5, 4, 3, 2, 1, use it. We like!
This week we will mostly be concerning ourselves with new laws and some other odds and ends...
All hail the lawmakers! Four years ago we had the ridiculous ELVs that allowed collapsed mauls, finger-wrestling on the ground to get at the ball, offside lines at the tackle... we had anarchy.
This time, for the next eighteen months we have a common sense list of tweaks, all designed to get the players playing, the kickers kicking, the referees reffing and the game clean. It's as though a rugby wish-list has been granted, a little visit from a Canterbury-clad Santa Claus.
We'll start with the one we like the most: that a ball must be played once available from the back of a ruck within five seconds.
One of the ruck concepts doing the rounds at the moment is called the 'centipede' ruck: that one where a stable ruck already over as a contest is nevertheless joined by two or three players at the back one behind the other, in order to buy a scrum-half either time to make a decision, room to kick, or time to waste as the clock runs down. Saracens, the Bulls and Munster are all masters of it. It's horrible to watch, as we've opined in this column before.
The new law appears designed to crush the centipede underfoot, as well as to eliminate the ludicrous posturising time-wasting that goes on between scrum-halves and first receivers seeking to wind down the clock in a tight game. If you are not sure what we are talking about there, watch the final five minutes of last year's World Cup Final. Interestingly, that very same referee was this weekend to be heard urging half-backs to use the ball or run the risk of being whistled for time-wasting...
But it will cause problems. Coaches are going to question the interpretation of when a ball is available or not, are going to find ways of making a ruck seem more contested than it is to slow it down, may even question that if they do start centipeding, surely a new five seconds is bought each time another 'rucker' arrives.
Out of all the laws introduced this round, this one is the one referees and their mentors have to be toughest about enforcing, for having only five seconds between phases will make for a significantly improved spectacle and keeps the onus on the team in possession to use the ball constructively.
That the bench would be increased to add another prop was nigh on inevitable, while the minor extension of where a quick throw-in can be taken from is barely going to be noticeable except at stadia like Westpac, where there is a bigger area outside the pitch. Offering teams the choice of a line-out or scrum when a knock-on goes into touch or when an offence is committed at a line-out is a technical one for the layman, a potential source of riches for a shrewd coach.
The increase in TMO powers on adjudication of foul play may cause the most teething problems with players milking the system and asking the referee to go upstairs, but as long as protocols are established that make sure the referee only goes there when he knows something has taken place and just needs a number, it should be ok.
Increasing the TMO powers to adjudicate on events leading up to tries is a problematic one. But once the question 'how far back can you go?' has been answered sensibly and also set under protocols, we should get a more precise tool for score adjudication.
But finally, the one we like the most: there's this business of a conversion having to be taken within 90 seconds of the score. So now we don't have the kicker tying shoelaces, swapping phone numbers with the cheerleaders, drinking gallons of water and spitting them out again and considering his haircut options on the big screen while he waits for the tee to arrive and the clock winds down, all before the allotted 60 seconds for the kick begin. Now we have onus on the tee-bearer to get out quickly, the kicker to get set and kick the ball, everybody to get the hell on with the game.
Same with the ruck law change really. A middle finger to burgeoning negative practices, a kick up the pant-seat for coaches who are just content to 'see out a game', a recognition that fans know their sport and want to see a better product. Thanks lawmakers, you've done a terrific job this time.
It would probably be amiss not to congratulate Leinster on the maintenance of their dynasty. They've played some terrific rugby, able to dig in just as much as demolish all season long. You wouldn't bet against their taking the RaboDirect PRO12 this coming weekend and finishing a double... Leicester, Wasps, Toulouse and now Leinster... which is the greatest European team of the modern era now? Discuss...
Loose Pass compiled by Richard Anderson
Comments
Carpelone says...
@ StunTheMullet
Free Kicks and penalties, both, must be used, depending upon infringements. The target should be 0 resets.
Posted 14:49 23rd May 2012
eireoldboy says...
The only sensible option for ruck/tackle is to have the tackled player "roll or pass" the ball clear of the tackle area. It would stop all the "pile ups" in the tackle area. This one might be worth a trial in the law labs.
Posted 13:05 23rd May 2012
markpat says...
@RugbyLeRoux - while I previously thought rolling subs would be good, the recent mass use of the bench has put me off that idea completely.
At the moment, 2nd halves seem to be a huge disappoinment compared to 1st halves (the quality of the rugby,I mean, not necessarily the excitement), due to all the changes in the lineups (especially in the backs, it seems).
Posted 10:30 23rd May 2012
Bones7 says...
This rule is a complete waste of time. Players will find ways to slow the game down if they want to slow it down, they will just employ different methods.
@RugbyLeRoux - I think rolling subs would be the perfect answer.
Posted 10:27 23rd May 2012
sandal says...
@APV1
Harsh, Algonquin.
The British held their hands up and confessed to this one -- the media has been full of lamentations about halfbacks in the Premiership, the Heineken Cup and other northern competitions standing over the ball for long periods.
But Piri Weepu, as I noted, has been as bad as any, waving his arms around like Napoleon. I hate it.
Neither can you deny that a huge proportion of injuries -- injuries that did not necessitate a replacement taking the field -- in tests during the 60s, 70s and 80s occurred close to the players' own tryline. And it's not something that Kiwis ever accused Springboks or Wallabies of. It was your lot who earned that reputation.
Posted 08:43 23rd May 2012
RugbyLeRoux says...
I still think that the best way rugby could be improved is to be more liberal with the subs and thus allow players to player at a higher intensity without as many injuries. S15 this year has again been played at a ridiculous pace but it seems, especially the back row, that the boys are getting injured a lot. More liberal subs would mean that the pace could be maintained for longer allowing more free flowing running rugger.
Posted 23:14 22nd May 2012
StunTheMullet says...
@ Carpelone - "Scrums. Referees must use free kicks, at the first opportunity. The defending team must be responsible not to collapse the scrum. This would avoid time wasting techniques at scrum (OZ style) and allow more running rugby."
Free kicks in place of scrum penalties was one of the evil ELVs that was rejected.....
Posted 21:49 22nd May 2012
jontheref says...
headhunter99
ref would award a scrum to opposition, if the use it or lose it was not complied with.
Re setting clock, a consideration at elite level,but these laws are supposed to be seamless, from the top to the lowest grade, cannot see it happening.
The way to give space in the game, another that was trialled, make the offside line at ruck maul, 5 metres back.
The complaint was, "it is difficult to police".
I'd prefer them 3 metres back, rather than on the other teams side as we see in most games!
Agreed, doesn't address the scrum adequately, the tackle area, or "legalised obstruction", i.e. the so called rolloing maul. Now that resembles a centipede most of the time!
Posted 21:09 22nd May 2012
kybone says...
I like these changes. Im a bit surprised that nothings been done to the scrum though. Even as an England supporter i was getting more than a little p****d off with the amount of time Dickson was taking to get the ball away during the 6N.
As for best team in Europe it depends how you define it. In my opinion the best club in the HC has been Toulouse simply because they have still won it the most times and have managed to continually evolve the side over the years. The best team ( as in the players on the pitch) has got to be Leinster because its basially been the same players that have won all 3 of their HC titles. I wonder how many players have won the HC 3 times. There must be some more other than the one in this Leinster team. Has anyone won it more than 3 times?
Posted 16:56 22nd May 2012
APV1 says...
@ cuw3100 - that's an excellent point, that they can't score when the game's not "in play". Not sure how they could get around that one...
Posted 15:06 22nd May 2012
APV1 says...
@ sandal - could you be any more anti-British? According to you, everything which has ever gone wrong on a rugby pitch (probably off it too!), is always the fault of those damned Brits!
;-)
Posted 12:31 22nd May 2012
Carpelone says...
I agree on almost all.
Rucks. Use it or lose is an idea which I cast time ago, possibly after having watche yet another Munster's win. The final minutes of the RWC final were also not a good advert for rugby.
Scrums. Referees must use free kicks, at the first opportunity. The defending team must be responsible not to collapse the scrum. This would avoid time wasting techniques at scrum (OZ style) and allow more running rugby.
Kicks. Some years ago, I saw a phenomenal conversion from the side from Dan Carter. It took 5 seconds (maybe because the ABs were losing to the Boks) and was ok. You do not need all that fuss going around. 30 to 45 secs is more than enough.
Posted 12:28 22nd May 2012
tha_mai says...
Stellenbosched2, sandal - re actual playing time per game, often a 'tough 80 minutes' involves about half that of actual rugby.
IRB stats show an average of 35 minutes ball in play for all matches at the 2011 Rugby World Cup. About same (within one minute) as RWC 2007 and 2003.
2009's Tri Nations matches and the British and Irish Lions v South Africa - 34 minutes.
RWC 1991 ball was in play, on average, just 31% (25min) of the game, now it's up around 44% so they are running more per match (on average).
SANZAR's 2012 3rd outcome priority (thay have five!) is: Ball in Play: aim - 35-40 minutes per game
Posted 10:55 22nd May 2012
cuw3100 says...
Maybe PR Expert on the Laws of Rugby Union can explain why the clock is not stopped for conversion / penalty kick.
Me thinks it is because the act of conversion/penalty kick will result in a score if successful and a score cannot be made outside match time!!!!. Even in football the clock is not stopped for any type of kick, be it penalty or free kick or corner. The clock is the determinent of playing time and any scores must be inside playing time. For example when a penalty is given and the refree is speaking to the captain , he stops the clock because if he did not the others can take a quick tap or a slow tap and catch the opposition napping, which will be an undue advantage.
One must remember that in rugby there is a lot of time lost due to set play; line outs, scrums, penalties, free kicks. actual time played in a match out of the normal 80 (not considering injury stops because the ref stops the clock then and add the time lost) may be in the region of 40 - 60 % depending on tacticks and conditions. This is much higher for football as there are less set plays and even set plays are faster compared to rugby.
Posted 08:58 22nd May 2012
sandal says...
@Stellenbosched2
You say: ""Is the time wasting in modern rugby just a result of too much rugby being played? In order to drag their bodies through 30-odd matches a year the players no doubt have adapted by slowing the game down.""
Lol. You could be right.
I recall that from the 60s to the 80s, teams in the British Isles had a ploy for getting a rest after prolonged defence. One player (it was only ever one) lay down on the ground "injured" and play was stopped. Now that refs tend to let play continue around injured players (sometimes shamefully, it has to be said), this "hollywood" no longer serves any purpose. So it was inevitable that the burden would fall on halfbacks to assist those feeling the pace.
Naturally, it was British halfbacks who started prolonged direction-giving as the ball lay at the back of the breakdown. And, equally naturally, in New Zealand it was "who ate all the pasta carbonara?" Piri Weepu who has been the greatest exponent.
Posted 08:27 22nd May 2012
Stellenbosched2 says...
Is the time wasting in modern rugby just a result of too much rugby being played? In order to drag their bodies through 30-odd matches a year the players no doubt have adapted by slowing the game down.
Posted 06:07 22nd May 2012
Jivinjeff says...
They'll never make changes which significantly affect the length of the match (eg stopping clock for kicks) because that would mess up TV commitments. They have a set window of time into which they must fit as much rugby as possible.
And before anyone rants about TV greed vetoing a good game, the program they may want to show after said game could be another rugby game you're more interested in seeing. I'd rather have "look at me, preening for the camera" flyhalves a little more rushed than watch the next match from the 5 minute mark onwards, or not at all. It may reduce the marketability of flyhalves, but better that than the marketability of the game.
Posted 04:40 22nd May 2012
StunTheMullet says...
Ah...the evil ELVs which were never trialled in the NH....Always good to be an armchair critic.
The allowing of collapsing mauls was one of the best ELVs as it gives the option to be able to defend legalised obstruction.
Instead a collapsed maul remains a penalty lottery, generally against the defending team, according to the whim of the whistle blower.
Plus of course the breakdown remains unresolved (bring back rucking).
Posted 20:44 21st May 2012
DropZone62 says...
Love the idea about rucks and use it or lose it, this will make for more exciting rugby! Could we get any update on how Jonah Lomu is? I'm worried for him, and also how Otaga's liquidation is happening are they still in trouble? oh yeah and no article on Viadana in the Pro12 yet? or is that just speculation?
Posted 20:17 21st May 2012
ChrisInCrete says...
Best Team in Europe - a bit difficult - Leinster a very, very good team as are the others, but they don't have so much to do in domestic competitions and are fresh for Europe. All round as a team - Leicester.
Posted 18:54 21st May 2012