Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

How the new law changes in Super Rugby can bring the All Blacks up to speed

(Photo by Hagen Hopkins/Getty Images)

Comparing statistics from Super Rugby Pacific and the top international teams is offering an insight into the rugby trends that could define this year’s World Cup, with law changes in the Australasian/Pacific competition aiming to amend the disparity in time with the ball in play while improving the overall product.

ADVERTISEMENT

The new law changes more firmly impose the time limits or “shot clocks” on set piece plays, giving 90 seconds and 60 seconds for conversions and penalties respectively, and 30 seconds for lineouts and scrums to be formed.

Also speeding up the game will be the removal of lengthy TMO reviews for foul play. Yellow and red card-worthy acts will now see the guilty player immediately handed a card, with yellow cards being reviewed by the TMO as play resumes.

Video Spacer

Video Spacer

Former Blues front-rower James Parsons was on the Aotearoa Rugby Pod discussing the breakdown as New Zealand’s most crucial area for improvement throughout Super Rugby Pacific when he expressed optimism that the new laws will have a positive influence on the way the All Blacks‘ players will want to play the game.

“It is effort but it’s a little bit more than that,” Parsons said when analysing the art of the breakdown. “If you look at Ireland, they are so good at putting bodies in motion and it’s not an effort, I don’t question any player’s effort but it’s just around maybe simplifying systems.

“There’s many elements to it but the faster you move, the faster you get in position, the faster you’ll be able to see what the opportunity is and you’ll be able to take it. Then on the flip side, defensively, the faster you set, the faster you can get up, come up and shut the ball down. So it’s really simple, it’s just moving as fast as possible to where you need to be, A to B, A to B, A to B, off the ground, off the ground, all those little things.”

Related

Parsons said the law changes could bring the All Blacks up to the speed of Ireland and France and change the player’s intent with how they go about the moments in between plays.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Even the new law changes, I think we’ll see that filter into the international game of getting to lineouts quick, getting to scrums really quick and getting that ball in play.

“I think it was Ireland and France, 48 minutes of ball in play, I think the average of Super Rugby was around 32, 33 (minutes) last year. That is an increase of ball in play, the NRL’s at 52. That’s a massive increase in a short space of time but that’s the mindset that those two teams, No 1 and 2 have got. It’s ball in play and playing this game at pace and being direct.”

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 1 hour ago
'Passionate reunion of France and New Zealand shows Fabien Galthie is wrong to rest his stars'

Where? I remember saying "unders"? The LNR was formed by the FFR, if I said that in a way that meant the 'pro' side of the game didn't have an equal representation/say as the 'amateur' side (FFR remit) that was not my intent.


But also, as it is the governing body, it also has more responsibility. As long as WR looks at FFR as the running body for rugby in France, that 'power' will remain. If the LNR refuses to govern their clubs use of players to enable a request by FFR (from WR) to ensure it's players are able to compete in International rugby takes place they will simply remove their participation. If the players complain to the France's body, either of their health and safety concerns (through playing too many 'minutes' etc) or that they are not allowed to be part in matches of national interest, my understanding is action can be taken against the LNR like it could be any other body/business. I see where you're coming from now re EPCR and the shake up they gave it, yes, that wasn't meant to be a separate statement to say that FFR can threaten them with EPCR expulsion by itself, simply that it would be a strong repercussion for those teams to be removed (no one would want them after the above).


You keep bringing up these other things I cannot understand why. Again, do you think if the LNR were not acting responsibly they would be able to get away with whatever they want (the attitude of these posters saying "they pay the players")? You may deem what theyre doing currently as being irresponsible but most do not. Countries like New Zealand have not even complained about it because they've never had it different, never got things like windfall TV contracts from France, so they can't complain because theyre not missing out on anything. Sure, if the French kept doing things like withholding million dollar game payments, or causing millions of dollars of devaluation in rights, they these things I'm outlining would be taking place. That's not the case currently however, no one here really cares what the French do. It's upto them to sort themselves out if they're not happy. Now, that said, if they did make it obvious to World Rugby that they were never going to send the French side away (like they possibly did stating their intent to exclude 20 targeted players) in July, well then they would simply be given XV fixtures against tier 2 sides during that window and the FFR would need to do things like the 50/50 revenue split to get big teams visiting in Nov.

307 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING The Wallabies have a serious problem The Wallabies have a serious problem
Search