Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

'Don't anticipate any law changes': Premiership, RFU and WRU set to ignore World Rugby's 10 Covid laws

(Photo by Michael Steele/Getty Images)

World Rugby’s ten optional law trials won’t be implemented in England or Wales to help the sport return to playing in the Covid-19 era. Super Rugby in New Zealand will restart on June 13 with the same laws it had when it was suspended in March. And the Gallagher Premiership have now suggested it will do likewise if it does get the go-ahead to restart its stalled 2019/20 campaign. 

ADVERTISEMENT

The general feeling is that it would be unwieldy to restart the tournament with an altered set of laws different from what had been in use in the first part of the campaign, particularly the tweaks regarding the scrum and maul.  

A Premiership Rugby spokesperson said in the Telegraph: “We are undertaking a review of all aspects of the game to ensure the safe return of Gallagher Premiership Rugby, but don’t anticipate any law changes.”

Video Spacer

RugbyPass recently hosted a FIFA 20 tournament for rugby players during the lockdown… here are some of the highlights of the competition won by Mako Vunipola

Video Spacer

RugbyPass recently hosted a FIFA 20 tournament for rugby players during the lockdown… here are some of the highlights of the competition won by Mako Vunipola

Premiership Rugby suffered a setback last week in its efforts to have its clubs return to training, but with lockdown measures in England set to move into a new phase of lifting restrictions, there is hope that a full set of guidelines will be established by the time the clubs next meet late next week. 

World Rugby’s law review group apparently conducted an analysis of 60 matches before deciding on its ten optional law change recommendations aimed at reducing Covid-19 transmission risk.

However, amid criticism that they alter the spirit and the look of rugby as it has been known, they have so far not been warmly received. 

Aside from the Premiership stating that their tournament will not adopt any of the proposed law changes, the RFU and the WRU have also hinted they too would be giving the recommendations a wide berth as they formulate plans for the safe return of grassroots rugby for the 2020/21 season.  

ADVERTISEMENT

“The RFU has its own review underway looking at the options for a return to training and return to play rugby for clubs in England,” said an RFU spokesperson. “When government advice on social distancing measures are eased, specific RFU guidance will be announced and provided to clubs.”

The WRU agreed, their chairman Gareth Davies stating in a BBC interview: “I’m not a fan. I think it eats away at the integrity of the game. “There are a couple of positives there. Looking at the scrum, it would be great if we could put something in place long-term… (but) at the moment, our union has no firm plans to implement them.”

World Rugby had always intended that these laws changes were optional and were up to individual unions to adopt or ignore. “It’s not going to be forced upon people,” said chief medical officer Martin Raftery in a midweek interview.

“It’s just going to say, ‘Here’s the research we found. If you think you want to trial it, by all means you can trial it’. That doesn’t mean a country who has a low risk can’t adopt it and trial it as well. That’s up to the actual competitions to make that decision.”

ADVERTISEMENT

WORLD RUGBY’S 10 OPTIONAL LAW CHANGES 

SCRUM

1. Remove reset scrum when no infringement occurs;

2. Hookers must use a ‘break foot’ to aid scrum stability;

3. No scrum option for a penalty or free-kick;

4. Goal-line drop-out when an attacker is held up in-goal or knock on in-goal.

TACKLE 

5. Reinforce high tackle sanction framework – the introduction of an orange card for red card high tackle offence;

6. Remove choke tackle and reward defensive team.

RUCK 

7. Ruck ‘use it’ duration time reduced from five to three seconds;

8. No scrum for failure to ‘use it’ at scrum, ruck or maul.

MAUL 

9. No one can join a maul if not in it from the start;

10. Only one forward movement at a maul.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 5 hours ago
Does South Africa have a future in European competition?

I rated Lowe well enough to be an AB. Remember we were picking the likes of George Bridge above such players so theres no disputing a lot of bad decisions have been made by those last two coaches. Does a team like the ABs need a finicky winger who you have to adapt and change a lot of your style with to get benefit from? No, not really. But he still would have been a basic improvement on players like even Savea at the tail of his career, Bridge, and could even have converted into the answer of replacing Beauden at the back. Instead we persisted with NMS, Naholo, Havili, Reece, all players we would have cared even less about losing and all because Rieko had Lowe's number 11 jersey nailed down.


He was of course only 23 when he decided to leave, it was back in the beggining of the period they had started retaining players (from 2018 onwards I think, they came out saying theyre going to be more aggressive at some point). So he might, all of them, only just missed out.


The main point that Ed made is that situations like Lowe's, Aki's, JGP's, aren't going to happen in future. That's a bit of a "NZ" only problem, because those players need to reach such a high standard to be chosen by the All Blacks, were as a country like Ireland wants them a lot earlier like that. This is basically the 'ready in 3 years' concept Ireland relied on, versus the '5 years and they've left' concept' were that player is now ready to be chosen by the All Blacks (given a contract to play Super, ala SBW, and hopefully Manu).


The 'mercenary' thing that will take longer to expire, and which I was referring to, is the grandparents rule. The new kids coming through now aren't going to have as many gp born overseas, so the amount of players that can leave with a prospect of International rugby offer are going to drop dramatically at some point. All these kiwi fellas playing for a PI, is going to stop sadly.


The new era problem that will replace those old concerns is now French and Japanese clubs (doing the same as NRL teams have done for decades by) picking kids out of school. The problem here is not so much a national identity one, than it is a farm system where 9 in 10 players are left with nothing. A stunted education and no support in a foreign country (well they'll get kicked out of those countries were they don't in Australia).


It's the same sort of situation were NZ would be the big guy, but there weren't many downsides with it. The only one I can think was brought up but a poster on this site, I can't recall who it was, but he seemed to know a lot of kids coming from the Islands weren't really given the capability to fly back home during school xms holidays etc. That is probably something that should be fixed by the union. Otherwise getting someone like Fakatava over here for his last year of school definitely results in NZ being able to pick the cherries off the top but it also allows that player to develop and be able to represent Tonga and under age and possibly even later in his career. Where as a kid being taken from NZ is arguably going to be worse off in every respect other than perhaps money. Not going to develop as a person, not going to develop as a player as much, so I have a lotof sympathy for NZs case that I don't include them in that group but I certainly see where you're coming from and it encourages other countries to think they can do the same while not realising they're making a much worse experience/situation.

144 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Sacha Feinberg-Mngomezulu suffers new injury setback Springboks flyhalf's latest injury worry
Search