England captain Maro Itoje 'stood down' from rugby left out of Saracens squad

Player welfare rules mean the 30-year-old must take at least five weeks off before returning to club duty, leaving Mark McCall without his star lock for the start of the campaign.

Itoje has been making the most of his time away from rugby. After leading the British and Irish Lions to a famous 2-1 series win over Australia this summer, he celebrated his marriage in style on Friday with a Nigerian wedding party in London.

Although he wed model wife Mimi back in May, the full festivities were delayed until after the Lions tour. The celebration, held at the Devere Grand Connaught Rooms, was attended by teammates and friends, many of whom wore traditional Nigerian dress.

Among the guests were Alex Lozowski, Elliot Daly, Ollie Lawrence, Nick Isiekwe, Marcus Smith, and Ben Earl. A TikTok shared by Andy Onyeama-Christie even showed the group dancing late into the night.

Meanwhile, Saracens will head to Durban where they face the Sharks at Kings Park on September 5. The tour serves as both preparation and team bonding, with joint training sessions, a safari, golf day, and beach BBQ all scheduled.

The trip also has a community focus, including a kit donation drive and visit to the Zululand Rhino Orphanage.

“As part of the tour, Saracens will focus on strength and conditioning alongside the Sharks as well as training and a fixture against the South African outfit,” said a statement.

“There will of course be a big emphasis on social capital, with plenty scheduled to bring the group together, including a safari, golf day and beach braai.

“There will also be a strong community focus, with a visit to Zululand Rhino Orphanage planned as well as a donation to a Kit Charity to give back to the local area.”

Forwards: Tayo Adegbemile, Samson Adejimi, Harvey Beaton, Phil Brantingham, Rhys Carre, Alec Clarey, Eoghan Clarke, Theo Dan, Max Eke, James Hadfield, Reggie Hammick, Nick Isiekwe, Toby Knight, Nathan Michelow, Vilikesa Nairau, Andy Onyeama-Christie, Marco Riccioni, Olamide Sodeke, Marcus Street, Kennedy Sylvester, Hugh Tizard, Tietie Tuimauga, Charlie West, Tom Willis, Harry Wilson.

Backs: Charlie Bracken, Jack Bracken, Fergus Burke, Noah Caluori, Elliot Daly, Luke Davidson, Tobias Elliott, Owen Farrell, Angus Hall, Olly Hartley, Cam Hutchison, Brandon Jackson, Louie Johnson, Alex Lozowski, Max Malins, Rotimi Segun, Gareth Simpson, Sam Spink, Nick Tompkins, Ivan Van Zyl.

As the sport grows faster, stronger, and more tactical, certain laws stand out as ripe for reconsideration—not to upend the game, but to make it fairer, safer, and more exciting.

We highlight four specific laws that, with thoughtful updates, could better reflect the way rugby is played today. These ideas come from a deep respect for the game and a desire to see it flourish for players and fans alike.

World Rugby has shown it’s willing to adapt in recent years—these could be the next steps in that evolution.

Rugby has changed significantly over the years, and one of the biggest shifts is how the bench is used. These days, teams often bring on almost an entirely new forward pack late in the game. Big, fresh players crash into tired defenders, making the final 20 minutes less about skill and endurance, and more about brute force. Many fans and former players feel this has turned rugby into a collision sport rather than a contest of stamina and intelligence.

Reducing the number of substitutions would encourage players to pace themselves. Space would open up in the second half, creating more opportunities for creative play rather than endless phases of pick-and-go. It would reward fitness, smart decision-making, and those capable of performing for the full 80 minutes.

Fewer substitutions wouldn’t just make the game more exciting—it would make it fairer, safer, and more in line with the spirit of what rugby has always been about.

With the rise of 6–2 and even 7–1 bench splits, pioneered by Rassie Erasmus, the trend seems to be heading in the opposite direction. That’s all the more reason to act now.

The caterpillar ruck is one of those tactics that, while legal, just doesn’t sit right with many who love the game. It involves players lining up behind a ruck in a queue, giving the scrum-half extra time and space to kick.

It slows the game to a crawl, gives the defence no real chance to compete, and often feels more like a way to kill momentum than build it.

It may be clever, but it’s not entertaining. Fans want to see fast, hard-fought rugby—not box-kick after box-kick with a queue of bodies shielding the kicker. Eliminating or limiting the caterpillar ruck would speed up the game and reintroduce unpredictability at the breakdown.

This isn’t about removing strategy. It’s about keeping the game flowing and true to what makes rugby exciting: dynamic, contested play.

Referees have improved at calling “use it” earlier, which helps speed things up, but more needs to be done. Getting rid of the caterpillar ruck would go a long way toward fixing the issue.

The 20-minute red card was introduced as a middle ground—punishing dangerous play without completely ruining a match. But let’s be honest: it sends the wrong message. If a player commits a reckless or dangerous act, 20 minutes off the field doesn’t always feel like enough—especially for serious offenses, like a high tackle that could end an opponent’s game or season.

Rugby has made major strides in protecting players, especially around the head and neck. Keeping the full red card—where the offending team plays a man down for the rest of the match—reaffirms that commitment. It makes the consequences clear: cross the line, and your team suffers. That’s how you change behaviour.

Yes, it’s tough. Sometimes it may seem harsh. But safety must come first. It’s about respecting the game and the long-term health of every player on the field.

In many ways, the 20-minute red gives officials a cop-out. It’s often seen as the easy option to avoid controversy—even when a full red card is justified.

Few things in rugby divide opinion quite like the driving maul from a lineout. For some, it’s a show of power and coordination. But for many fans, it feels like a loophole — a near-guaranteed way to score that sucks the creativity and unpredictability out of the game.

A well-drilled pack can set up a maul five metres out, trundle forward almost unstoppably, and fall over the line for a try. Where’s the skill in that? It’s become rugby’s cheat code — more about physics and numbers than ingenuity or flair.

Outlawing the maul as a direct scoring weapon would open the game up. Instead of endless rolling rucks towards the try-line, teams would need to find inventive ways to use space, pass under pressure, or outsmart the defence. That’s what gets fans on their feet.

Defenders, too, would benefit. At the moment, they’re often left with little option but to illegally collapse a maul, leading to a penalty or yellow card. Take away the automatic try-machine, and we’d see fewer cynical infringements, less frustration, and a fairer contest.

The maul will always have a place as a tactical tool in the middle of the pitch — but when it’s allowed to dominate the scoreboard, it turns rugby into something it was never meant to be.