- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
It is now over 14 years since the IRB flicked the switch on the sport of Rugby Union (August 26th 1995), paving the way for professionalism within the game.
Over this time period, rugby has grown drastically from amateurism into a global sport played by physically impressive athletes and watched by millions on television.
With the professional image of the game in mind, many important changes have also taken place in regards the rules of the game in the previous 14 years.
Some of these changes include:
Tactical Subsitutions
The removal of rucking
Lifting of jumpers in the lineouts
Introducing Red and Yellow cards
Experimental Law Variations
New laws have always been introduced with the ideal of increasing the enjoyment and safety of the sport for participants, with the exception being the ELVs (which appeared more directed at the professional realm of the sport in order to make it more simplistic to referee and to make it a faster spectacle for the viewer).
Many have lamented the failure of the ELVs, for whatever reason, but most fans of rugby were in agreement that the intentions were correct.
The amateur element of rugby has never had major issues with clarity of law, lack of speed in the game or lack of enjoyment from the participants.
The same cannot be said of the professional element.
The voices of discontent seemed to have reached a crescendo over the last 25months (following the 2007 World Cup) to the point where the sport’s entertainment value and safety are being seriously questioned in nations where rugby is very well established.
Player injuries are reaching pandemic levels and the quality of attacking play is generally poor.
Kicking as a first option has also dramatically increased, following Argentina’s successful tactics in the 2007 World Cup, to the point where a large majority of a team’s possession is received in the form of a kick.
Question marks have also been raised over the amount of time taken up in stoppages and in particular scrums. IRB figures have revealed that upwards of 16 per cent (sometimes 20 per cent) of the 80 minutes of test match rugby is spent contesting or resetting a scrum.
Fears have also arisen about the deliberate faking of injuries to force uncontested scrums and about the lack of transparency for referees and fans when it comes to exactly what happens once the ref call “engage”.
The above is the basic breakdown off the problems now facing the 14 year old version of professional rugby.
Some still maintain that there is no issue and that the sport will fix itself, or that it doesn’t need fixing.
But these people are a part of what is becoming a shrinking minority.
So what can be done to improve the above issues?
Personally, I’m more a fan of simple changes, rather than complexity. Complexity is what has lead to a lot of the complaints about officiating of Rugby Union, so I believe adding a bevy of new rules will be a step in the wrong direction.
Some comments have arisen that the field dimensions for pro rugby should be made larger to give balance to the larger/faster player of the modern era.
My proposal would be to simply remove two players from the field. Now many may have made this comment before (mostly it is a tongue in check comment from fans of Rugby League) but not many have given genuine reasons for doing so.
Many have also failed to address how this very simple change could fix most of modern rugby’s biggest growing pains. So here I go …
Scrums would become a 6 man affair and the desire would be to swing the balance in favour of the backs (rather than the 8/7 forward split of now) and running rugby.
Two less players on the field will allow for more space to attack and less defenders to clutter the running lanes (and to slow the breakdown).
Attacking teams would be encouraged to run the ball at thinner defensive lines, rather than kick it away, so good bye ping-pong rugby.
Less players and more running means more player fatigue over the 80 minutes. More tired player’s means more gaps to exploit.
More fatigue and running would also see a reversal in player sizes and bulky gym junkies would struggle to lug around the extra weight.
In steps smaller more agile runners of the Shane Williams, James O’Connor and Corey Jane type who would exploit any mismatches against lumbering monsters and light up crowds with old school Rugby razzle-dazzle.
6 Man scrums would reduce the pressure on props from flankers pushing and would make it easier for referees to see Props (without flankers hindering their view).
This coupled with the lighter weight of props and locks, through increased fitness demands, would lead to less collapses and more technique at scrum time (rather than sheer bulk and impact).
With competitive scrums and lineouts retained, so too would the ‘game for all shapes and sizes’ mentality be retained.
At least two genuine lineout targets would be required, but super tall individuals would need to be more athletic to make up for the loss of two flanker types.
Men like Ali Williams and Victor Matfield would still thrive, but to have two of them in your team might mean you struggle to gain as many turnovers.
What is most likely is that players of the Adam Thomson or Juan Smith build would move into the second row to partner the primary lineout target, while the guy at the back of the Scrum (now the No.6) would fill the ball playing and scavenging role.
The No.6 would need the all round skill of a McCaw, Parisse or George Smith.
Two less players also reduces the major cost in pro rugby, the player wages. This would also mean that the remaining 13 players could be in line to receive even better wages than now, making a pro Union contract even more valuable.
The major hurdle would be convincing rugby fans (and the RFU) that this isn’t some kind of admission that league is a better sport, because 13 man Rugby Union would not be Rugby League.
13 man rugby would be a more dynamic and attacking version of a sport where the contest for possession is still maintained.
The ELVs were rejected on the premise that the game (globally) did not need fixing. The IRB and SANZAR nations have shown willingness to make changes to improve the game.
Will the emergence of failings in the European game now pave the way for a potential revolution in how the game of rugby is played?
Would 13 man rugby cure the ills or is this too much of a change for unionites to stomach?
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.