TMO Involvement
- Thread starter BikingBud
- Start date
didds
Resident Club Coach
maybe not for that.
But are we now going to deny the opportunity for a less than perfectly executed kick requiring a jump whilst in space?
Might work does in hockey.
Aerial Balls – Rule 9.10 Players must not approach within 5 metres of an opponent receiving a falling raised ball until it has been received, controlled and is on the ground. The ball may be intercepted within 5 metres but outside of playing distance provided it is done safely.
Aerial Balls – Rule 9.10 Players must not approach within 5 metres of an opponent receiving a falling raised ball until it has been received, controlled and is on the ground. The ball may be intercepted within 5 metres but outside of playing distance provided it is done safely.
I’d like to see a trial where all open play kicking is banned apart from grubber kicking.
Can’t see it being accepted. It would mean more running rugby.
Perhaps the law could be that if you kick in open play your team cannot contest for the ball until either it has bounced , or the opponents have possession
There are definitely some trials that could be run in this area
Rich_NL
Well-known member
I’d like to see a trial where all open play kicking is banned apart from grubber kicking.
Can’t see it being accepted. It would mean more running rugby.
At a guess it would mean 14 in the defensive line, attackers unable to pull the defence out of shape, and back to the days of 6-3 scorelines. The rule changes incentivising the kicking game have (generally) helped the running game significantly, now that defences are professionally drilled. Look at the latest rounds of premiership scores, and compare them to 10 years ago
Marc Wakeham
Referees in Wales
No you just get no reward for it.Mostly the law book says one metre is close. But if you collide with another player you must be close.
I've never done a well executed cross kick. So you might need to jump to catch it.
Material effect.
AgreedAt a guess it would mean 14 in the defensive line, attackers unable to pull the defence out of shape, and back to the days of 6-3 scorelines. The rule changes incentivising the kicking game have (generally) helped the running game significantly, now that defences are professionally drilled. Look at the latest rounds of premiership scores, and compare them to 10 years ago
Kicking has its place but it needs to be purposeful not kick tennis. We need it to be into space to turn defences or to give opportunities for a safe regather.
Last edited:
50/22 works well.
Judicious grubbers have always worked well.
Kicking into space where the full back or winger is caught out of position in a ruck maul can be very successful.
Kicking and expecting to pick up where the opposition make an error is generally negative but if they do then the kicking can still pressurise the receiving side but not in the air.
Any 10 that can vary play and mix up the game according to what's occurring in front of them and especially when under pressure will always be good whereas those that rely on predetermined rugby by rote will frequently be shown up.
Judicious grubbers have always worked well.
Kicking into space where the full back or winger is caught out of position in a ruck maul can be very successful.
Kicking and expecting to pick up where the opposition make an error is generally negative but if they do then the kicking can still pressurise the receiving side but not in the air.
Any 10 that can vary play and mix up the game according to what's occurring in front of them and especially when under pressure will always be good whereas those that rely on predetermined rugby by rote will frequently be shown up.
I appreciate what you are saying but I was anticipating more running from the set pieces and from the breakdown. Your 14 man defensive line scenario only really happens after a kick and a player tries to run it back. What you are describing is more akin to a rugby league match. They still manage to get some reasonable scoring done in those matches. It may mean that we have to go through a short period of players learning to be more creative with the ball in hand.At a guess it would mean 14 in the defensive line, attackers unable to pull the defence out of shape, and back to the days of 6-3 scorelines. The rule changes incentivising the kicking game have (generally) helped the running game significantly, now that defences are professionally drilled. Look at the latest rounds of premiership scores, and compare them to 10 years ago
didds
Resident Club Coach
the 14 man in the defensive line I read to be what happens when
"I’d like to see a trial where all open play kicking is banned apart from grubber kicking."
so basically you just need one player in the back field to defend grubbers - cos now nobody is able to put a 35 metre punt behind/wide of you for a chase. makes defence easy so you can now fill the width of the pitch.
Quite aside from what happens when an attempt at a touch kick doesn't "go" - is that now a penalty of some sort for kicking in what is effectively now open play? (where open play presumably must mean anything that doesn't score a goal - DG - or finds touch )
"I’d like to see a trial where all open play kicking is banned apart from grubber kicking."
so basically you just need one player in the back field to defend grubbers - cos now nobody is able to put a 35 metre punt behind/wide of you for a chase. makes defence easy so you can now fill the width of the pitch.
Quite aside from what happens when an attempt at a touch kick doesn't "go" - is that now a penalty of some sort for kicking in what is effectively now open play? (where open play presumably must mean anything that doesn't score a goal - DG - or finds touch )
Variable length grubber kicking would soon break down a 14 man defence. You’d need much more than one back field player to guard all the possibilities, as well as a sudden change of direction by the ball carriers. Why can’t a grubber kick travel 35M or more, especially on a hard pitch? But then I’m talking as someone who played mainly in the backs, kicked off both feet and could sidestep, rather than play in the front row.
didds
Resident Club Coach
well I wasnt going off to write volumes...Variable length grubber kicking would soon break down a 14 man defence. You’d need much more than one back field player to guard all the possibilities, as well as a sudden change of direction by the ball carriers. Why can’t a grubber kick travel 35M or more, especially on a hard pitch? But then I’m talking as someone who played mainly in the backs, kicked off both feet and could sidestep, rather than play in the front row.
So - id stick 2 at least in the back field. That leaves a 13 man trench defense every time you got the ball.
Id certainly as a coach watch a LOT of rugby league for first three tackles to see what the back field defence looks like.
your not going to need 4 or 5 back there that's for sure. A pendulum 3 at most, inside most of the three tailing just inside the ball carrier at any time, the other two outside them in the direction of play. Thats till leaves a 12 man trench defence for a ~70m wide pitch
My initial response to Rich_nl was to counter his perceived opinion that cutting out a great deal of high ball kicking would be detrimental to the game because it would be too easy to defend. Your response suggests that you support that position from a defence coach point of view. I equally could come up with attacking strategies that would test/beat your strategies. Isn’t that why teams have attack and defence coaches? I don’t think that what I have suggested in relation to kicking would have a deleterious effect on the game. We’d have more running rugby with attack and defence coaches trying to outwit each other just as we have now. (Without the issues of danger and inconsistency that so often are raised on this forum in relation to receiving and chasing a high ball which was the catalyst for my trial suggestion.)
We've gone to general tactics now and away from what I was hoping people would contribute but I played in the front row and that's the game I want my 10 playing. Much easier to attack and pressure when running what are now considered to be cheat lines, used to be called ball/game awareness, if the 10 plays flat and keeps the defenders guessing, rather than just sitting in the pocket and hoofing!Variable length grubber kicking would soon break down a 14 man defence. You’d need much more than one back field player to guard all the possibilities, as well as a sudden change of direction by the ball carriers. Why can’t a grubber kick travel 35M or more, especially on a hard pitch? But then I’m talking as someone who played mainly in the backs, kicked off both feet and could sidestep, rather than play in the front row.
Stats have detracted as this concept of metres gained seems all important and potentially to the detriment to the data that really matters, the scoreboard.
Attackers outwit defenders because they generate a disparity: 2v1 or other numerical advantage, fast v fatties, wider gaps, long flat passes and pops, straight and counter lines to breach drift defence, all of them can be varied to increase threat by well thought out kicking that adds further uncertainty to fix the defender. And next time do something different.
I feel in the Leinster Saints semi final Fin Smith showed a master class with this. Leinster rush defence was made to look schoolboy as he always had variety and pulled at least five different options in a row, good supporting players knowing what he might do enable that choice.
Harry
Active member
IMHO, one of the wonderful things about Rugby Union is the variety. Scrums, rucks, mauls and line outs one one hand and open play has running passing and kicking all of which have further variations such as box kicks high kicks grubbers and kicking to touch and the wonderful new 50/22. except for aimless Twickenham tennis I wouldn't want to effectively ban any of them or so disadvantage the attacking side that kicking stopped.
I'd just like to see dangerous jumping stopped for player welfare reasons.
The Rugby world has several fantasticly skilled half backs whose tactical kicking is a wonder to behold. Don't wanna lose that
I'd just like to see dangerous jumping stopped for player welfare reasons.
The Rugby world has several fantasticly skilled half backs whose tactical kicking is a wonder to behold. Don't wanna lose that
Your points can’t be disagreed with but the suggestion was specifically put forward to stop ‘dangerous jumping’. What do you suggest? Whatever we do will change the game in some way. If we allow kicking high into the air we are always going to get catchers/receivers and chasers. Not allowing jumping for instance, as a possible solution, would in my opinion lead to more high impact collisions of a slightly different nature as to now as the players arrived.
Volun-selected
Referees in America
There are two threads to this. The first is to rebalance the lopsided advantage of a player in the air. The second is about whether we want to rein in the leaping in general for the sake of player safety.
Dealing with that first one, although rugby generally rewards the attacking team I think the simplest solution is to put the onus on the jumping player and explicitly state via a clarification that there are no more free hits.
If the defender reaches the point where the ball would land without intervention then a leap by the attacker after that point will be deemed dangerous or reckless and will be penalized accordingly. High lateral speed directly into the defender will be an aggravating factor and deemed high risk.
Basically, only leap for the ball if you know the defender isn’t there already.
If the jumper leaps before the defender gets in place, the defender needs to adjust their position to not tackle in the air, similar to what we have now. If they both leap, then we treat as we do now - was it fair.
I’d expect the rebalance would remove the worst excesses.
The second thread about whether we want to rein in the leaping in general for the sake of player safety - that’s tough. See some earlier comments around to players leaping together and taking both of the out - is that fair play and just a rugby incident or something we should look to remove?
That one would require more discussion and nuance than I think I can bring. Would we want a full or highly restrictive ban, would we want to phase it in through the age grades - no leaping until U14 etc. However, I would suggest that it would be critical that we have that conversation at the grass roots first and not with the elite - based on recent empirical evidence I remain skeptical that would be allowed to happen…
Harry
Active member
In a previous post I suggested: Except in a line out, no player may jump when close to or aproaching another player. It would also cover jumping over a tackle.
If a player jumps and collides with another player they can be pinged. Might I suggest that no collision makes the offence imaterial ?
didds
Resident Club Coach
Thing is - is there much if any leap[ing below that age group anyway?
Marc Wakeham
Referees in Wales
THe attacking kick is a valuable weapon. However, sides just hoof it into the air hoping to win the "Battle in the air" / get a PK for the defender taking out the man or putting preassure on. Rather than outlaw the kick , put pressure on the 10 / 9 to find space not kick down the throat of the defender. thus rewarding the skill of the kicker nd not chance.