DON'T BE DISAPPOINTED, THERE ARE A FEW GUIDELINE CHANGES TO THE LAWS

Unveiled: what you were all waiting for.

If you were disappointed not to read about Law changes in the first instalment of these notes, here comes a summary of the amendments, which are essentially directives. There are a sizeable number of spectators (and referees!) who really enjoy the start of a new season when some very obvious alterations are scrutinised .....until about November and the interest wanes. You might easily go through this season without being aware of anything different.

In the opening edition of 'Rugby Tonight' on BT Sport, international referee Wayne Barnes gave a clear demonstration of how it is hoped the Maul (ball in hand) and Ruck (ball on the ground) will be refereed. In the maul the ball carrier must not be sealed off at the back, he must be in contact with the other players and those in support cannot join by slipping in on the side of the maul to provide additional obstruction. Interpretation of ruck means that a player of the side not in possession cannot walk through it to kick at the ball; nor can stretch over to play it in that way.  

The player replaced because of injury caused by foul play does not count as one of the allotted number of replacements. Advantage may be played at a collapsed scrum provided there is no risk of injury. I'm not sure how that will work, especially since safety is a paramount concern, although it could help some of our Southern Hemisphere referees who already ignore the collapse. Thirty seconds will be allowed to set the scrum, again as long as injury does not prevent it. The scrum half (usually defending) may not work his way into the space between the flanker and number eight. There will be a call to "use it" if the ball is at the number eight's feet and the scrum is stationary for 3 to 5 seconds. Following a scrum wheeled through 90 degrees the put in will go to the team who put it in.

Enough there for the connoisseur of the scrum. I can't find any mention of the crooked put in, looks like we've given up completely on that. There is to be an increased emphasis on punishing the growing practice of 'simulation' or diving on the ground, football style.

So, there you are, no prizes for anyone who reports to me that they have actually spotted evidence of one or other of these offences being penalised. Think about this: I discovered towards end of last season that there had been a directive on the criterion for the scrum feed, that it should be judged on whether or not it was "credible." It never went into print, and I wonder how many of you knew about it.