The last piece of the rugby laws puzzle

By ruggabugga / Roar Rookie

While most of us, bar perhaps Springbok fans, have been lapping up the excitement of all the running rugby we’ve seen in the Tri-Nations so far this year, there still appears to be one element that is fundamentally wrong with the way the game is being officiated at the breakdown, due to a lack of backing from the written laws of the game.

The breakdown is still an immense problem.

For me and countless others I’ve spoken to in general conversation about the Tri-Nations tests, the biggest frustration is that the goals the IRB set out to achieve after 2007 included a faster paced game, more tries and less penalties are being held back by the lack of hard nosed officiating at the breakdown.

After the farce that was the initial ELVs, with all the free kicks, which essentially destroyed rugby at its core, we have now converted to a more traditional set of rules with a few tweaks here and there to keep the ball in play for longer, which has sped the game up and on occasion we are seeing a few more tries.

But the key problem area holding this part of the game up is the written law and its lack of backing for refereeing the breakdown.

In the last three weeks, yellow cards have been dished out for everything but the one area of the game which I feel ruins it as a spectacle and essentially condones blatant cheating.

Killing the ball has long been an area of the game that players have chosen to risk doing simply because it is worth it.

Richie McCaw and David Pocock have gotten away with murder in the last three weeks. By an estimated calculation I think that what they do at the breakdown is legal, according to the written laws of the game, around about 30 per cent of the time.

In the second test against the Boks in Wellington, Richie McCaw was penalised on a number of occasions for killing the ball and was actually personally warned three times by referee Alain Rolland that “next time it’ll be a yellow card.”

This is a disgrace.

The referee cannot possibly forget he has said something like that to the captain of a team in a Test match and it is a problem that has been going on for so long.

It’s entirely possible that the Crusaders and the All Blacks put McCaw as captain of their respective sides purely so that referee’s would be scared of punishing him harshly in front of home crowds, and it’s the IRB’s fault that it’s happening.

But it doesn’t stop there.

David Pocock last week was penalised and nothing more after the Boks had made a huge break through Bryan Habana, who flicked it inside to Gio Aplon and retained possession.

Before the Boks could even get the ball out, Pocock managed to commit three professional fouls in one act no more than 10m out from the line: diving off his feet, coming in from the side and playing the ball on the ground.

All this directly in front of the referee and touch judge, whilst the Springboks had a decisive overlap out to the right of the breakdown.

Pocock should have been yellow carded, but he wasn’t.

The Springboks then took (stupidly, might I add) a quick tap and at the next tackle Pocock actually managed to stay within the law and grab a crucial and outstanding turnover, but he should’ve been on the sideline.

The Boks didn’t even get three points out of it and Pocock remained on the field, terrorising the breakdown for the rest of the game.

There is no doubting the skill of these two players and the fact the Wallabies and the All Blacks completely outplayed the Boks, and it is not my intent simply to single them out above all others, there are many players and teams who commit such stark lack of respect for the rules of the game, but I thought it important to point out examples fresh in the mind of rugby fans everywhere.

It needs to be written in the laws of the game that killing the ball inside the 22, commonly known as the ‘red zone’, is an automatic yellow card and a shot at goal worth five points.

It doesn’t make sense that if you are the attacking team and you have a distinct advantage at the time of the professional foul being committed, that a player should be able to deliberately cheat, stay on the field, and his team only concede three points.

This could be made up in minutes via a drop goal or something as ridiculous as a penalty conceded when they don’t even have the ball.

If a team is in a likely position to score a try, and a player deliberately infringes on their ability to recycle the ball, he is cheating and thus the attacking team should be rewarded for positive play and the defensive team punished for overt negative play.

Players will not deliberately do it if they know they cost their team a try’s worth of points and force them to play a man down for 10 minutes. But referees don’t have the power to enforce the end of this blatant cheating until it’s written in the laws of the game.

It’s unfair that referee’s appear to feel intimidated by home crowds and can be subjected to criticism for applying the rules correctly.

They need to be backed up.

The Crowd Says:

2010-07-31T06:56:42+00:00

Jock M

Guest


You are all carrying on like a bunch of boofheads. If the laws of the game allowed for full unhindered competition at the breakdown most of these modern laws would become redundant. In the days of pre professionalism the ruck area was mainly self policing. Get hold of some old footage and look for yourselves.

2010-07-31T06:48:57+00:00

MR

Guest


Shaun: "As for Burger – it was cited and not declared Eye gouging due to a lack of sufficient evidence " Shaun not sure what rugby planet you live on but here is the link showing Burger's Eye Gouging of Lions wing Luke Fitzgerald, Schalk Burger was banned for eight weeks for eye-gouging and should have been banned for life ( this type of activity has no place in rugby and as a direct result of the light sentance IRB issued dirrective for longer bans) : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NYONDg4J_E I am surprised to see anyone defending eye gouging or similar acts I have no issue with - Pocock, Brussow or McCaw (all are great players who can steal ball) - Coopers citing - any lifting of feet above head should lead to a ban

2010-07-31T05:59:13+00:00

sixo_clock

Roar Guru


Thanks for the invitation, I listened to the Scarfman and: Ruck 1: momentum from support players miss the bind, why didn't he mention VM's failure to roll away? Ruck 2: Franks (trip over legs - Mealamu bit iffy - also neglects to mention Roussow 3m past ruck) Ruck 3: Franks' arm being pulled by Smit to propel him, Smit even had his arm before the tackle! .........etc, etc. Has he considered that the refs might see a lot more than he gives credit, such as the niggle. Maybe ref saw why Botha had company for the tango with Owen. Attacking players have been cleaning out the ruck area all year from all angles, however going for possession or to harass the halfback requires the 'gate' entry. Whatever the bodies are doing they will not be penalised unless they interfere with recycling possession, especially holding on. This is not a video game, they cannot stop on a pixel. Other misleading statements: 'flops over the ball' ?? - RM is on is feet the whole phase Woodcock was clearing out as was RM the next phase. 1st try. Conrad is fine on Kirchner players are allowed to muscle people out of the ruck, however Steyne then pulls on Conrad's jersey and Scarfman says 'Conrad tackles him' not the other way round,. 2nd try. RM re-enters the ruck? - he was being pushed by Januarie!!! ...etc etc etc Hope this helps. Now maybe you can have another look with both eyes wide open. Referees do not make it to this level without years of scrutiny, being second guessed by a camera with no depth perception and little of the sounds from the players. Scarfman(?) has a way to go before he can confidently give valuable analysis in this forum. Tell him to avoid the self-serving expressions and he may get heard. Now I can return the invitation to you till you begin to comprehend the complexity of modern Rugby. Till you understand - remember!

2010-07-31T03:04:50+00:00

shocked!

Guest


point is that they're both deliberate cheating.....stamp them both out and all rugby fans can be satisfied that they're watching a game as it was/should be intended (fair and free flowing)

2010-07-31T02:55:50+00:00

Shaun

Guest


watch the video first - to understand: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdr-W775hk4&feature=player_embedded

2010-07-31T02:53:51+00:00

Shaun

Guest


In the video you can see what is allowed and what is not - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdr-W775hk4&feature=player_embedded it has nothing to do with "catch up" as you say it has to do with completely inapt refereeing - watch the video again, and again until you understand.

2010-07-31T02:49:46+00:00

Shaun

Guest


Great piece of writing - here now is the video proof . http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdr-W775hk4&feature=player_embedded

2010-07-31T02:48:25+00:00

Shaun

Guest


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdr-W775hk4&feature=player_embedded this is how its done !

2010-07-31T02:45:37+00:00

Shaun

Guest


Dont be so Blind - Coopers' spear on steyn was paramount to thuggery as you put it. Forearm behind the neck, while driving his head into the turf. As for Burger - it was cited and not declared Eye gouging due to a lack of sufficient evidence - Please know the facts before you comment. as for cheating see the video clip by you Aussie mates : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdr-W775hk4&feature=player_embedded makes very interesting facts !!!

2010-07-30T20:00:00+00:00

Jock M

Guest


Bring back full competition at the breakdown. The tackled player must release the ball on making contact with the ground. Both Defence and attack must be able to compete vigorously for the ball. The game now differs very little from Rugby League. How about we start organising games using Laws pre professionalism.

2010-07-30T16:52:48+00:00

JVGO

Guest


Professional fouls inside the attacking 22 should result in one point (maybe 2 if inside 10m) to the attacking team with them getting the ball back to have another go. As a noncore Rugby observer that is my solution to the professional foul which has blighted RU ever since I can remember. The attacking team could have the option of taking the mandatory 1 or 2 point penalty or having the 3 point shot for goal. You could even escalate the penalty for each infringement on the same drive. 1 pt for first infringement, 2 for second etc. It has always driven me crazy with RU how every time a great game threatens to break out some big fat forward gives away a penalty so everyone can stand round and have a blow while a penalty is kicked. That is my 2 cents worth and it might just turn RU into the consistently great spectacle it has the potential to be.

2010-07-30T16:06:20+00:00

MM

Guest


It's a balanced and fair article and not, truly speaking offensive to the Boks or any team. The problem is that nothing will change in the foreseable future.

2010-07-30T07:59:53+00:00

MR

Guest


Can we stop this inane discussion spread over several articles about loosies (aka McCaw, Pocock and others) cheating, it is boring and wrong for the reasons outlined in may replies to the Authors (Springboks?) who start these discussions. If we want to have a discussion about cheating or "The last piece of the rugby laws puzzle" that needs to be fixed how about we discuss eye gouging, head butting and other illegal thuggery which goes on but has no place in the game. Lets have a quick poll and discuss which of the following is worse for the game: - illegal thuggery (e.g. Berger's eye gouging in Lions test) - Pocock and Richies actions as loose forwards If anyone votes for the later I would be deeply concerned

2010-07-30T05:40:27+00:00

shocked!

Guest


ok then...read these if you're not convinced that the players deliberately push the limits according to how leniant the ref is being... http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=10661106 http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/richie-mccaw-reveals-how-he-reads-referees-20100729-10x5a.html Just the simple fact that there is enough interprative inconsistency in the law is a problem, if from referee to referee we are getting a different type of game then it needs to be tightened up and clarified to every player and every team knows what to expect from every referee before they take the field, not after they test his patience and interpretation of an area of the laws of the game which in the end is probably the most important area of the game---as it is being exposed by players who are by their own admittance, essentially, deliberately cheating as much as they can.

2010-07-30T05:09:47+00:00

tubby

Guest


the rules have been evolving all year from the very strict interpretations in round 1 to the almost random application we see now. tacklers must let go, unless we think the player was isolated hence they deserve no chance to pass the ball afte rthe tackle. there's no clarity at all in the rules. the main issue in this discussion is the definition of a deliberate foul. some players are great at feigning innocence (SIR the ball was out!!) and others look guilty before they start. All we can do their is rely on the ref's judgement. deliberate foul is already a yellow card offence, but from there it is a judgement call

2010-07-30T00:21:00+00:00

sixo_clock

Roar Guru


Whatever it is that is preventing you and your compatriots from understanding the breakdown, and how the hell are both Pocock and McCaw getting away with what seems to be blue murder is precisely why the 'Boks have no points from 3 games. I do not agree with your analysis or solutions above and more to the point neither did either of the 3 refs in question. No supporter from the republic is going to be happy until Heinrich studies, understands, learns and applies what the fetchers are doing now. It is not rocket science mate. So take off the eye patch and catch up, that is if you want stay in the race. It would help if you could get rid of the delusion that Saffa Rugby is the centre of the known universe.

2010-07-29T23:13:13+00:00

kovana

Guest


Ruggabugga.. Get off the grass. Pocock is just super at getting in the right postion. Excuse me. Mccaw has been getting away with NOTHING. I have not seen him win any turnover ball by himself. Stop complaining. The rules and applications are fine. The saffas are the ones who still dont get it and complain like heck. Pocock Just knows the right time to get at the ball. Full stop.

2010-07-29T23:00:50+00:00

Lee

Guest


OK my fault - thought I might have been missing something!

2010-07-29T22:23:55+00:00

Hoy

Roar Guru


We always used to say "is the sun on the ball?" meaning it was out from the last mans feet. Sorry, should have explained what that meant.

2010-07-29T22:02:04+00:00

Bokkie Bok

Guest


Nicely written!! I think you displayed an accurate account of what has been happening over the last 3 weeks. It's just a pity some people don't see it as it is. The Springboks have not been playing well at all... but there has been a significant amount of favouritism with certain players who should have been penalised. Well done!!

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar