Continuity and and contestability of possession are cornerstones of the game of rugby. They attempt to co-exist at every breakdown.
Now that the ELVs are firmly rooted in our game, and rucking is unlikely to return, the governing bodies need to instruct referees to change their current modus operandi at the breakdown.
Rather than issue multiple warnings in the early stages of the game for infringements at the breakdown, I propose that players deliberately infringing at the breakdown will be dealt with by an immediate yellow card, not a procession of free kicks, full penalties and finally a yellow card.
In turn, the rugby audience needs to adopt the mindset that yellow cards are an integral part of the game, like they are in ice hockey, rather than a last resort.
Infringements come from pressure by the attacking team. A yellow card is a reward to the attacking team for trying to play attacking rugby.
Defenders are very skilled at slowing down or killing the breakdown ball for their opponents. Under this change, the consequences to the defenders match the loss suffered by the attacking team.
This will eradicate the only blight on our game: defenders, mostly burly forwards, trying out for Dramatic Arts scholarships with lines like ‘Who me?’ or ‘Sorry!’ or ‘I was stuck!’ or ‘But I was on my feet!’
When rucking was the consequence of deliberate infringement at the breakdown, players thought long and hard before venturing onto the dark side. When caught there inadvertently, they took immediate action to leave.
Yellow cards can be the new-age sanction to replace rucking.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (198)
- Will South African rugby force a Super 21 by 2018? (172)
- Brumbies 2012: New coach, new players, new attitude (128)
- Dan Parks and the unsolved questions of expat rugby (61)
- Pocock set to be named new Force skipper (56)
- Can the ‘Tahs win the battle after losing the Waugh? (51)
- What does the future hold for the Six Nations (50)
- Chiefs continue to wait for SBW (2)
- Nathan Sharpe to retire at end of 2012 (2)
- Queensland ready for Super challenge (2)
- Australian teams at Super disadvantage (50)
- Foley excited about Samoan rugby challenge
- Force rugby coach praises his pack (2)
- The real story of how John O’Neill turned Manchester City down (62)
- Wales show Southern Hemisphere how to play running rugby (26)
- What opening matches of Six Nations taught us (18)
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (201)
- Clinical Chiefs cost rusty Rebels in Corio (9)
- Six Nations shows rugby is a parochial game at heart (5)
- Goose’s Super Rugby up-and-comer XV for 2012 (29)
- What does the future hold for the Six Nations (50)
- Explore:
Roger said | June 10th 2008 @ 11:12am | Report comment
The great advantage that rucking allowed for the game was that it encouraged defenders to commit to the rucks to steal the ball or at least slow it down, but also allowed the attacking team to ruck players off the ball to feed attacking play.
If we issue yellow cards early on (which I agree with you is the only way we can get quick ball at the moment), a smart coach is simply going to tell his players to fan out in defence and not committ to rucks. This will result in a rugby league type defensive line and will cramp flowing footy.
So we are left with how to encourage the battle for possession and also allow flowing football…I am stumped…any suggestions? If players cant ruck does that mean they will have to drag attacking players on the wrong side of the ball back away from the rucks…imagine a player being dragged out by head or legs (see Meads v Catchpole) when a team wants quick ball.
Perhaps we need a crazy idea like putting the game on astro turf (already happening in UK due to weather), banning studs, giving players rubber shoes and then bringing back rucking! Sure the rucking wont be as effective, but the incentive to battle possession will be there, and at least the onus of removing players from the ruck area will be taken out of the hands of the refs and given to players.
Whilst this could probably work at senior level, I am not sure how park and jnr rugby would survive and running on soggy fields in joggers would be horrible.
stillmissit said | June 10th 2008 @ 11:14am | Report comment
The game is fully professional and yet the refs are treating it like a private school where the thoughts seem to be “We know you are all gentlemen” as opposed to the players who use the professional foul immediately anyone is within striking distance of the try line.
I agree with LeftArmSpinner we need to penalise professional fouls with yellow cards earlier in the game. It is too easy to set the stage wrongly in rugby and then trying to correct it and get the game to flow becomes very hard. The players only want consistency but we need to understand that they will push the envelope as far as it will go.
If we want to get the most out of the ELV’s then the ref’s need to be firmer and agree on a set of sub rules that decides how they will manage the game and this includes professional fouls in the ruck and collapsing the scrum on the blind side of the ref. Both of these are a blight on the game and must be stopped.
I would give the assistant ref a small set of binoculars to watch the blind side of the scrum if they are too far away to see. May look odd but it would stop this pox on scrummaging.
stillmissit said | June 10th 2008 @ 11:23am | Report comment
Roger – I suggest that the team not commiting to the ruck in their own 22 would be commiting suicide if they didnt commit to the ruck all 8 forwards picking and going at your line demands attention and also they only need to pick it up and maul it across the line at speed to score.
Always assume that if one coach uses a tactic the opposing coach or players will use that change to find an advantage or weakness in it.
Flowing rugby can only occur in our current game from fast, skillful, forward play and quick ball creating space before the defensive line is set. Of course you will always get a Larkham or a Giteau making a break through a tight defence but this is the exception.
paulmc said | June 10th 2008 @ 12:04pm | Report comment
I am a bit reluctant about the quick draw on yellow cards – I see the merit but … I have always liked the even contest 15 vs 15. However what about a 5 min bin or a 10 or 15 metre distance penalty coupled with the free kick (quick tap or scrum) or even a combination of both?
clint said | June 10th 2008 @ 5:19pm | Report comment
Stillmissit: I agree with you, the maul seems to be underutilised in today’s game. We are seeing the reemergence of the pick and drive, and even the drive of 2 or 3 players in a ‘mini-maul’ bit always with the intention of hitting the deck 2-3m past the gain line. I don’t see why the players don’t try and keep this up and create a mini rolling maul (like the good ‘ol days) I see this as the next development to breaking the League style defeneses that are so popular today.
In fact I’ll email Robbie right now and let him know…
Sledgeandhammer said | June 10th 2008 @ 8:09pm | Report comment
completely against this one – firstly as soon as you send a player off the field you destroy the contest. Secondly ELVs or no ELVs the breakdown remains a subjective area and it’s not always obvious who is to blame. The idea that some players are the ‘bad guys’ and deserve to be punished is simplistic and can lead to the disaster we saw in Sydney last weekend when Eastwood were refereed off the park against uni.
stillmissit said | June 10th 2008 @ 8:22pm | Report comment
Sledgeandhammer
didnt see the game but if the referee had sent a couple to the bin in the first 15 mins there would have been time for either side to win the game. Letting professional fouls go almost unpunished early is setting the teams on a last 15 min collision course. It seems your ref was trying to establish some control too late in the game. An assumption of course but a good chance of being correct.
It seems that nobody would have been happy with the outcome of that game. Uni would have the thought that without the ref they could have lost and Eastwood would see the opposite outcome. Not great for anyone but better for Uni.
LeftArmSpinner has this one absolutely correct.
LeftArmSpinner said | June 11th 2008 @ 9:02am | Report comment
Roger, if the forwards fan out, the opposition will drive thro the ruck over the gain line, and then the defensive line is off side under the new laws and have to go through the gate to defend the ruck/maul area.
Sledge, It is exactly your mind set that i was referring to. I shared your view but I know believe that It needs to change.
You don’t destroy the contest. Sure it will test the resolve of the 14 man team. They will have to adopt a different strategy while the 15 man team also has to make the most of the advantage. The latest S14 final is a case in point. The Tahs failed to take advantage of 15 on 14. The Crusaders adapted their game while a man down and came back stronger once Thorn returned.
That the game takes a turn is a good thing.
Immediate yellow cards are given for foul play, mostly harmless handbags at 2 metres. Why not at the breakdown where defenders are stopping the scoring of tries and the continuity of running rugby that makes the game more emjoyable to play and watch!!!!
Stillmissit, in the Eastwood V Uni game, the ref did issue yellows in the first half to one Eastwood and one Uni player for cynical play. But the Woodies were under so much pressure from Uni, that they had no choice: give away the penalty or have Uni score the try.
Peter K said | June 11th 2008 @ 9:37am | Report comment
When a ball comes out slow from an attacking ruck within the 22, and the tackled player was supported (i.e.) not isolated then it is cynical ball killing by the defense to stop a try. It may be difficult to identify the exact culprit but you know the team that did it.
I say ALL cynical cheating (call a spade a spade) should be an automatiic yellow card, with no referee discretion. Sure in a small number of cases the wrong decision is made but who cares? The upside is attacking teams get a fair chance of scoring a try. Games get decided by better rugby play not better rugby cheating.
Sure the coaches and players will moan about keeping players on the field etc. Guess what that is up to them to not CHEAT.
If this was enforced the players and coaches would soon learn and not so readily cheat and thus opening up the game.
stillmissit said | June 11th 2008 @ 12:15pm | Report comment
LeftArmSpinner – re Uni v Eastwood based on what you are both saying it sounds like it was a tough day at the office for the ref. I am not amazed that players today will take a penalty as they can set up their defences if they tap and go or take the 3 points versus 5-7. This can only be resolved with harsher penalties for professional fouls and therefore QED more yellow cards.
Cant see any other way around it. Penalty tries is not the answer in my book.