- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Greg Growden wrote an article in the Sydney Morning Herald earlier in the week about 20-13 rugby. According to the promoters of this idea – Eddie Jones and ex ARU chairman Dilip Kumar – the objective of 20-13 rugby is to open up the game.
The idea is to have two players from each team removed from the field for 20 minutes in each half.
I’m all for a more open game, but I don’t like the sound of taking players off the field. I think there’s a better and simpler idea, that doesn’t change the structure of the current game at all.
One of the major changes to rugby in the professional era has been the improvement in defence. We often see teams choosing not to compete at the breakdown and holding a very strong line of defence throughout prolonged periods of attack.
The wall of defenders at the last feet of the breakdown makes it hard for open attack. The defensive line is also often barely onside, cutting down attacking space even more and making it easier for defences to keep their line strong.
A simple way to open up the game is to move the defensive line back a bit. The new laws already do this at scrums. So why not all breakdowns? This would be easily managed by marking the field in five metre increments.
At each breakdown, the defensive line would have to retire to the next line, marking behind the last feet in the ruck/maul. That might be four and a half metres, or one metre, but it would be better and clearer than the current zero metres.
You might say that this is a step towards rugby league but I don’t agree. It’s just moving the onside line back a few metres, that’s it. No other change, and just the same as scrums. Marking the field makes it easy for players, officials and spectators to see the onside line at every breakdown.
Defending players would have to work harder to be onside at each phase (where they are not part of ruck or maul). They would have to move forward to meet the attack and then retreat further to be onside at each breakdown.
This means a bigger test of defensive resilience, as attacking pressure builds. The extra space would give attacking teams more opportunities to create or exploit holes in defences and a bit more time to weave their magic. That’s what we go to see.
It’s also likely to drag more players into the breakdown, as they don’t have a retreat to the onside line if they are part of the ruck or maul. It might also make the attacking blocker a thing of the past (he’s the guy standing to the side of the breakdown but in front of the last feet, to impede defenders).
There would seem no point in blocking defenders if they are further back. Although you will get players on the side of the ruck, packing like flankers, ready to pounce when the ball comes out.
I think it is a simple, logical way to open the game up, while cleaning up the area around the breakdown at the same time. 20 – 13 rugby doesn’t grab me at all and I hope it’s got no future in rugby.
Join The Roar rugby editor Christy Doran, former Wallaby Matt Toomua and a cast of regular and special guests as they look at the biggest issues in the game on The Roar Rugby Podcast. If you’re looking for great odds on the next game check out Aussie bookmaker PlayUp. Chances are you’re about to lose. Set a deposit limit.