All Blacks mull maul conundrum

From my understanding of the laws, if a defending team refuses to defend the maul - just stands well back, the attacking team will be penalised for obstruction. This actually occurred in the last World Cup, when one of the Islander teams (from memory Tonga) stood back from the maul and were awarded a penalty. Not sure if anyone can clarify this, or was it just a one off?

Jerry G, I agree... I like the look of Franks too... and demalmanch as hooker could be interesting.

CK - on current form, I don't reckon Tialata is any better than Baxter to be honest. Franks looks a good prospect though.

chuckle

"Playing too much rugby" should almost always have the word "stupid" added before "rugby".

I hate it when players or coaches say "maybe we played too much rugby" What the hell does that mean? Running out of your own 22? That is not trying to play rugby, that is suicide against any resolute defense.

Bob, obviously you missed last years matches vs SA 19 -0, vs OZ 39 -10 and the whole european tour. They were all dominant forward packs. Havent hit our stride this year yet but if anything the games have been more about the forwards than backs so really cant see your point at all. Hayman is a once in a decade tighthead, its not as if we have Al Baxter playing there at the mo...

The All Blacks were quite effective at stopping rolling mauls when they would target a point just ahead of the ball carrier to attack and therefore isolate the ball carrier from his support. It required perfect timing and strength so as not to incur penalties. As OJ mentioned in another thread, SH teams have had to adjust to ELV changes three times in two seasons and now revert back to the previous laws. NZ has taken longer than the others to adjust and that is what Hansen needs to correct. NZ also demonstrated midway through the second half that they can perform a driving maul as well as the Boks. The main difference is that SA were able to win cleaner ball from their lineouts than NZ to initiate the drive.

Bob - what Katz said, they're not whinging about what's happened they're trying to affect what will happen.

Henry's comments after the Test: "They were the better team and deserved to win. We thought we had a chance at the end, but we made too many errors. ‘This is the best Springbok team we’ve played in a while. They are a very fine side." Richie McCaw: "‘Our mistakes let them off the hook, that [Jaque Fourie] try from 70m was one example,’ said McCaw. ‘We were forced into mistakes though. Those errors came from the pressure they were putting on us in defence. We also played too much rugby at times. ‘I was disappointed with our discipline but you give away penalties when you’re under pressure. We knew we had to stop their maul early, but once they got it started and got the roll on, it was difficult to and they got penalties.’" As for the NZ forwards, I think they've dominated the breakdown for an awful long time for a team that doesn't have strong forward play. They haven't always been up to scratch in the set pieces, but a lot of teams who are solid at set piece play can't compete with the All Blacks at the breakdown and that's where the game is won and lost these days. If you have a problem area, like defending the maul, you work on it for the next Test. I don't see how it's an issue other than people one of Hansen's pet peeves.

But everyone here and the coaches and players all have said those things bob. What Jerry is alluding to is the fact that Hanson is putting it out there so the ref will take notice and may just have a look a his IRB refs vids on Mauling before the game. Which will help NZ if SA get pulled once or twice, deserved or not. Loftus - Don't be a Hypocrite, every country has a few fans that blame external factors after a game, yours included, hell your guys are generating all types of excuses on these very boards and they won. Hate to see it when you guys lose. Conspiracy theories abound. But like I said Hanson isn't blaming the Maul for our loss. Hes merely playing the game. Or are you naive enough to think that the game only starts when the ref blows his whistle?

cronullakiwi, I rephrased my earlier comment and stated that Ab forward play is not as strong as their back play in recent years... I think that's a fair comment. Without Hayman there is no real powerful tighthead, ther eare some boys emerging, but as yet not making the AB's... but it's a cycle, and the wheel will turn in favour of the big, confrontational forwards again. Jerry, I take the point on obstruction... it's a real tough one for refs to call though. And I can kind of see where Loftus is coming from... it would be refreshing to hear the Ab's, after losing, to simply say they weren't good enough, played it wrong, coached it wrong whatever... not always seeking external excuses. It's not so much the players at fault for that, they know the truth, but the grey men who are worried about their jobs.

Looking at the game generally too many penalties are conceded at mauls. The maul should be allowed to be sacked, as it was under the trial rules. If it's a truly effective attacking weapon (I believe it is) sides will continue to maul regardless of this law change and games won't be reduced to penalty kicking competitions. Loftus, over the last decade or so the boks win about 1/4 of the games they play against the AB's - hardly something to gloat about. Bob, slide towards thuggery?

Loftus - Is there an international coach who doesn't publicly raise things they want the ref to look at?

First it was the sheparding in rolling mauls of the Springboks and then the players off side when the All Blacks wanted to take quick throw ins.How predictable the Kiwis are getting when they get their backsides beaten.What s gonna be the excuse after Saturday s game? Food poisoning? What a shame.

"Forward play in NZ generally is weak and has grown weaker over the last few years" - one of the more ridiculous comments seen on here in a while...

It's obstruction, rather than offside. By being in front of the player with the ball (before the maul has formed) they're preventing tacklers from playing the ball carrier.

interesting video Jerry... I'm not sure a player can be offside in a maul before the maul is joined and set though, and that seemed to be the error in the video. Until its joined it doesnt exist... which is one way to defend against it... Once they are bound on, they are not offside. Interesting that the only example not defended well and stopped was the AB against boks... I should rephrase my earlier comment though, and say that AB forward play has for a long time been weaker than their backs play... broken play is their favoured play, set piece and forward play is less impressive... still class, but not scary. that will change in time, but the cycle of rugby the AB's are currently engaged in shows a lack of forward depth and strength... IMO. I suspect you are right that Hanson is flagging for the ref and is wise to do so... having said all that, they are still impressive, do the basics well and if they had a little more confrontational attitude in the pack, would be almost unstopable. I think a bigger issue is the apparant slide towards thuggery the boks are engaged in... so many off the ball incidents and afters, against the Ab's and previously the Lions... I think this is a worry, but in the end will rob them of victories.

Bob - there is a lot of obstruction that teams (Boks included) get away with in respect of forming (and rolling mauls) Have a look at this IRB training video - I reckon hardly anyone would pull these up at first glance. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vVswqjHhqI I suspect Hanson is just trying to influence the ref to take a closer look, while also acknowledging the AB's need to defend better. By the way, I'd dispute the AB's forward play is generally weak - you don't win that many games with weak forwards.

The maul can be stopped and defended well using current legislation, Hanson has just ignored the inevitable and not prepared his players. The notion that the maul is undefendable is rubbish, if it were true every maul would result in a try. The NZ teams have just overlooked a vital part of forward play in the hope it would go away or their backs would always get them home safely. Forward play in NZ generally is weak and has grown weaker over the last few years. Time to get back to basics boys, and get the heavyweights trundling! Long live the maul!