50/22 law change

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

Moderator: moderators

JB1973
Mullet
Posts: 1825
Joined: June 7th, 2013, 10:30 am

50/22 law change

Post by JB1973 »

Just wondered what the general feeling is about this new law change?

Are we in favour or against it?

Will it have any major impact on the game or will there be little difference?

wixfjord
Shane Jennings
Posts: 6863
Joined: April 13th, 2009, 1:00 pm

Re: 50/22 law change

Post by wixfjord »

I'm not sure how much of an impact it'll have because it will likely only happen 1-2 times a game.

But I think it can only be a positive if it forces wingers to hang back and gives kicking 10s something to aim for.

The one problem I do have with it is that the range of what constitutes 50:22 kick is huge.
For example a kick along the ground from just inside the half way line involves a certain skill, but much less skill than a kick over a winger's head from deeper in your half that bounces!

Ross Byrne should definitely benefit from it though.
If it means wingers have to step back he'll have more time to get the ball wide with a kick, or if the winger steps up he can kick in behind.

It'll probably suit Irish sides a bit more than other sides, since we tend to have more positionally aware wingers (generally!).

User avatar
Morf
Rhys Ruddock
Posts: 2422
Joined: April 26th, 2011, 2:20 am

Re: 50/22 law change

Post by Morf »

wixfjord wrote:I'm not sure how much of an impact it'll have because it will likely only happen 1-2 times a game.

But I think it can only be a positive if it forces wingers to hang back and gives kicking 10s something to aim for.

The one problem I do have with it is that the range of what constitutes 50:22 kick is huge.
For example a kick along the ground from just inside the half way line involves a certain skill, but much less skill than a kick over a winger's head from deeper in your half that bounces!

Ross Byrne should definitely benefit from it though.
If it means wingers have to step back he'll have more time to get the ball wide with a kick, or if the winger steps up he can kick in behind.

It'll probably suit Irish sides a bit more than other sides, since we tend to have more positionally aware wingers (generally!).
Leaves SA sides with 7s players as wings Spekman for Bulls for example with an even weaker argument to play them.

User avatar
Logorrhea
Shane Horgan
Posts: 4325
Joined: October 2nd, 2007, 1:20 pm
Location: D24

Re: 50/22 law change

Post by Logorrhea »

A side will win the throw into a lineout if they bounce the ball into touch beyond the opposition 22 from behind halfway or beyond halfway from behind their own 22
Just wanted to put this here as I keep forgetting what the rule is.

FLIP
Rhys Ruddock
Posts: 2106
Joined: May 22nd, 2009, 1:00 am

Re: 50/22 law change

Post by FLIP »

I'd rather referees actually implement the current rule set in a consistent and equitable way instead of fiddling on the deck of the Titanic like this.
Anyone But New Zealand

User avatar
hugonaut
Shane Jennings
Posts: 5588
Joined: May 5th, 2009, 7:44 pm

Re: 50/22 law change

Post by hugonaut »

wixfjord wrote:I'm not sure how much of an impact it'll have because it will likely only happen 1-2 times a game.

But I think it can only be a positive if it forces wingers to hang back and gives kicking 10s something to aim for.

The one problem I do have with it is that the range of what constitutes 50:22 kick is huge.
For example a kick along the ground from just inside the half way line involves a certain skill, but much less skill than a kick over a winger's head from deeper in your half that bounces!

Ross Byrne should definitely benefit from it though.
If it means wingers have to step back he'll have more time to get the ball wide with a kick, or if the winger steps up he can kick in behind.

It'll probably suit Irish sides a bit more than other sides, since we tend to have more positionally aware wingers (generally!).
There was a report on the trial in Australia by Gerry Thornley late last month in the Irish Times [source: https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/ ... -1.4216057 ]

"Meanwhile, in Australia’s abbreviated 2020 NRC, there were 14 cases of 50-22 kicks which found touch in the opposition 22 from inside halfway and three of them led to a try as a result of the subsequent attacking throw-in. While there was less evidence to go on, not surprisingly the trial in rewarding the 50-22 kick actually led to a slight reduction in kicks out of hand, but then in punishing defending teams for keeping 14 in a line, it rewards the attacking team for keeping the ball in hand. There was less data regarding the goal-line drop out."

The Doc
Rhys Ruddock
Posts: 2045
Joined: August 11th, 2006, 2:59 pm
Location: Location Location

Re: 50/22 law change

Post by The Doc »

FLIP wrote:I'd rather referees actually implement the current rule set in a consistent and equitable way instead of fiddling on the deck of the Titanic like this.
I actually think it is a significant change - because of the implications. It means a defending team (especially when the attacking team is in their own half) can't flood the defensive line with one person covering the back. It should create space. I don't think it is just tinkering at the edge
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

FLIP
Rhys Ruddock
Posts: 2106
Joined: May 22nd, 2009, 1:00 am

Re: 50/22 law change

Post by FLIP »

The Doc wrote:
FLIP wrote:I'd rather referees actually implement the current rule set in a consistent and equitable way instead of fiddling on the deck of the Titanic like this.
I actually think it is a significant change - because of the implications. It means a defending team (especially when the attacking team is in their own half) can't flood the defensive line with one person covering the back. It should create space. I don't think it is just tinkering at the edge
What other top tier sport changes the in play rules so often? It's a barrier to public acceptance and adoption.
Anyone But New Zealand

The Doc
Rhys Ruddock
Posts: 2045
Joined: August 11th, 2006, 2:59 pm
Location: Location Location

Re: 50/22 law change

Post by The Doc »

FLIP wrote:
The Doc wrote:
FLIP wrote:I'd rather referees actually implement the current rule set in a consistent and equitable way instead of fiddling on the deck of the Titanic like this.
I actually think it is a significant change - because of the implications. It means a defending team (especially when the attacking team is in their own half) can't flood the defensive line with one person covering the back. It should create space. I don't think it is just tinkering at the edge
What other top tier sport changes the in play rules so often? It's a barrier to public acceptance and adoption.
NFL tweak and adjust every off season - sometimes interpretation but sometimes rule changes. But I know what you mean about moving the goalposts. But rugby has always tweaked and changed. And some of them significant.
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

wixfjord
Shane Jennings
Posts: 6863
Joined: April 13th, 2009, 1:00 pm

Re: 50/22 law change

Post by wixfjord »

FLIP wrote: What other top tier sport changes the in play rules so often? It's a barrier to public acceptance and adoption.
I actually think this is a huge positive of rugby. The authorities are happy to change laws if they feel the game is getting stale or to try reward/prompt more attacking play.

Have heard commentators from other sports compliment this and bemoan their own sports inertia to law changes too (GAA & soccer).

This particular rule could have a really positive effect by opening up more attacking options and potentially creating more space by taking men out of the defensive line.

If you're a side that likes to get the ball wide quickly from inside your half AND you have a 10 who is an accurate kicker from hand (I'd argue we do both of these things well) then it could really benefit.

User avatar
dropkick
Mullet
Posts: 1763
Joined: January 2nd, 2007, 12:27 am
Location: Cork

Re: 50/22 law change

Post by dropkick »

It looks promising. If it results in 1 less player in the defensive line then it will be a success.


Having 8 subs should be the next thing they tackle. If only 5 subs were allowed it would mean subs mainly being there in case of injury and every player needing to last 80 min which means fitter, smaller players.

wixfjord
Shane Jennings
Posts: 6863
Joined: April 13th, 2009, 1:00 pm

Re: 50/22 law change

Post by wixfjord »

I think by faaaaaarrrrr the biggest change could come by just policing the offside line properly.

But things like this are good additions overall imo.

FLIP
Rhys Ruddock
Posts: 2106
Joined: May 22nd, 2009, 1:00 am

Re: 50/22 law change

Post by FLIP »

Joe Bloggs who watches the six nations when it's on every year but doesn't follow much rugby otherwise isn't going to be converted into a more serious fan if he's thinking "for fecks sake they've changed the game again".

If you want to speed up the game, get referees who understand all aspects of the game (refereeing standards on scrums are awful) and who are fully professional in their approach to refereeing. Apply the current laws correctly instead of adding yet another thing they'll get wrong.
Anyone But New Zealand

User avatar
Logorrhea
Shane Horgan
Posts: 4325
Joined: October 2nd, 2007, 1:20 pm
Location: D24

Re: 50/22 law change

Post by Logorrhea »

FLIP wrote:Apply the current laws correctly instead of adding yet another thing they'll get wrong.
I agree with you in general but this one is pretty cut and dry. No interpretation to it. These are the kind of rules that are easier to ref.

User avatar
Oldschoolsocks
Rhys Ruddock
Posts: 2680
Joined: January 4th, 2015, 10:36 am
Location: Stepping out of the Supernova

Re: 50/22 law change

Post by Oldschoolsocks »

Logorrhea wrote:
FLIP wrote:Apply the current laws correctly instead of adding yet another thing they'll get wrong.
I agree with you in general but this one is pretty cut and dry. No interpretation to it. These are the kind of rules that are easier to ref.
The offside line is piss easy to ref - there's 4 referees all it needs is the what we would have called touch judges in my day to call offside when somebody is offside, and if they miss it there's a ref watching it on d'telly to call offside. That's the biggest bane on the current game.

Simples

User avatar
Morf
Rhys Ruddock
Posts: 2422
Joined: April 26th, 2011, 2:20 am

Re: 50/22 law change

Post by Morf »

dropkick wrote:It looks promising. If it results in 1 less player in the defensive line then it will be a success.


Having 8 subs should be the next thing they tackle. If only 5 subs were allowed it would mean subs mainly being there in case of injury and every player needing to last 80 min which means fitter, smaller players.
Could lead to fewer players and smaller squads.

How many players go from pro to semi-pro or semi-pro to amateur?

Not that I'm necessarily disagreeing but doubt the players' associations would be fans of it.

FLIP
Rhys Ruddock
Posts: 2106
Joined: May 22nd, 2009, 1:00 am

Re: 50/22 law change

Post by FLIP »

Logorrhea wrote:
FLIP wrote:Apply the current laws correctly instead of adding yet another thing they'll get wrong.
I agree with you in general but this one is pretty cut and dry. No interpretation to it. These are the kind of rules that are easier to ref.
No quick lineouts from a touched ball or new ball is another and we all know how that turned out against Wales.
Anyone But New Zealand

wixfjord
Shane Jennings
Posts: 6863
Joined: April 13th, 2009, 1:00 pm

Re: 50/22 law change

Post by wixfjord »

FLIP wrote:Joe Bloggs who watches the six nations when it's on every year but doesn't follow much rugby otherwise isn't going to be converted into a more serious fan if he's thinking "for fecks sake they've changed the game again".

If you want to speed up the game, get referees who understand all aspects of the game (refereeing standards on scrums are awful) and who are fully professional in their approach to refereeing. Apply the current laws correctly instead of adding yet another thing they'll get wrong.
It's not zero sum.

You can both apply current laws (they're laws btw) better AND improve the game by tweaking what's there.

Irregular rugby watchers want faster games with more excitement.

This law change should give that.

User avatar
hugonaut
Shane Jennings
Posts: 5588
Joined: May 5th, 2009, 7:44 pm

Re: 50/22 law change

Post by hugonaut »

wixfjord wrote:
FLIP wrote: What other top tier sport changes the in play rules so often? It's a barrier to public acceptance and adoption.
I actually think this is a huge positive of rugby. The authorities are happy to change laws if they feel the game is getting stale or to try reward/prompt more attacking play.

Have heard commentators from other sports compliment this and bemoan their own sports inertia to law changes too (GAA & soccer).

This particular rule could have a really positive effect by opening up more attacking options and potentially creating more space by taking men out of the defensive line.

If you're a side that likes to get the ball wide quickly from inside your half AND you have a 10 who is an accurate kicker from hand (I'd argue we do both of these things well) then it could really benefit.
Rugby's laws are unwieldy because the sport is very complex and from its inception has tried to include very diverse aspects of physical competition.

It seems like a paradox but it is because the sport is so liberal and free-ranging that its lawbook is so complicated. If you're allowed to do something in the game, then there has to be a set of regulations governing how you do it.

For example, there doesn't have to be a set of laws in basketball governing kicking, because you're not allowed to kick the ball. There doesn't have to be referee conferences on the physics of a forward pass in soccer because you can't pick up the ball in your hands.

Going back to the first principles of starting a sport with competitors, a ball and a blank sheet of paper, think of how many things you can do in rugby that you can't do in [for example] tennis or baseball or cricket. Those sports are great sports in their own right, but they do not offer anything like as wide a range of challenges as rugby does to both the athlete and the referee. Sure, there are rallies in tennis and double-plays in baseball [and the equivalent in cricket, I suppose], but then the action stops after a few seconds and everybody goes back to their positions to start the next point.

User avatar
Logorrhea
Shane Horgan
Posts: 4325
Joined: October 2nd, 2007, 1:20 pm
Location: D24

Re: 50/22 law change

Post by Logorrhea »

Oldschoolsocks wrote:
Logorrhea wrote:
FLIP wrote:Apply the current laws correctly instead of adding yet another thing they'll get wrong.
I agree with you in general but this one is pretty cut and dry. No interpretation to it. These are the kind of rules that are easier to ref.
The offside line is piss easy to ref - there's 4 referees all it needs is the what we would have called touch judges in my day to call offside when somebody is offside, and if they miss it there's a ref watching it on d'telly to call offside. That's the biggest bane on the current game.
Simples
Fair point but all they have to do with this one is identify if the ball has been kicked, where its been kicked from, and where it went.

Post Reply