Their ‘job is hard enough’ as ex-Irish ref boss warns Super Rugby that there is ‘little point’ in playing a different game after World Rugby outcome
Harry Potter of the Wallabies tackles All Blacks captain Scott Barrett and an inset of Owen Doyle.
Former head of referees at the Irish Rugby Football Union, Owen Doyle, has warned Super Rugby Pacific that their law trials could be detrimental for the All Blacks, Wallabies and referees.
This comes after World Rugby’s Shape of the Game conference did not result in any alterations in the lawbook in the build-up to next year’s Rugby World Cup in Australia.
Tensions have been high heading into the summit, with reports of opposing views on multiple laws, trials and possible changes.
However, World Rugby issued a statement of ‘universal agreement‘ following the Shape of the Game meeting, adding that the sport is in a ‘strong, positive place’.
Warning to the All Blacks and Wallabies
Additionally, the nations have committed to focus on aligning laws and referee directives across elite competitions to improve fan understanding, while recognising the need for some closed law trials.
A former international referee and manager of officials, Doyle understands the challenges facing referees and welcomed World Rugby’s statement of synergy after being on chairman Brett Robinson’s case recently.
He adds that the fact that World Rugby has opted not to make any alterations to the lawbook shouldn’t be viewed as a ‘winners-and-losers scenario’ but has warned Super Rugby Pacific bigwigs of playing a different game to the rest of the world.
“Super Rugby Pacific (SRP) has already introduced more of these ‘league’ changes. So, that needs to be sorted and it won’t be easy. However, if SRP’s key figures look closely in the mirror, they may come to realise there is little point in playing a different game. Also, their players are likely to be disadvantaged when the international Test matches come around,” Doyle wrote in his Irish Times column.
“It also makes life difficult for those elite referees who will move between SRP and international rugby. Their job is hard enough without having to manage different sets of laws and directives. As well as this, if SRP is trying to appeal to rugby league supporters, then introducing similar laws is not the way to go.”
SA Rugby boss: Why New Zealand and South Africa may never host a Rugby World Cup again
Goes against the World Rugby charter
This season, the southern hemisphere competition is trialling laws that limit the number of scrums. In the event of an accidental offside, a free-kick is awarded instead of a scrum. There is also a crackdown on players joining rucks after the referee’s use it call and more leniency around where a quick tap can be taken.
All of these innovations have been ‘designed to further reduce stoppages, inspire positive play and simplify the officiating of the game’. Doyle warns that some go against World Rugby’s charter and the likes of New Zealand and Australia should be careful that it doesn’t have a negative impact on the players that are produced for the international teams through the club competition.
“SRP is further reducing the number of scrums and replacing them with free-kicks. By doing so, it is heading for a game that does not have a place for all shapes and sizes – a kind of hybrid mishmash with elements of rugby league. It is not at all in line with union’s charter, nor indeed with the sentiments expressed in World Rugby’s communique,” Doyle continued.
“It is also all very well to keep looking for more ball-in-play time (BIPT), but if that is not accompanied with a quality mark, then, as a goal in itself, it is meaningless. Rugby union is currently delivering in spades on this point, the Q-BIPT is top notch, while the vital contests remain pretty much intact.”
Want more from Planet Rugby? Add us as a preferred source on Google to your favourites list for world-class coverage you can trust.
READ MORE: Tony Brown reveals how ‘the evolution of Springbok rugby’ has made them more difficult to beat
