Rules and referees are ruining our game
Roar Guru By Luke Hymers, 23 Mar 2010 The Crowd is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- rugby referees, Rugby Union, Super Rugby
South Africa's Bulls captain Victor Matfield gestures to the fans after winning the semi-final of the Super 14 rugby match against New Zealand Crusaders at the Loftus Versfeld stadium in Pretoria, South Africa, Saturday May 23, 2009. The Bulls defeated the Crusaders 36-23. (AP Photo/Themba Hadebe
Modern rugby is hampered by confused, disjointed and misguided opinion of how to ‘fix the problem’ in the structure of the rules and horrifically inconsistent refereeing as a result of widespread confusion.
The biggest problem with rugby is that the IRB’s many attempts at amending the rules are killing the core principles of the game that it’s trying to supposedly save.
Rugby’s biggest issue in the last 10 years has been the ease with which players get away with killing the ball in their defensive red zone, not how much opportunity teams have to score tries.
Richie McCaw and co get away with murder when opposing teams storm their line and the defensive players are happy with risking giving away 3 points, as it is obviously better than 7.
If we are wanting to see more tries, then the points system for penalties needs to be amended. Players must be aptly punished for negative play. It is a core value of the sport across the board but it is not being upheld effectively, which has led to the stagnant defense and kicking-based games that plague our fields, stadiums and screens today.
Rugby has lost its appeal because it’s ridden with negative, cheating play, and more recently, as a result of the changed rules, scrappy, soft, directionless slop.
The current Super 14 rule changes, or ‘re-interpretations’, have destroyed the physicality and raw challenge at the breakdown, and we’re not necessarily seeing better rugby as a result.
Top teams end up in defensive stalemates because they don’t commit at the breakdown so as to fill their defensive line. And we’re either seeing teams have a decent balance and hold out, or not pay enough attention to one or the other and end up leaking tries from the speedy recycling through the middle, as in the case of the Lions.
Breakdown prowess is no longer a priority and referees also seem to appear to have forgotten the one very positive rule that was introduced last year, where a defensive player arriving at the tackled ball first on his feet (provided he enters from the back, and if he is the tackler, releases and retires first) has full rights to hang onto it until bashed off the ball or his feet.
Should that not happen, the defensive team receives a penalty for holding.
Where has this rule gone?
I don’t know how many times in this year’s Super 14 I’ve lamented the apparent ignorance of referees to this rule as quality turnovers are wrongfully punished. It’s near impossible to turnover ball, apart from simply waiting for an opposition mistake.
It’s not better to give the attacking team the advantage because it does exactly that! It creates an unfair advantage and the current stronger interpretations just make rucking and mauling a thing of the past because defenses acknowledge that they’re disadvantaged and just re-form.
Why don’t we all just go and watch the NRL? It’s boring, pointless and frustrating as the key aspects of specialist forward play have been completely eliminated.
If we want to see an improvement in rugby, go back to how we played it in 2007, bar the few new rules that have had a positive effect (first player at ball has rights and 22 pass back, for example), but punish negative play and the farce that is penalty kicks from any further than 40m out and give teams a limit for how long they can keep the ball at the last feet of their ruck.
Let’s hope they sort out the current mess and get back to good hard rugby that encourages positive play within the rules that are set out and apt punishment which encourages teams to defend properly, not to cheat.
And to attack, not to kick, and to ruck and maul, not to fan out your defensive line.
Recommend this story.
The Turkey 10
The Turkey 10 teams have now been selected, as Wild Turkey Bourbon's sport sponsorship kicks into the next exciting phase.
Choose which side you're going to support and get in the running to win $2,500!
Simply visit Wild Turkey Australia on Facebook for your chance to win.
Find out more.
- Explore:
- rugby referees, Rugby Union, Super Rugby
March 23rd 2010 @ 11:01am
soapit said | March 23rd 2010 @ 11:01am | Report comment
just had a brainwave.
what if after penalty goals they restarted play from the 22, not from halfway. then you wouldnt be intentionally risking penalties to relieve pressure as the pressure would still be on in addition to the 3 points.
March 23rd 2010 @ 1:29pm
shocked! said | March 23rd 2010 @ 1:29pm | Report comment
i like…
March 23rd 2010 @ 12:36pm
Bay35Pablo said | March 23rd 2010 @ 12:36pm | Report comment
“The current Super 14 rule changes, or ‘re-interpretations’, have destroyed the physicality and raw challenge at the breakdown, and we’re not necessarily seeing better rugby as a result. ”
What game are you watching?! The spectacle is far better than last year.
besides which, they are still implementing it. it was clearly aimed at going very hard in the first few weeks at getting the tacklers off and out, and erring in favour of the attacker. Once the players were clear on that, they have tried to balance it back, by allowing the contest for the ball from the defensive. However, it is only half a dozen games in, and still a work in progress.
The issue is always consistency between refs, but we’ll have that with any rules. Just look at the NRL from last weekend, where several coaches and commentators are complaining refs are killing their game. That with a far simpler rule set!
here’s a tip. if everyone had the attention span of more than a goldfish, and didn’t immediately dismiss stuff because it didn’t work immediately, perhaps we’d stick to something and get the game “fixed”.
March 23rd 2010 @ 1:36pm
shocked! said | March 23rd 2010 @ 1:36pm | Report comment
it’s only better because the ELV’s were so ridiculously bad it made rugby a joke….. The spectacle might be better for someone who doesn’t appreciate specialist positions in the forward pack or proper contesting for the ball at the tackle but otherwise much of it has been crap….watch the french games from the 6 nations, bar the most recent with england which came down to a woeful refereeing performance and you’ll catch some real entertaining rugby with proper breakdown contests…..it’s down to keeping what has made the game what it always has been and not changing it so it’s always favouring the attacking team….rugby has to hold onto the things that makes it unique, not what makes it necessarily exciting to watch to the average person. if you’re taking away the rights of the defender at the ruck contest they just fill the defensive line…and surprise, that’s exactly what teams are doing. the saders are playing mccaw like a number 8 just like the stormers are playing schalk burger much the same way, because ref’s are ignoring other rules in favour of the new interpretations, they are a distraction to fair contest.
March 25th 2010 @ 3:11pm
tubby said | March 25th 2010 @ 3:11pm | Report comment
““The current Super 14 rule changes, or ‘re-interpretations’, have destroyed the physicality and raw challenge at the breakdown, and we’re not necessarily seeing better rugby as a result. ”
What game are you watching?! The spectacle is far better than last year.”
I agree that the game is nowhere near as good to watch as last year. the excitement has gone from half the game. When your team is defending now, really you are just passing the time until a mistake is made, the hope of springing a turnover from the ever contested breakdown is gone.
how many 15 or even 20 phase passages are we seeing this ear with nothing much actually done? really quite soft pick and drive.
penalise people lying on the wrong side, let people on their feet have a shot at the ball.
and enough with the referees seemingly wanting to trick the front rows into packing in early. get a decent pace on the crouch-touch etc so everyone knows what the calls will be.
even though the stormers are finally playing to potential, I’m not watching as much of the S14 as last year and paying more attention to the 6N.
March 25th 2010 @ 3:39pm
Cattledog said | March 25th 2010 @ 3:39pm | Report comment
Tubby, if you think the 6Ns is more entertaining than the Super 14, then so be it. As I said in my post below, the 6N has been boresville to date and I couldn’t help thinking how badly these teams would fare in the Super 14. Anyway, each to their own and we can agree to disagree
March 23rd 2010 @ 12:50pm
Cattledog said | March 23rd 2010 @ 12:50pm | Report comment
Never seen a rule book in rugby…seen plenty of law books…and for good reason. I’ve advocated for some time that reducing penalties and field goals is OK, but better would be to increase the points for a conversion from a try to 3. Not a try to 6!
Having said that, the Super 14 has been great to watch this year and so was totally bewildered by Firebrand Sally’s suggestion of growing the grass and wetting the field as ‘rugby still works well in the Northern Hemisphere under heavy conditions’. Not sure what your taking Sal but you should pass it around!
The 6 Nations has been boresville in the main and anyone comparing NH rugby with SH in a positive way is delusional.
March 23rd 2010 @ 2:46pm
Brian said | March 23rd 2010 @ 2:46pm | Report comment
You suggest “If we are wanting to see more tries, then the points system for penalties needs to be amended.” Quite an assumption and one that points to the essence of the difference between Australasian fans and South African fans of rugby. Where Australasians are seemingly obsessed with the need for “entertainment” (ie. scoring tries), all South Africans care about is winning and winning no matter what it takes, be it tries, penalties or drop-goals. It might stem from the fact rugby in Australia (and maybe NZ, I don’t know) is under pressure from other games in order to attract crowds and thrive, whereas in SA rugby has always been the only winter sport to attract massive crowds and revenue. Don’t Aussies prefer the thrill of winning over being “entertained” for 80 minutes?
March 23rd 2010 @ 2:59pm
shocked! said | March 23rd 2010 @ 2:59pm | Report comment
it would appear that way….i think many oval shaped ball following fans grow up in aus with the two games side by side and league is the game that has never changed and perhaps is therefore easier to follow, because it is so simplistic, but i personally don’t find it entertaining at all, or at least until the end of the finals series and occasionally origin when they try to avoid their phase ball being shut down and throw it around a bit…but even then it’s a bit of a mindless game for me, i really just hate watching it….union in my mind is superior in its tactically based gameplay and it’s diversity through multiple phase ball play…oh yeah and scrums can at least occasionally have a point in union, i don’t know why they bother in league….it’s realistically touch rugby but tackle…fun to play, not to watch…..so i don’t think it’s a thing of aussie sports fans not liking winning, that’s why they’ve turned on union…the wallabies haven’t been the powerhouse that the aussie league and cricket teams have been so it’s easy to turn to the dominant code and enjoy that while it’s going well, but when the wallbies aren’t winning apparently rugby is boring…bet noone was saying that in ’99….?
March 23rd 2010 @ 3:27pm
Cattledog said | March 23rd 2010 @ 3:27pm | Report comment
Brian, I hear what your saying and sure, winning is great, but being entertained is also what we are after. I remember the Bledisloe match at the Olympic Stadium in Sydney, 2000 where the ABs were up 20 odd points after about 7 minutes. Australia clawed their way back to be leading with 60 seconds to play when that great winger Lomu broke our hearts and lifted the Kiwis. I think nearly 110000 fans left the stadium that evening believing they had witnessed the greatest game of rugby ever, combined with the biggest crowd in rugby history. Even the Kiwis were gracious in victory.
Rugby and entertainment were the winners that night, as well as proving Australia’s ability to host World events exceptionally well. The movement home went like clockwork. However, the point here is Super 14 is moving in a positive direction and entertainment is essential, especially here in Oz where we do have significant competition for followers, especially in winter.
We just need to keep tweeking the laws and we’ll just about get it right. You’ll never please everyone all the time. By changing a conversion from a try to 3 points will, IMO, change the mindset of teams to opt for ball in hand rugby more often than we are seeing now, although most would agree this has changed this year to some extent.
By doing this, the kicker remains important but the decision process is changed to some extent to provide, IMO, further entertainment.
March 23rd 2010 @ 3:06pm
T C said | March 23rd 2010 @ 3:06pm | Report comment
The reinterpretation changes in rugby this year are a Godsend and a move in the right direction to making the game more open and if the northern hemisphere have any brains they will get smart and adopt it as well. The more 15s evolvess toward 7s the better the spectacle will be .
March 23rd 2010 @ 7:58pm
shocked! said | March 23rd 2010 @ 7:58pm | Report comment
oh my god, you actually have no idea do you? 7s is absoloute waffle, it’s hardly rugby and if you love it so much, watch it, it’s on all the time, just don’t harp on with that kind of rubbish in case someone hears you and tries it
March 23rd 2010 @ 4:06pm
Jock M said | March 23rd 2010 @ 4:06pm | Report comment
We need to right back to 1995 Laws if we wish to see Rugby returned to its former glory.
I loved Rugby with a passion once upon a time-I won’t even watch it now and shake my head as I see the game lurch from one disaster to another.
We do not even seem to have a referance point anymore.