Australia bombed out of it by the new laws
By pothale, 27 Aug 2009 Pot Hale is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- Grand slam, IRB, Peter Hynes, Rugby Union, running rugby, S14, SANZAR, Shane Williams, Super Rugby, Tri Nations
Australian winger Peter Hynes believes he is being bombed out of the game of rugby by current playing methods. And it’s all because of the Laws adapted into the game this year, apparently.
Hynes was giving out about the current habit of Garryowens or up and unders which South Africa have used in their recent Tri Nations games against Australia and New Zealand.
In contrast, they didn’t use them – or get a chance to use them – in their recent series against the British and Irish Lions. Both lots of games were played under the new Laws adopted into the game following the IRB’s decision on the ELVs trial earlier this year.
According to an article filed by AAP, “the laws adapted this year, wingers must now play as second and third fullbacks as they are tested by garryowen after garryowen with opponents looking for field possession by keeping their kicks in play.”
“I think that’s becoming a huge part of wing play, the ball in air,” Hynes is quoted as saying. “Teams that kick well, it’s very hard to get that ball. Under a good contestable kick you are standing still and the opposition runners are coming through, it’s very hard to take.”
Some might think that Hynes hasn’t been paying much attention to world rugby over the last few years where kicking a high ball to allow players to contest for it has been going on for quite some time.
Argentina made it a feature of their performance in the last World Cup. This year, a classic kick and catch resulted in Tommy Bowe of Ireland scoring a scintillating try against Player of the Year, Shane Williams, in the final Grand Slam decider match versus Wales.
The match was played under the Global ELVs being trialled at the time. (The S14 and domestic matches in SANZAR got a derogation to continue using the free-kick sanction during the Global trial.)
According to the AAP article, “the (adapted) laws – which have reverted to full-arm penalties for ruck infringements – have also seen a reduction in tries and a huge increase in penalty goals in the Tri Nations. With less expansive, ball-in-hand play, wingers are rarely receiving it in space and getting the opportunity to show their try-scoring wares.”
This sweeping claim about the effect of the adapted Laws is not supported, however, by evidence that awarding full-arm penalties for ruck infringements have directly been the cause of less tries being scored. (Let’s not forget that less than 10 international matches have been played under the adopted Laws.)
Nor are other possible causes cited.
No account seems to be have been taken of teams conceding more infringements than usual. A game flaw that dogged England earlier this year in its opening games of the 6 Nations, before correcting it to finish in second place, and scoring the most number of tries in the competition.
The dropping of the Free Kick derogation for SANZAR, has logically led to an increase in penalty awards in SANZAR matches, under the new global Laws.
However, Southern Hemisphere teams have chosen to take the kick at the posts every time, rather than kicking for territory, or running with the ball – despite an apparent penchant for running rugby by SH teams and the option of getting a try.
This was in marked contrast to some of the games in the recent 6 Nations and in the various Northern Hemisphere leagues last season where penalty kicks were turned down in favour of gaining territory and scoring a try – under the Global ELVs.
However, even allowing for the effect of having less ‘free-flowing’ rugby, and more penalty kicks, it’s interesting to note the try-scoring tallies between Northern Hemisphere and Southern Hemisphere this year without the free-kick sanction option.
The 6 Nations Championship (which had no free-kick sanctions) still managed 56 tries across 15 matches in 2009 under the Global ELVs.
The Lions three match series had 12 tries scored under the Adapted Laws (and no free-kick sanctions.)
And in the five Tri Nations matches played so far, we’ve had eleven tries scored.
Hynes has clearly bought into the hype about the perceived effect of the revised Laws of the Game.
“From a back three perspective, I’d like to get the ball in hand and see a bit more free-flowing rugby and have it thrown wide but at the same time the South Africans have showed they have a certain game-plan … and they’re winning,” he is quoted as saying.
“There’s a huge emphasis on territory and penalties and at the end of the day it’s winning games.”
Unfortunately for Hynes and his career development, his Super 14 coach Phil Mooney simply agrees “pure finishers” will become a dying breed under the new laws.
“If you’re purely a finisher your effectiveness is reduced quite significantly, he said. A comforting thought for the player from his mentor.
Tommy Bowe, of Ospreys and Ireland, would disagree.
He had no problem scoring tries for his club, in the 6 Nations and during the Lions series – experiencing both the Global ELVs and the Final Adapted Laws. Even Shane Williams finally recovered his form, scoring two opportunistic tries in the final match of the Lions series.
With the current South African style winning them games, and New Zealand and Australia not appearing to have any answers to counter their tactics, it looks like we might have to wait for the Autumn Internationals to see whether the New Laws adapted into the game, have actually wrought such a game-changing travesty.
The Northern Hemisphere teams will get an opportunity to re-gather their rolling maul and lineout skills when the NH season starts in two weeks across the Magners, Guinness, 10, and Top 14 leagues.
Then they’ll just have to wait for the angry and confused SANZAR teams to arrive in November looking for retribution.
Well, two of them will anyway.
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? (201)
- Will South African rugby force a Super 21 by 2018? (173)
- The real story of how John O’Neill turned Manchester City down (70)
- Dan Parks and the unsolved questions of expat rugby (65)
- Australian teams at Super disadvantage (58)
- Pocock set to be named new Force skipper (56)
- Can the ‘Tahs win the battle after losing the Waugh? (51)
- Wales show Southern Hemisphere how to play running rugby (29)
- 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:
- Grand slam, IRB, Peter Hynes, Rugby Union, running rugby, S14, SANZAR, Shane Williams, Super Rugby, Tri Nations

pothale said | August 27th 2009 @ 11:31am | Report comment
Here’s a final bit I couldn’t find initially to put into the above article.
April 2009:
“Comparing the Six Nations and Super 14, the penalty count is similar, but there are four times as many short-arm penalties given in our game on average this year. In round six of the Super 14 there were 14 short-arms given and only 11 regular penalties, while in the corresponding round of the Six Nations only two short-arms were given but there were 17 penalties.
These statistics suggest players are more careful in the northern hemisphere, with no doubt the severity of the direct penalty resulting in the lesser overall penalty count. The result is less stop-start football.
If penalties were far greater for breakdown infringements and there was a higher use of the yellow card, players would be a lot more reluctant to push things to the limit and we’ll get a better, faster-flowing, running game. Something we can all appreciate.” – John Connolly.
Sounds like the message hasn’t got home yet.
mitzter said | August 27th 2009 @ 1:36pm | Report comment
Your point isn’t necessarily true.
short arm counts could have been higher in the super 14 because refs are more inclined to reward them than full arms BECAUSE they have less impact instead of your argument of a cleaner game in the northern hemispheere ( i’m not saying that its not true just points considering)
AndyS said | August 27th 2009 @ 1:57pm | Report comment
And it might also explain high penalty counts now, with the refs still pinging everything as before and not yet having redeveloped the blind eye…
Sam Taulelei said | August 27th 2009 @ 11:38am | Report comment
Pothale
The shift that I’ve noticed has been more with the coaching and selection of types of wingers as a reaction to the ELV law changes and now the uniform laws of the game. Robbie Deans, PDV and Graham Henry have been more defensive than offensive in the types of players they wanted on the wing and how they want them to play. They favoured players who are more reliable under the high ball and have a good kicking game and coached them further in developing these skills.
Graham Henry last year favoured the tidy, efficient skills of a player like Rudi Wulf ahead of the more elusive and attacking player like Anthony Tuitavake because of the latters perceived fallibilities under the high ball. This year an out of form Joe Rocokoko initially missed out to Cory Jane and if Rocokoko’s attacking guile and strikepower was in full song then his demotion would have sparked much debate. However calls for Jane to be restored to the side has less to do with his attacking ability and more with his defensive skills as a specialist fullback because there are other specialist wingers available for Joe’s spot.
Last year PDV favoured the attacking skills of Odungane, Jongi Nokwe, Habana and Pietersen and tried to get the Boks to play a more attacking style of rugby with mixed results, this year Habana and Pietersen have been effective kick and chase merchants but have seen little ball move to them by hand. They’re the same players from last year but they’re utilised very differently now.
Last year Deans had the Wallaby backline moving the ball wide quickly to their wings but this year they’ve changed tack and have imitated the tactics of their SANZAR colleagues. They’ve been executing it poorly in comparison to SA and after a lack of wins in the Tri Nations this year, their fans don’t even have the cold comfort of claiming the moral high ground that at least they’re trying to run the ball and play some rugby.
This is a singular coaching strategy from Deans and Henry in how to combat the effective low risk, high pressure game favoured by PDV by imitating them and as we saw from the Lions in their test series and in glimpses from the All Blacks in SA, you can still move the ball around by hand and be effective and successful.
However you have to be brave to be bold and a coach has to maximise the playing resources available to develop a strategy to utilise your own strengths rather than trying to negate the oppositions. I’m not sure if either Deans or Henry have cracked this yet or if it’s a case of the players not implementing the gameplan well enough. But I remain confident that someone will unlock the Boks effective style of play and we’ll see some sparkling backplay again, mind you it may not be until they tour overseas in November.
Ben J said | August 28th 2009 @ 7:33pm | Report comment
Sam, what you’re saying is in line with Eddie Jones’s assesment that both Australia and New Zealand neither has the personell (pre Dan Carter,the man is a genius), strategy or accuracy to execute in the same manner that the Boks have been doing. Or am I reading it incorrectly?
Knives Out said | August 28th 2009 @ 10:03pm | Report comment
I thought that Australia was very conservative last year, Sam. I don’t see how their style has changed.
ohtani's jacket said | August 27th 2009 @ 12:01pm | Report comment
“If penalties were far greater for breakdown infringements and there was a higher use of the yellow card, players would be a lot more reluctant to push things to the limit and we’ll get a better, faster-flowing, running game. Something we can all appreciate.”
Sorry John, but when players are carded we just see the defence go into a mode they’re well prepared for. I really hate the card system. It’s like sitting through 10 minutes of disengagement. When Brown went off in Sydney, the better, fast-flowing, running rugby amounted to a 3-3 draw.
Sam Taulelei said | August 27th 2009 @ 12:06pm | Report comment
Hey OJ, who is the John you’re referring to?
Sam Taulelei said | August 27th 2009 @ 12:07pm | Report comment
Oops didn’t read Pothale’s added quote from John Connolly, my bad.
Temba said | August 27th 2009 @ 1:00pm | Report comment
The last 4 3N matches had 63 penalties given, this is why there is no running game. Too many stoppages, too many infringements. The boks taking a shot at goal is not the problem, it what gave them that chance to kick were the issue lies.
Every backline is stuffed with players that can play 2-3 in some cases every position in the backline… It’s not a new thing.
I think the wallaby team is under instruction to highlight the boring bok game every chance they get, this will make things harder for the Saffers and keep the focus off the rest.
Willem said | August 27th 2009 @ 1:15pm | Report comment
I would of thought that the team best suited to counter this type of play would of been OZ. My reason for this is that most of these players would of had a reasonable infolvement with Aussie rules as youngsters were contesting for bal in the air is one of the most important skills in the game. With the ability to counter attack with their back three. Clearly i am wrong about this.
Just a thought
mitzter said | August 27th 2009 @ 1:42pm | Report comment
why would have most australian players have some involvement with aussie rules? If they come from the rugby states then they probably have only had an auskick clininc under their belt
Willem said | August 27th 2009 @ 1:53pm | Report comment
As i said i am clearly wrong, but i doubt that these guys as natural athletes would of remained completely clear from AFL growing up. even if just mucking around with friends it is still more exposure to this sort of skill then players in other countrys. Just like argentina traditionally have good kickers of the ball in their team due to a football/soccer background.
Mushi said | August 27th 2009 @ 3:29pm | Report comment
They can also curl soccerballs around a 4 man wall from 30 metres out as they turning around to deftly hook a bouncer coming in at 150km then top it all off with a nice sharp 15 minute 1500m in the pool as a warm down…
Pippinu said | August 27th 2009 @ 5:47pm | Report comment
Willem
what you have failed to realise is that the majority of the population from the North-East of Australia possess enormous reserves of antipathy for the Australian game, it’s bottomless. So what you are suggesting is akin to asking a real man to eat quiche.
Ben J said | August 28th 2009 @ 7:37pm | Report comment
What’s wrong with a nice quiche? Ma’a Nonu wore makeup…
Skip said | August 27th 2009 @ 1:27pm | Report comment
Pothale,
I dont beleive Peter Hynes said he was bieng bombed out of the game. he was stating that he believes a wingers role has changed. As Hynes is a wing/fb I think the new game improves his selection chances over Lachie Turner.
I agree that time will tell as to the true impact of the laws. I also agree that the game has been moving towards a more defensive and kicking game this has been happening since the success of England 2003.
What is clearly evident is that there is less open rugby, the sanctions ELV went some way to addressing this though not perfect, It “appears” that running rugby is not as succesful, perhaps the current laws will result in only one style of Rugby bieng played?
Based on your analysis asnd stats it appears that defensivley the NH teams are not as good as the SH or not as fit this is why more tries are being scored. Even you would agree It would be hard to say it is because of magnificent ball handling skills of the NH teams.
The 6 nations stats are also flatered due to the poor quality of opposition teams, Italy, Scotland and England. I will admit that is an observation as I dont have the stats of the games. The Tri Nations is played by the best 3 teams in the world. The AB’s and Boks would be the most physical while the Wallabies the best defensive team. Why would the AB’s and Wallabies when awarded a penalty kick for the corner when Victor Matfield is in the opposition line out?
As for the penalty vs free kicks awarded at the break down, I would argue that this has nothing to do with Players bieng “more careful” but referee’s being reluctant to give every penalty they see due to the impact on the game. This means that referee’s are not policing the breakdown properly and not allowing a contest for the ball.
You are absolutley correct when you said “This sweeping claim about the effect of the adapted Laws is not supported”
I am not sure if you were refering to Peter Hynes or your self.
pothale said | August 27th 2009 @ 7:52pm | Report comment
“Based on your analysis asnd stats it appears that defensivley the NH teams are not as good as the SH or not as fit this is why more tries are being scored. Even you would agree It would be hard to say it is because of magnificent ball handling skills of the NH teams.
Skip – you would say that, wouldn’t you? I presume it’s occurred to you that one could draw a different conclusion from the stats of the tries, depending on your viewpoint. Or I could follow your logic and say that since more tries were scored in the S14 than in the H Cup, therefore, I could argue that defensively the SH teams are not as good or not as fit – this is why more tries are being scored.
And I think the Magners, Premiership, Top 14 and Lions series amply demonstrate the ball handling skills of NH players, so I wouldn’t agree with you.
“The 6 nations stats are also flatered due to the poor quality of opposition teams, Italy, Scotland and England. I will admit that is an observation as I dont have the stats of the games. ”
You’re right that’s it’s an observation – a wrong one. England came second, and scored the most tries in the comp. I could respond that the 3 Nations stats are also flattered this year by the poor quality of the opposition teams, but I won’t.
“The Tri Nations is played by the best 3 teams in the world.”
I’m sure it is. And sure the NH is only playing catch-up down here at the shallow end of the pool. Far be it from me to point out the error of your ways.
Skip said | August 27th 2009 @ 8:36pm | Report comment
Pothole you are right you could argue that, which is exactly my point. Unless you have detailed analysis then you are making generalised sweeping statements
Pothole I have watched the Magner, premer (SH pensioner premiership) and six nations the ball handling skills are poor especially the english players compared to thier southern counterparts. That isnt general that is fact!
pothale said | August 27th 2009 @ 10:58pm | Report comment
Skip
What generalised sweeping statements have I made?
I commented on an article published by a third party which adduced that the impact of the adapted laws had reduced try scoring in rugby and lots more penalty kicks. That is the sweeping statement I’m referring to. Hynes didn’t make it, neither did I.
You may well have watched the Magners, Premiership, etc. And you may think that ball handling skills are poor compared to SH counterparts. That isn’t a fact. That’s your opinion and it is general. Equally, contributors on here have pointed to the poor ball-handling skills of the teams in the recent 3N matches. So one could argue that your claim doesn’t stand up.
In addition, NH rugby is regularly portrayed as plodding, penalty-kick infested rugby. I would have thought that the try scoring tally might have countered that misconception.
The facts I was presenting are that more tries were scored in matches involving NH teams in this year’s competitions without free-kick sanctions. That is a fact.
You also suggest that the reason for this is that some of the the opposition in the 6N was poor. That’s an opinion. Equally I presume you would acknowledge that some of the opposition was poor in the 3N matches. That’s another opinion. And I would think they are fair and accurate. However, since it’s an issue common to both, it’s not a reason to explain the difference.
The point remains that the try scoring rate is higher – even without free kick sanctions. That’s not a sweeping generalisation, it’s a fact. And is related to the wider point I was making. Not having free-kick sanctions does not necessarily mean the end of try-scoring, or having more penalty kicks. The games involving NH teams have proven that already.
Knives Out said | August 28th 2009 @ 10:06pm | Report comment
France and Italy didn’t concede a hug amount of tries recently, Skip.
ohtani's jacket said | August 27th 2009 @ 2:22pm | Report comment
When you switch between the old laws and the ELVs as many times as the SH sides did, the game is bound to be a mess. The NH sides trialed the Global ELVs for a season, right? Were they really that much of a disruption?
Whatever Hynes meant or didn’t mean by his comments, wingers were being targeted under the ELVs as well. A season ago, we were saying that you couldn’t counter attack because of the FK for holding on. Now you can’t counter attack because of the full arm penalty for holding on.
Kearney, Byrne, and to a lesser extent, Sivivatu, have shown that you can counter attack. Muliaina has been scratchy this season, but in general he’s shown the same skills. RIght now, the back three are having their skills tested. If they can’t claim a high ball with any sort of forward momentum, they’re sunk. This may have traditionally been a fullback skill, but wingers will have to learn it too.
The problem, in terms of continuity, is that if a fullback takes a high ball and breaks the line, he’s off and running without any sort of support, so either they need to get better at kicking the ball ahead or their teammates need to read the situation better and follow after him.
Willem said | August 27th 2009 @ 2:52pm | Report comment
Has anyone concidered that rugby styles change almost in a cycle just like a teams form or dominance does. Since the profesional era started it has been the team with the solid forward platform and the strong attacking backline that would win games. Then teams started improving their defensive structures in order to counter and teams that based their game on a strong defence and attack from turn over ball turneded out to be more successfull. Now that most teams have become better at scrambeling from broken play the turnover ball is not has valuable has it use to be. So team tactics shift again and now we have a game where the back three is placed under a lot of presure. Could it be that when teams start dealing with this problem well enough and pick full backs and wingers that handle the high ball well that we will see a nother shift in playing styles adopted by teams around the world.