New Season, New Laws

Here's the five new laws being trialled by IRB officials for the new season in NH.

• Scrum call is now “crouch”, “touch” and "set”.
  
• At the ruck the new 5 second 'use it or lose it' ref call.
  
• The “concussion bin”   a five-minute period for player to be assessed at pitch side if they're able to continue. A temp sub is allowed for that period but they can't kick at goal.
  
• For a quick throw-in, a player may be anywhere outside the field of play between the line of touch and the player’s goalline - this is best understood with the IRB's useful graphic on its website.
  
• A conversion kick must happen within 90 seconds of a try being awarded.

[In addition, people may not be aware that the Premiership is trialling additional TMO protocols along with Currie Cup in SA. A protocol will be developed from these trials for trialling in the November Internationals.]

Television Match Official (TMO) protocols
Law 6 – Trials for the extension of the role of the TMO to be trialled in a northern and southern hemisphere competition.
Additional jurisdiction protocol
1. Potential infringement by the team touching the ball down in opposition in-goal
1.1. If after a team in possession of the ball has touched the ball down in their opponents in goal area and any of the match officials have a view that there was a potential infringement, of any nature, before the ball was carried into in-goal by the team that touched the ball down, they may suggest that the referee refers the matter to the TMO for review.
1.2. If the referee agrees to refer the matter to the TMO he will indicate what the potential offence was and where it took place. Potential infringements which must be CLEAR and OBVIOUS are as follows:
 Knock-on
 Forward pass
 Player in touch
 Off-side
 Obstruction
 Tackling a player without the ball
 Foul play
 Double movement in act of scoring
Referee judgement calls for all other decisions in the game are not included in the protocol and may not be referred to the TMO.

1.3 In reviewing the potential offence the TMO must use the criterion on each occasion that the infringement must be clear and obvious if he is to advise the referee not to award a try. If there is any doubt as to whether an offence has occurred or not the TMO must advise that an offence has not occurred.

1.4 For forward passes the TMO must not adjudicate on the flight of the ball but on the action of the player who passed the ball, i.e. were the player’s hands passing the ball back to that player’s own goal line.

1.5 If there has been an infringement, the TMO will advise the referee of the exact nature of the infringement, the recommended sanction and/or where play will next restart.

1.6. The TMO may mention issues viewed in addition to those requested by the referee if it is appropriate to the situation under review.

2. Potential infringement by the defending team preventing a try from being scored.
2.1. If the match officials have a view that there was a potential infringement by the defending team that may have prevented a try being scored they may suggest that the referee refers the matter to the TMO for review.
2.2. If the referee agrees to refer the matter to the TMO he will indicate what the potential offence was and where it took place. The offences will normally be an act of foul play such as obstruction or playing a player without the ball.
2.3. In reviewing the potential offence the TMO must use the criterion on each occasion that the infringement must be clear and obvious and that but for the infringement a try would probably have been scored if he is to advise the referee to award a penalty try. If there is any doubt that a try would be scored the TMO must advise the award of an appropriate sanction in accordance with Law.
2.4. The TMO may mention issues viewed in addition to those requested by the referee if it is appropriate to the situation under review.

3. Potential acts of foul play
3.1. The match officials may suggest that the referee refers the matter to the TMO for review if they observe an act of foul play where:
 They may have only partially observed an act or acts of foul play
 They are unsure of the exact circumstances
 The views of the match officials reporting the act(s) of foul play differ
 There is doubt as to the appropriate sanctions to be applied
3.2. If the referee agrees to refer the matter to the TMO he will indicate that he wishes the TMO to review the potential act(s) of foul play and to make a recommendation as to the appropriate sanction(s).
3.3. In reviewing the potential offence the TMO must use the criterion on each occasion that the infringement must be clear and obvious especially where sanctions may apply where a player is removed from the field of play either temporarily or permanently.
3.4. The other match officials may utilise the in stadium screens (where available) to form a judgement in this matter.
In accordance with Law 6.A.4, the referee will remain the sole judge of fact and law during a match.

In the SARU/Currie Cup trial the potential infringement must have occurred between the last restart of play (set piece, penalty/free-kick, kick-off or restart) and the touch down but not further back in play than two previous rucks and/or mauls.

In the RFU/PRL TMO trial referrals can now go back to the previous restart (set piece, penalty/free-kick, kick-off or restart).

The TMO changes are a pain in the arse and still rely on the referee spotting something to ask the correct question

I must, say observing the new scrum directives tickled my sense of humour.

In one of the last scrums of the Super xv final, Ben Tamieafuna was penalised under Crouch..Touch..Pause ..Engage for going Early, Two weeks later in the first scrum of the first game of the ITM under Crouch..Touch..Set, There goes Ben again, penalised for going early.

He hadnt missed a beat.

after watching 2 top14 games (one on tv and another in the stadium), I have seen the new scrum directive in action and while it doesnt always prevent some teams to be penalised for going too early, I feel like the number of scrums that end being reset are certainly reduced. some teams used to watch tapes of the ref before a game to assess the number of seconds between the pause and the engage. at least this is gone now and the game is slightly more fluid.
as for the new ruck law, havent watched bayonne play yet so cant say wether or not not it makes a difference.

I wonder why they chose Crouch... Touch... Set. It almost sounds like a question, crouch, touch are you set?

Should have been GO or SCRUM.

Are these going to be implemented in the HC? Seems a bit strange just to have them in the Top 14 and Aviva prem.

gowales wrote:Are these going to be implemented in the HC? Seems a bit strange just to have them in the Top 14 and Aviva prem.

No the new laws were started from August in the NH and from Jan 2013 in the SH. The additional TMO protocols listed above are for trial only in the Premiership and the Currie Cup.

However, for some reason, the NZRU managed to get them started in the ITM Cup a couple of weeks ago, but not in 4N.

Confusing?

Ah i see.

I think it makes sense actually for the NZRU to do that. Why the IRB didn't originally set out for them to is strange.

They shouldn't really implement them in the SH international scene until they've played with it at the top level below international.

gowales wrote:Ah i see.

I think it makes sense actually for the NZRU to do that. Why the IRB didn't originally set out for them to is strange.

They shouldn't really implement them in the SH international scene until they've played with it at the top level below international.

I made an error. The five laws being trialled in the NH are the scrum call, 5 seconds at ruck, quick throw-in, 90 sec conversion and the head bin.

The TMO trials are only in the Premiership and Currie Cup. A protocol will be developed from these for use in the November Internationals. I've adjusted the OP to reflect this.

I dont know what ones are being trialled in the ITM.

I think it's the laws that are being trialled. From the comments i've read, that seems to be the case.

Alain Rolland recently gave his take on some of the Law Trials:


Law 16.7 (Ruck): The ball has to be used within five seconds of it being made available at the back of a ruck with a warning from the referee to "use it". Sanction - Scrum.

"They're obviously trying to speed up the game. In effect, once there is static ball at the base of the ruck, and if the half-back doesn't play it away, or whoever is standing in the scrum half position, the referee will give an instruction to whoever is there to play the ball.

"That kicks off the clock, they have five seconds to use it and if they don't, as it's stated, it's a turnover and a scrum for the opposition."

Law 19.2 (b) (Quick Throw-In) For a quick throw-in, the player may be anywhere outside the field of play between the line of touch and the player's goal-line.

"What happened previously is if the ball went into touch, the player who caught it could take it quickly from where he was. If he elected not to do so, then the lineout would take place back where the touch judge was.

"Because it obviously went straight in they would gain ground back to where the ball was kicked in, straight opposite to where the ball was kicked.

"Now what's going to be allowed to be done is if that player kicks the ball, he can in effect go anywhere from where he is to his own goal-line or up to the line of touch, and can play the ball at any stage.

"So, his options are no longer limited to taking it immediately from where you are or have a normal lineout from where the ball went in.

"They now have an opportunity to go from where the ball was caught and up to where the line of touch was going to be given. So, he could even give the ball on the run."

Law 19.4 (who throws in) When the ball goes into touch from a knock on, the non-offending team will be offered the choice of a lineout at the point the ball crossed the touchline; or a scrum at the place of the knock on. The non-offending team may exercise this option by taking a quick throw-in.

"The thing about here is, if a ball as stated has been knocked on into touch, before this ruling you had no choice but to bring it back for the scrum.

"A referee, if the team hasn't elected to play it quickly, can ask the non-offending team would they like the option of an advantage which would lead to a lineout, or do they want to play the scrum from the knock on."

Law 21.4 Penalty and free-kick options and requirements. Lineout alternative. A team awarded a penalty or a free kick at a lineout may choose a further lineout, they throw in. This is in addition to the scrum option.

"As it states, they're giving the option assuming the offence is a lineout offence. Rather than having to kick the ball back into touch, they can just enact it straight away.

"It could come into play at any stage, but what it brings into play is if there was 40 minutes or 80 minutes on the clock and the time is dead, under the previous ruling if the referee had been asked do we have time for the lineout, the answer would have been no because the time was up. Whereas now, they can elect to have the lineout because they no longer have to kick it.

"It's also more apparent from the free-kick option because if it was a free-kick they wouldn't have been able to kick it into touch and retain possession. Because from a free-kick needless to say, if the ball goes into touch, they wouldn't be kicking it into touch because if they're not inside their own 22, it would be straight in and they would lose possession straight away. Whereas now they can just elect to have a lineout option."

A conversion kick must be completed within one minute 30 seconds from the time that a try has been awarded.

"That's how long they have, and the only time that can be stopped is if there's any injury or if the referee has called a time out, then it will be extended from that.

"The only thing teams will have to be aware of now is two fold. Number one, if a player scores a try, throws a ball into the grandstand and there is mass celebration for whatever reason, the clock is running.

"The onus is on them, they have to ensure that the kick is done within the allocated time. If the try is scored and what happens straight afterwards is the ball is taken by the kicker and he is getting himself sorted, there will never be an issue of not having it done within the minute and 30 seconds.

"It only becomes an issue when people are doing other things after the try is scored.

"I can't foresee it as being a major issue. Now that they've put it in that there is an allocated time, if a player wants to take his full minute and 30 seconds, we cannot make him go any faster than that."

"So, if there is 78 minutes and 30 seconds on the clock he can stand there and let it run to 80 and take the kick. That's the other side."