There’s more to rugby than just a highlights package
By James Vaughan, 29 Oct 2012 James Vaughan is a Roar Rookie
- Tagged:
- NRL, Rugby League, Rugby Union, wallabies
Related coverage
Much has been said in the recent weeks about the state of rugby, and I do not wish to add unnecessarily to an increasingly breathless and discordant debate.
However, I feel it important to briefly take a step back so that we might have a better view of the game, specifically where it has come from and where it appears to be going.
First, though, a question: why am I interested in rugby?
It is a question I have been forced to ask myself many times in recent days after the barrage of attacks on the sport by well-meaning–and other, I suspect, not so well meaning–spectators and participants.
Particularly salient at the moment are the self-appointed redeemers who have kindly wandered down from their league-shaped castles to ceremoniously present us–the witless and/or wicked rugby fans and administrators–with a few of their very own ingenious remedies guaranteed to halt the catastrophic rot of a code that has strayed so far from its allegedly noble past.
I don’t wish to be drawn into a discussion of when and how the sport has been debased, nor do I even want to dispute this argument with a long list of statistics that may or may not prove otherwise.
Rather, I wish to would like to toss aside the premise of this argument altogether and storm ahead with an impassioned defence of the sport I love, in its current form, more than any other.
Before I begin I would like to assure readers of all persuasions that I enjoy linebreaks, tries, exceptional passes and crashing hits as much as the next contact sport fanatic.
However I’d also like to stress that nothing on that list is responsible for my obsession with rugby.
I’m drawn to the sport for the unique technical demands placed on players in each position and the complex technical battles that are occurring between individual players and units of players all over the field simultaneously.
Teams are forced to fight on multiple fronts, and while they might be gaining ascendency in one or two areas of the game, such as the breakdown and lineout, they may also be losing it in others, like the scrums, tactical kicking and backline play.
I find the way this complexity plays out over 80 minutes enthralling, as well as how it shifts, slowly or dramatically, as certain players tire or break down and players with different strengths and weaknesses replace them. And so selecting the right players becomes essential, as well as being able to execute a game plan that fits the balance of skills in the team.
Just as when a player hits a gap it’s the result of the technical and tactical precision, equally, when a breakdown penalty is given, it’s is the result of a player being technically exposed, or of having just lost a technical battle with their opposite.
Far from bemoaning this aspect of the game, it’s one of the core aspects I enjoy most. I love Test cricket for the same reason – the drawn out technical and mental struggle which in many ways are even more pertinent than in rugby.
Again, I enjoy seeing batsmen hit boundaries or a bowler knocking out middle stump, but only in the context the wider technical and mental war; the pressure forced by one player or team over another, which, in the case of Test cricket, may have taken hours to establish.
Many of the critics who emerged from the woodwork after the third Bledisloe Test have made some very revealing comment about the absence of highlights in that game, most notably league writer Dean Ritchie in The Daily Telegraph. He stridently insisted that a lack of highlights is the clearest evidence of a poor game and a struggling code.
For me, if a sporting contest could be effectively surmised in two minutes of highlights I would be wonder why anyone bothers watching a full game, and it’s for the same reason when I miss a game of rugby I have almost no interest in seeing the highlights.
To me, it is like not reading a book and then being read five of the best pages to make up for it.
Sports like rugby league and Twenty20 cricket are based on the idea of the highlight package. When I watch them, I am basically just waiting for the moments that will end up in the highlights.
And those moments do come. The most spectacular tries are invariably scored in rugby league, and I have no hesitation conceding that. The game is quite simply better designed to create fireworks – there’s more space, less ambiguity and no mess.
Rugby on the other hand is full of contradictions; as a spectacle it is unwieldy, capricious, often unsightly, and prone to crabbiness and periods of depression.
It’s complicated, laden with technicalities, and the build-up of momentum is subtle and takes time while pressure is released suddenly in strange, often anti-climactic ways.
For coaches and players, the art of its mastery requires an almost alchemic balance between power and finesse; directness and chicanery; flamboyance and restraint. When the balance is wrong the result is awkward, sometimes excruciating to watch.
Yet looking at these qualities, I see no reason why true rugby fans should feel the need to hang their head in shame and apologise.
These are the hallmarks of the game we adore. And if these qualities don’t appeal to you, here’s a thought: it’s not the game that needs to change, it’s you who needs to change the channel.
Sport, all day long. Does this sound too good to be true? We're searching for a Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. If you're a sales star who doesn't mind a hit, kick, throw, or cycle, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
Have you seen the new Wallabies jersey? Want one of your own? We're giving away a brand new 2013 Wallabies jersey to one lucky Roarer, click here to go in the running to win.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Wallabies squad announced: Folau in, no Quade Cooper – yet (267)
- Deans: Should he stay or should he go? (245)
- SPIRO’s Lions Diary: Deans goes for experience, plus Folau (242)
- Wallabies 25-man Lions squad: analysis (214)
- Quade Cooper misses Wallaby squad selection (209)
- Quade shouldn’t be fly half against the Lions (184)
- What gives with Israel Folau? (184)
- Super Rugby teams will skin the Lions (55)
- Super B to the rescue for rugby? (25)
- Picking your ‘First V’ for the Wallabies (29)
- Looking forward to the 2015 Wallabies (12)
- Philippines avoids relegation, stays in Asian Five Nations top division (3)
- Lions cheat-sheet: the Wallaby game plan (142)
- AAC: the man for this moment (25)
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- NRL, Rugby League, Rugby Union, wallabies



October 29th 2012 @ 7:34am
tc said | October 29th 2012 @ 7:34am | Report comment
Good article ,we don’t need to change the game ,all that needs to happen is the players need to play with the right attitude .
Just look at the ITM cup a lot of those games have been amazing so whats the difference ,the difference is that the higher the level of rugby the better the defence is ,so how do we solve it ,you can’t unless you go to a rugby league type of format (yawn) .
The five second rule that has come in should make a difference because it wont allow the defence to form itself properly (in theory) . I heard someone the other day say that maybe the IRB should bring in a 5 meter rule and that if your not a part of the breakdown or ruck you have to be at a distance of 5 meters ,there could be merit in that .
October 29th 2012 @ 9:07am
Grimmace said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:07am | Report comment
the 5m rule was part of the ELV’s wasn’t it?
October 29th 2012 @ 9:19am
Jerry said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:19am | Report comment
No, scrum only (has been passed into law).
I don’t think a 5m offside line would work in the ruck – there’d have to be exceptions for people who are going to join the ruck which would make it too hard to enforce (in respect of forwards anyway). And, it’d just make it much easier for teams to run a pick and go for easy gains just wide of the ruck, rinse & repeat. Hey presto – boring league style hit ups.
October 30th 2012 @ 1:29am
James Vaughan said | October 30th 2012 @ 1:29am | Report comment
Yeah there have been quite a few things written about the need to change the rules and I guess the point of this article was that there always seems to be the same tacit assumption there: the game must be more entertaining; we need to ‘speed it up’; we want more highlights. Faster isn’t necessarily better, especially if it is going to effectively standardize the pace of the game. At the moment we can have fast games, and we can have slow games, and mixes of the two. Is that a problem? I don’t think so. As jeznez rightly says, it’s never going to get faster than sevens, so if that’s what we’re supposed to be after we might as well just give up on the XV game altogether.
Perhaps the only rule change I’d get behind that I read about last week is the stopping of the clock for penalties and scrum resets. This would add another 10 or 15 minutes of actual game time without altering the architecture of the sport. I definitely find it depressing when a game has just gone into the final quarter and, just as the tension should really be reaching a climax, we’re at the 70 minute mark after watching five minutes of kickers squinting at goal posts and scrums being reset. These are important and necessary aspects of the game, no question, though I see no reason for them to be part of actual game time.
Five second rule at the ruck is interesting, and haven’t watched the ITM enough to really comment. While I imagine it has had the desired effect of speeding the game up and forcing defense onto the back foot a little bit, I’m also worried it would have the undesired effect of homogenizing the way different teams play. As it stands, any team can can set itself a five second rule if they believe it’s in their own interests. The All Blacks have shown how devastating a commitment to that philosophy can be. And while I am a massive fan of the All Blacks’ approach, I’m still an even bigger fan of the opportunity for teams to decide themselves how they would like to play. I love that other teams around the world have the chance to look at the All Blacks’ success in recent seasons and decide to play a similar game or one completely different. In other words, as much as I love watching the All Blacks play, I would hate to see every other team forced to play that way too. Sacrificing diversity on the alter of entertainment would be a big loss to the game. I haven’t watched much ITM cup though, can anyone comment on whether 5 second rule has reduced teams’ capacity to play to their own style and pace?
October 29th 2012 @ 7:41am
Wally James said | October 29th 2012 @ 7:41am | Report comment
Thank- you James. You have eloquently put my own views.
October 29th 2012 @ 8:32am
hog said | October 29th 2012 @ 8:32am | Report comment
Well said, Rugby is a complicated game and is at odds with today’s so called sports all being about entertainment , however with professionalism and the need to create more revenue rugby is stuck between a rock and a hard place, if you simply just add more product you are basically saying it’s entertainment and that’s the problem.
October 29th 2012 @ 8:34am
biltongbek said | October 29th 2012 @ 8:34am | Report comment
I wholeheartedly agree with your articke James, rugby is not dumboard, where you criss cross and pop a few pieces, it is more like a chess match, and although there are many different pieces in the game that needs to be outsmarted and overcome, at the end of the day, it is really only the king you are after.
Only when you get the king in checkmate the match is over, not before.
October 29th 2012 @ 8:36am
Chris @ the Old Barbershop said | October 29th 2012 @ 8:36am | Report comment
Either bring back rucking or just play Rugby League.
October 29th 2012 @ 9:24am
Barns said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:24am | Report comment
Good article. The constant battle for possession and the opportunity to compete for the ball is what I love about rugby….. Personally I find league boring (not saying it is boring, I just find it that way, always seems formulaic. Don’t want to get into a whole league v union thing though… each to their own)
October 29th 2012 @ 9:32am
allblackfan said | October 29th 2012 @ 9:32am | Report comment
The ITM Cup showed what a difference attitutude can make (helped by some rule tweeks and sympathetic refeering).
Some of the high scores came about not because of poor defending (although there was that) but because teams went for tries instead of penalty goals. Teams would attack from their own 22m if they backed their running ability (stand up, Tasman!).
Put simply: the No 10 chose to pass the ball more often then kick it!
October 29th 2012 @ 10:05am
Shahsan said | October 29th 2012 @ 10:05am | Report comment
Well said, James. Exactly the point. It’s not just a matter of how many tries are scored etc, it is all about the contest and that is often more fulfilling. it is not just the ends, but the means.
October 29th 2012 @ 11:07am
Dasher said | October 29th 2012 @ 11:07am | Report comment
Excellent points there. The part about missing a game and not wanting to watch the highlights is something I’ve not thought about before, but it makes a lot of sense. You can’t even get close to the feel for a rugby game from 2 minutes of footage, but you can in league.
–
Comment left via The Roar’s iPhone app. Download it now [http://itunes.apple.com/au/app/the-roar/id327174726?mt=8].
October 29th 2012 @ 11:46am
Gary Russell-Sharam said | October 29th 2012 @ 11:46am | Report comment
Well said James, I enjoy rugby for all the reasons that you have espoused. Rugby is like chess and the strategy evolves during the game. It may take nearly all the game for the complete plan to be revealed. That’s what makes the game so riveting to watch.
League to me is the same ol, same ol, almost every game, Play the ball, a few individual hit-ups and then on the 4th the ball might be passed through two sets of hands before there is a tackle then the 5th and last is a kick. This goes on time after time.
Don’t get me wrong I enjoy some games of league and I am not in anyway critical of people who like the game, whatever turns you on.
I thought that the last test at Suncorp was not a bad spectacle on the whole it was a good contest except for a period where the Wallabies tried very hard to loose the game with their lack of skill in the second half. Apart from that it was a good arm wrestle and that’s what I enjoy with a game of rugby.
The current ITM cup rugby is simple great, the new rules that have been trialled really assist the game and the general flow of the game. I think that the essence of rugby has been left intact but the changes have just tweaked the speed up a notch and this makes for more entertaining rugby all round.
I especially like the use it or loose it rule for the half backs and the scrum sets are much better with the limited wording from the ref. All in all I think the rules changes are good for the game. I would hope that the IRB will introduce them internationally and for Super rugby as well.