Explanation: But it's good to see the referees taking control
Anybody notice a difference between North and South this weekend? Here's a clue: 9-0 and 6-3 v 50-32 and 47-22.
Or, to put it another way, two matches, no tries and six penalties v two matches, eighteen tries and twelve penalties.
Of course it would be unfair to make a direct comparison between the two hemispheres without taking the climatic conditions into account (no one can deny that a Highveld afternoon offers vastly different prospects to an evening kick-off in London - especially in February), but it seems even when it comes to kicking at goal, the South is upping the ante now, all thanks to a refreshingly common sense initiative.
The zero tolerance initiative requested by Super 14 coaches, adhered to by referees and bought into, slowly but surely, by the players, has been a roaring success.
Not only is it vindication of the southern unions' ideal that something needed to change, it is also vindication of the northern unions' opinions that it was not something inherently wrong in the laws of the game, it was merely a better use of the existing laws.
Despite the two factions having been at loggerheads throughout the whole ELVs shenanigans, they were both right.
The referees in the South must be applauded for sticking to their task diligently, just as the players must also take credit for helping themselves.
It all means that thus far, while fans in the North face an ever-more soporific wait for something to happen in their matches, fans in the South are perpetually on the edge of their seat as the scoreboard ticks on and on in all manners - tries, penalties, drop goals... they've all been on the increase. Not just tries.
In the first week of Super 14 there were marginally more penalties per game than in the Six Nations in most matches, but crucially, they were given much faster at the tackle breakdown (and many more at that point too) so the ball was never slow and rarely buried under a pile of bodies.
That's very important, that increase in all forms of scoring. The chief criticism of the ELVs was the decrease in structure of the game, the limitation of options from free-kicks, the generic way teams went about running the ball. The variety, the tactical variations and nuances of different teams were stripped.
Not this season. Some teams are kicking, others running. Most employ a mixture of the two, with the most effective mixture coming out on top. Teams not quick or clever enough at the breakdown and not willing to rely on their own defence are being punished - as the Blues found out when losing to eight Hurricanes penalties.
This has had a knock-on effect. The number of kicks per game in the Super 14 is twenty less than in the Six Nations: 72-52. Some may cite the tighter tactics required at international level, but who wouldn't be willing to bet that it has a lot to do with the cleaner quicker ball coming from Super Rugby rucks.
Defences are still tight, but now the runner has to be truly isolated before a defence can effect a turnover - unless the attacking team gets lax and doesn't commit enough players to a ruck, in which case the defence can simply pile numbers in and drive over. Both those principles have been in the laws of the game for time immemorial.
The net result is that the poaching specialists like Heinrich Brussouw and Richie McCaw - who were already pushing the limits of the law - now have far less leeway at the breakdown. Brussouw's impact so far this season has been largely nullified and we're all waiting on tenterhooks to see now McCaw handles the change.
Both will no doubt adapt, but it's clear that only those with perfect technique and timing will have any chance of stealing the ball, unlike the 'let's all dive in and try our luck approach' adopted by some in the past.
Some say defences are now being given too short shrift, but as the Stormers showed on Saturday, defence and predatory instincts can win you matches the hard way, just as the Bulls and Hurricanes showed how to win matches the complete way and the Chiefs showed what happens when you slip off the pace even for just a few minutes.
Significantly the number of re-set scrums has also taken a nose dive. That bastion of the northern game is as important as it ever was, but we'll all sick of watching the set piece collapse upon itself at nauseam.
The simple solution seems to have been to make sure that both teams follow the pre-scrum protocol to the letter and the slight delay in the 'engage' call has assured the front rows hit simultaneously, rather that one jumping the gun and the other automatically buckling.
In the North, referees still practice zero tolerance 'shouting at players for a few seconds before blowing the whistle', but it is that few seconds players are trying to buy.
The game is faster now, as the Super 14 has demonstrated. Officiating up North needs to get up to speed so the game can.
In the South it's the same laws, but better policing. Vive la difference!. Watch the slow and dowdy Six Nations this weekend. Plus ça change.
The obvious question now is, what will happen in June when the Europeans head South for the mid-year Test window? No prizes for guessing which set of interpretations we'd like to see used, but would that be fair on the tourists?
Surely it would be taking a step in the wrong direction to tell those in the South that they are allowed to return to their old delaying tactics. So what's to do? Answers on a postcard please...
By Danny Stephens and Ross Hastie
Comments
lostmyjockstrap says...
mmmh, England v Ireland, SH ref, and Ireland got away with murder slowing the English ball to a standstill. Once again, streetwise players duping manufactured refs. Give them the 3 points sir or a touchline kick.....another reason why I watch more RL. At least the skill level is more superior in both hemispheres and we get to see the ball.....maul = where is it, tackle/ruck = where is it, and it goes in one way and stays there, so tell me ref, what's happening? Derrggh = they are setting their defensive line. Answer, no ref can be a ref unless he has played....and I mean really played.
Posted 09:00 01st March 2010
reido says...
All you NH guys can talk about is the 72-65 game. Okay we heard you the first 20 times. That was a freak result. The fact of the matter is that it is NOT a NEW LAW it is the law being interpreted CORRECTLY. For god's sake get over yourselves. Tell me where the blow out matches are here.... BUL 48 vs WAR 38
CHE 24 vs HIG 31, WFR 19 vs CHI 37, RED 18 vs BLU 27, HUR 33 vs LIO 18
It's about time you NH boys got rid of the whinging for whinging's sake attitude and just muscled up and play a real game of rugby, instead of penalty shootouts. Whahhh, we don't want to change our game because the SH teams will beat us by even more.....whahhhh.....we need to cheat to stay in contention...whahhhh
Grow up tossers!!!!!!!!!!
Posted 03:13 01st March 2010
irishzimbabwean says...
New laws are working well in S14. I am sure the NH rugby will also benefit when the referees directives are applied at the beginning of next season and the weather is a little kinder.It would be appreciated if both Willems and Jmanngod would leave their ritualistic prejudism towards Northern Hemisphere rugby out of their otherwise interesting contributions. There is no NH conspiracy since the IRB is a global body. Let's lose the juvenile, snide comments out as real rugby fans do not think of fellow rugby players and fans in that way.
Posted 08:33 24th February 2010
FezJay says...
Those that are pointing out the Chiefs and Lions game as a reason not to endorse the new super 14 law interpretations are only looking at 1 game. The defense from both teams was really bad, but remember also there were a few yellow cards as well, which helped the Lions score a few tries at the end as the Chiefs tired.
If you take out that game, all other games were very good and competitive. Sure some were high scoring, but they were very good games that showed defense can win games and so can attacking.
But if you look at the NH games on the weekend with the exception of 1 game, defense was the only winner.
To the guy that doesn't know his rules, it clearly states "the tackler must release the player before playing the ball" and the "tackled player must play the ball immediately (place it or pass it)". It also states "players must not lie on the wrong side of the ruck".
These rules are being enforced and the game is becoming much more balanced. The only people that are worried about this are supporters of teams that have an inability to score and use their attack or use negative tactics to win games (slowing/killing the ball).
Posted 22:36 23rd February 2010
gentosprey says...
Sorry but the Super 14's is rugby League by any other name!
Posted 22:11 23rd February 2010
homergriffin says...
bruce - 'The best will adapt quickly and go back to stealing a lot of ball'
I hope that is true because some of the best tries are scored off turnover (stolen) ball. Relying on teams having to make mistakes in order to win possession would effectively make the game rugby league without the 5 tackle rule.
I have been very impressed with the 4 of the 5 games I watched over the 2 weekends. Jonker had a nightmare reffing the Chiefs - Lions game, the consistent awarding of penalties at the end of the game proved it.
Anomalies in scores do occur (remember the Wasps 37-56 London Irish match in 2006, 14 tries) but it is imperative that the reffing is of high quality to prevent high scores based on poor decisions. Both the Chiefs and the Lions racked up 5 TBP eacn in the 13 games last season so both teams are capable of scoring tries, but 9 each? Come on Jonker!
Posted 12:14 23rd February 2010
bruce says...
The Lion's - Chiefs game is an outlier, and should not be used as the basis for any comparison. It was created by good playing conditions, two teams who want to run, but have weak defenses, and set an all-time record for Super Rugby for points scored. But from a statistical point of view it's meaningless. (Kudos to the authors for not including it.)
Personally, having watched a few S14 games this weekend, I strongly approve of the new scrum approach. It's very simple and after a couple weeks even a prop can learn how to "touch" when the ref says touch. Yes it will be painful for a bit, but even this weekend we saw very few scrums collapse, and a more even contest for the ball.
The ball stealing won't go away - indeed my prediction is that it'll make the best fetchers even better. Gio Aplon demonstrated the technique for the Stormers last week against the Lions. Tackle, hands up high, then down to get the ball. Simple, effective and done by the smallest guy on the field. We won't see the turn-over-at-every-ruck we saw last year, but we will see the difference between the best and the rest. The best will adapt quickly and go back to stealing a lot of ball.
Posted 05:38 23rd February 2010
Rhino says...
I agree with some of the earlier comments regarding zero tolerance, because I have believed for years that Richie McCaw and to a lesser extent George Smith got way too much leniency at the breakdown (I will never forget a Wallabies v AB game several years ago were Rocky Elsom and Phil Waugh were just patrolling every ruck and belting Richie out of the ruck and then holding him down for a few seconds, how clean the Wallabies ball was).
So firm and accurate application of the rules leads to proper rugby.
Obviously comparing games in wintery London vs summery SA and Australia is bound to produce variations, the weather ensures that.
But it still showed how important defense was (Chiefs asleep at the wheel there).
I know the game was stupidly robotic and boring (kick off, receive ball, pass back to 22 and kick out on full, win line out pass back into 22 and kick out on full, rinse and repeat) before the ELV's were introduced and now that some of the better ones are being used and all rules properly enforced hey presto something good to watch.
So lets see if the Northern Hemisphere block can figure this out and try applying it themselves.
Posted 01:37 23rd February 2010
AshleyMorton says...
I hate to be picky about another commenter, but let's please be clear. The laws do NOT say that a player must be allowed to place the ball. In fact, they say the exact opposite: "If opposition players who are on their feet attempt to play the ball, the tackled player must release the ball." This "He's gotta let me place the ball, ref!" whining stuff is in bad spirit, and made much worse by the fact that it's flat-out wrong. A player on his feet (coming from the right side and before a ruck forms, of course), has complete rights to the ball, and the guy on the ground who wants to set it a metre back toward his own mates CANNOT do so once the on-his-feet fella put hands on it.
Posted 00:23 23rd February 2010
robhall_ie says...
I watched the 72-65 try fest and can't help feeling I was watching some kind of rugby league style of game. The exception was that there were no tackles being made and both defences were incredibly porous. Entertaining to the point of being ridiculous. That said there were about 12 people in the stadium so if the SH is so much better where are the fans?
Posted 00:04 23rd February 2010
Rugbynut says...
Last weekend's Super 14 games were not Rugby Union but nearer Rugby League. Union is a game of strategy, guile and teamwork, not running around like headless chickens!
Posted 23:12 22nd February 2010
Sm00thice says...
The reds seem to like these law's so i Love em!!!
But seriously, these interpretations are freeing up the game and making it a better spectacle. 72-65 is an anomaly, and anyone who completely blames the new law interpretations for it is a fool.
Posted 22:24 22nd February 2010
Danatthecorner says...
Leinsterdude has it about right. There is much to commend about the new breakdown rules however the careful selection of matches to show the best statistical match for your argument undermines this.
Its wrong to compare a pair of typical early season games, played in perfect conditions in a league with essentially nothing at stake at this stage to a pair of games that were always going to be tight, in the midst of the 6 Nations, where neither side could afford to lose. Whilst neither northern hemisphere game was entertaining, I dont find a game where a team is waiting for the opposition to knock on or score to get posession particularly appealing either.
N.B. I'm almost certain that nearly every year, the winners of the H Cup will beat the winners of the S14. Not because it is better (although I think its at least on a par) but because to win you play so many teams with different styles in different conditions on different days, which generally prepares the winners for anything. Just an opinion.
Posted 22:07 22nd February 2010
greenhenton says...
As tom1611 says, a high scoring game does not always a good game make. Take for example, Leinster's 6-5 win against Harlequins last year with Leinster tackling their hearts out on their own try line for what seemed like an eternity followed by Quins trying desperately to get into position for the possible winning drop goal. The drama and the tension were both incredible and unbearable. Also, Ireland's defeat of England in the 6 Nations last year. A point wasn't scored for at least half an hour but I was so into the game the entire time that I didn't even notice the 0-0 scoreline.
Posted 21:25 22nd February 2010
sjambok says...
I f I wanted to watch a game fo r90 minutes fors core of 6-3, I would watch soccer thank you.
I want tries. but nit basketball scores.
Iand I agree about ethe ntiment about the teams going at it hhammer and tongs for 90 minutes. but lets faceit, under the old officiating, teams were just lying all over teh ball and keeping their hands on teh ball as long as they can. I dont want to see ground wrestling match. goood rucking and counter rucking, sure, but soggy wrestling? come on! thats just frustrating.
Sure you still have good forward play and mauls and pick and goes- but the differences ithat teh ball comes back within half an hour, and the ball is in play for longer instead of being buried.
There is just no argument against this. This is teh way teh laws were supposed to be officiated - to allow for maximum flow. Hoenstly, give me a reason why "releasing the tackled player" should not be a higher priority than "coming through the gate" (a dumb stagnant law anyway- who cares where they come from as long as its their side?).
Posted 21:01 22nd February 2010
keste03 says...
seen a lot of the games this weekend and one trend is emerging in the super 14. the ability to defend and tackle has been devalued - look through ´the games and most of the tries are due to bad tackling.....
Posted 20:45 22nd February 2010
jmanngod says...
the 'proper' interpretation of the ruck and offside line in the S14 has been an absolute breath f fresh air. And lets be clear here... it is nothing 'new' - it is the correct application of law. So there should be no discussion about what is to be chosen - the laws will be chosen - and there will be changes and there will be painful lessons learnt - but in the end the shambles that was caused when the NH tribes brought ruin to our game by not adopting the full ELVs can be reversed by simply asking them to apply the laws properly...
Faster rucks means more tries and more exciting rugby - get used to it. It's in the laws already!
Posted 18:30 22nd February 2010
dclp says...
I can't help but feel that the Southern Hemisphere tends to produce a higher class of player and a more exciting, free flowing game anyway. Give the guys 1 set of rules to play with, North and South, and I'm confident that Super 14 will still blow the Heinekin Cup out of the water. It's good to see the 2 styles of Rugby as it will always produce a bit of debate, you wouldn't lose those 2 styles if the South adopted the H Cup rules into the S 14.
Get 1 set of rules in place and then have the top 2 teams from the H Cup play the top 2 teams from the S 14 and declare a World Club Champion!!
COME ON STORMERS!!!!!!!
Posted 16:00 22nd February 2010
LeinsterDude says...
Very selective in which games have been chosen to "represent" all of rugby both in the NH and the SH. Simplistic analysis and bombastic rhetoric are not enough to prove that any kind of "sea-change" has occurred IMO.
I've seen many a high-scoring game in different leagues and competitions in the last 20 years that have been devoid of any real excitment, and equally I've seen many tight games without a single try that have been absolute corkers.
None of that had anything to do with where the teams and players were from, and everything to do both sides going at it hammer and tongs for the full 80.
Posted 15:58 22nd February 2010
willems says...
This has been the most entertaining rugby ("new" zero tolerance initiative) I have seen in quite a while. Is this not the way the game should have been reffed from the start? A law is a law, so way tolerate it to a degree? Zero tolerance is the way to go.
I don't know why referee's became content to tolerate infirngements in the first place. Maybe it has something to do with the continued strive to close the gap between North and South. You will note how the gap starts to widen again once internationls start being reffed on a zero tolerance basis.
I have never been a fan of players like George Smith and Richie McCaw who won so many balls illegally. The law clearly states a player should be allowed to place the ball but referees started to turn a blind eye to this. Funny how now that South Africa has the best ball poacher in Brussouw, the laws should suddenly be applied differently (correctly). It will be interesting to see if Brussouw can keep his place in the Bok team with the "new" old law because he is not the best ball carrier and he was picked purely on his ability to win balls (before the tackled player was allowed to place the ball).
Long live the "new" old law!!!
Posted 14:48 22nd February 2010