sound.


I don't think there'll be too many more kicks. Its hard to make that kick usually. If there are more kicks teams will adjust. They'll put another man back and one less in the defensive line will result in more counter attacking opportunities.


If it doesn't result in taking extra defenders from the defensive line then it should result in more space to kick into so an extra attacking option.


Its worth trying and would be interesting to see from a tactical point of view.


Worth trying I suppose but...here is my reasons not to run with it.

1. Why attack from your own half if you can simply kick it into the opposition 22 and get a lineout if ROG type guys are on your team? Attacks from deep are one of the most entertaining sides of rugby....for me, anyway.
2. Rugby is (usually) a wet weather sport played in winter (often windy) which lends it self for teams kicking the leather off the ball in the hope of getting a lineout and gain yards quickly. That will increase, not decrease kicks imo.
3. Can you imagine the amount of TMOs needed to see if a ball touched a line or bounce out on the full? It is a huge yardage gain or lost based on small margins. For internationals with lots of cameras, that could work but In most rugby clubs, you can barely see the touchline in a lot of cases. And the touch judges at smaller clubs are usually fat forty year old farts like me who have been dragged out of the club bar to man the line.

I can see the logic that kicking downfield for a 50:22 carries the risk of gifting the opposition lots of time and space to respond with same and I see your points about extra space, but, am just not convinced.



I don't think too many players would be able to take advantage of it. I just see it as an extra attacking option and it makes things a bit harder for the defence.


If a team picks a kicking 10 to go for it then they're depriving themselves of attacking (the fewer numbers in the defensive line) out wide and if they mess up the kick they're will be more numbers waiting to counter attack.
User avatar
dropkick
Mullet
 
Posts: 1603
Joined: January 2nd, 2007, 1:27 am
Location: Cork

Re: the new proposed 50:22 rule

Postby kermischocolate » March 23rd, 2019, 8:37 am

FLIP wrote:If they want more exciting attacking rugby, they need to do the following which involves no rule changes

1 - Actually police offside, swimming up the side of mauls, and rolling away from the tackle. Equally.
2 - Actually penalise repeat offences with yellow cards. If an offence warrants a red, don't palm off the decision onto the citing commission. How often do we see foul play which takes a player out of the game be cited after the fact, but for the duration of the game at hand they don't suffer any more disadvantage than a yellow?
3 - Employ referees who actually understand scrums to prevent the messing around seen there.
4 - Go back to refereeing based on equality of application of the laws, not based on impressions, reputations, and the occasion at hand. Especially don't give teams favourable outcomes in refereeing based on past "injustices" - how long have Wales had favour due to Warbutons red card, or New Zealand for the Michalak forward pass?


A thousand times this.
User avatar
kermischocolate
Mullet
 
Posts: 1237
Joined: May 17th, 2009, 2:56 am
Location: Glasgow


Return to General Rugby

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests