Chris Rattue: Some rules are just begging to be tweaked

If only referee Paul Marks had made a stronger stand against a bane of rugby - the slap intercept.

Is there a more annoying sight than a decent rugby move being cut short by a defender who flings out a hand to nudge the ball, with no hope or intention of catching it?

This occurred in the Super 14 match between the Sharks and Waratahs in Sydney. The Sharks were robbed of a match-winning try when Kurtley Beale finger-tipped the ball, denying Ryan Kankowski a free 30-metre run to the line.

At least Marks sin-binned Beale. He should have gone a step further though - a try would have been scored. Beale and the Waratahs did not deserve any remote benefit of doubt.

Beale only just got a touch on the ball with an outstretched hand. Claims by the Waratahs and Beale of a genuine intercept attempt belong in the file marked Absolute Baloney.

Rugby, attractive rugby that is, has become difficult enough to play and the game needs to reward and protect passing as much as possible.

In this case, the rules were available, yet not applied to the fullest against a cheap shot. However, rugby authorities should keep looking at every angle in trying to eliminate the foul intercept.

There is an even cheaper shot in rugby though - the one where a player calls for the ball from an opponent.

This normally occurs when one team is hot on attack from broken play, and the ball carrier cannot be certain who is trailing him. Commentators, for some reason, often appear charmed by what is regarded as "cheek", although "cheat" is more appropriate.

I'd love to see a rule against bogus calling, no matter how hard the policing would be. Soccer has rules about calling for the ball, and so could rugby.

What are the rules worth tweaking in sport? Many, undoubtedly, but here are a few contenders.

Incorrect kick-offs in rugby should be punished with a free kick on halfway rather than the option of a scrum. Why have any excuse for another scrum in rugby? A free kick would be a simple, fair and quick way to restart a game that needs to limit down time.

Maybe the most pointless rule in all of sport is the nit-picking one governing soccer throw-ins.

To keep things simple, soccer could simply insist that players must be behind the sideline, and have two hands on the ball at release point. Penalty kicks could also do with a review.

Referees are supposed to insist that the ball is placed right on the spot, and yet for some mysterious reason the penalty spot invariably sits in a divot, thus disadvantaging the kicker. This is especially so in lower levels, on rough parks.

Why not allow the ball to be placed on the spot, or anywhere directly to the side or behind it? There would usually only be a matter of centimetres involved, but very important centimetres. Even golf allows a clean and place rule.

Now for the biggie.

Transform tennis by removing the second serve.

This is an experiment at least worth trying. Big servers would have their wings clipped, encouraging more rallies that will bring tennis artists back in vogue.

I confess that this is not an original idea. I first read about the concept a few years ago - a response to the age of rocket serves and high-tech racquets - and the proposal struck a chord. Players might be exhausted by more rallies, but this rule at least deserves experimentation.

Here's an unfair rule - the system for disqualifications in sprinting - which is about to be tweaked.

For the past six years, the first runner to break early has earned the whole field a final warning, with whoever offends after that thrown out.

This system was open to manipulation and psychological warfare through deliberate false starts, and the sins of one runner should not count towards the banning of another.

This year, the initial false starter will be disqualified. Harsh, some sprinters say, but this is surely much fairer.

And finally, one to put under the thinking cap.

How can the intentional walk - when pitchers effectively bypass the games' best batters in tight situations - be eliminated from baseball and softball?

I'm no baseball aficionado, although a fan. Maybe the intentional walk is inherent and accepted, but to this layman the ploy is against the spirit of competition and even baseball's best interests.

Designing a rule to beat the intentional walk is probably impossible though because pitchers cannot be ordered to throw in the strike zone.

Maybe baseball could look at how many free bases are given to walked batters in certain situations.

For more rule tweaking, over to you.