Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
NZ NZ

Offside rule tweak to end ‘kick tennis’ and ‘open up’ Super Rugby Pacific

By AAP
Carter Gordon of the Rebels kicks the ball during the Super Rugby Pacific Trial Match between Melbourne Rebels and NSW Waratahs at Harold Caterson Reserve on February 03, 2024 in Melbourne, Australia. (Photo by Morgan Hancock/Getty Images)

An overhaul of the Super Rugby Pacific offside rule has been approved to encourage teams to run the ball instead of engaging in a tedious game of “kick tennis”.

ADVERTISEMENT

Officials on Tuesday revealed a law variation that they think will close a “loophole” and encourage counterattacking rugby when the competition begins next Friday.

Traditionally, defenders in front of the kicker are put onside when a kick receiver either passes the ball or runs five metres with the ball.

But Super Rugby Pacific’s innovation will throw out those two clauses.

Related

Instead, defenders will remain offside until they have been put onside by a teammate who has come from behind the kicker, or the kicker themself.

Under the new rules, a long kick will be tougher to defend, with a fullback or winger able to glide past any would-be tacklers isolated in front of the kicker and chasers.

The law has been sanctioned by World Rugby as a trial and follows various tweaks in recent seasons designed to increase ball-in-play time.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Fans have been vocal in recent times about teams exploiting a loophole that’s seen a large number of players standing still while kicks go over their heads in what some people have called ‘kick tennis’,” Super Rugby Pacific Chair Kevin Malloy said.

“We don’t believe that’s the spectacle our fans want to see in Super Rugby Pacific.

‘”We want to open up the opportunity for teams to counterattack with the ball in hand, and we’re confident this tweak to the law will encourage that trend and encourage exciting, attacking rugby.

“With the full support of New Zealand Rugby, Rugby Australia and our coaches we’ve responded with a small change we think could make a big difference.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Join free

LIVE NOW - Singapore SVNS Day 1

Fresh Starts | Episode 3 | Cobus Reinach

Aotearoa Rugby Podcast | Episode 11

Chasing The Sun | Series 1 Episode 1

The Breakfast Show | Episode 7

Abbie Ward: A Bump in the Road

Pacific Four Series 2024 | Canada vs USA

Japan Rugby League One | Verblitz v Eagles | Full Match Replay

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
Jon 10 hours ago
The case for keeping the Melbourne Rebels in Super Rugby Pacific

I have heard it asked if RA is essentially one of the part owners and I suppose therefor should be on the other side of these two parties. If they purchased the rebels and guaranteed them, and are responsible enough they incur Rebels penalties, where is this line drawn? Seems rough to have to pay a penalty for something were your involvement sees you on the side of the conned party, the creditors. If the Rebels directors themselves have given the club their money, 6mil worth right, why aren’t they also listed as sitting with RA and the Tax office? And the legal threat was either way, new Rebels or defunct, I can’t see how RA assume the threat was less likely enough to warrant comment about it in this article. Surely RA ignore that and only worry about whether they can defend it or not, which they have reported as being comfortable with. So in effect wouldn’t it be more accurate to say there is no further legal threat (or worry) in denying the deal. Unless the directors have reneged on that. > Returns of a Japanese team or even Argentinean side, the Jaguares, were said to be on the cards, as were the ideas of standing up brand new teams in Hawaii or even Los Angeles – crazy ideas that seemingly forgot the time zone issues often cited as a turn-off for viewers when the competition contained teams from South Africa. Those timezones are great for SR and are what will probably be needed to unlock its future (cant see it remaining without _atleast _help from Aus), day games here are night games on the West Coast of america, were potential viewers triple, win win. With one of the best and easiest ways to unlock that being to play games or a host a team there. Less good the further across Aus you get though. Jaguares wouldn’t be the same Jaguares, but I still would think it’s better having them than keeping the Rebels. The other options aren’t really realistic 25’ options, no. From reading this authors last article I think if the new board can get the investment they seem to be confident in, you keeping them simply for the amount of money they’ll be investing in the game. Then ditch them later if they’re not good enough without such a high budget. Use them to get Jaguares reintergration stronger, with more key players on board, and have success drive success.

24 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING The Springbok Eben Etzebeth calls ‘one of the hardest men in rugby’ The Springbok Eben Etzebeth calls ‘one of the hardest men in rugby’
Search