It was pleasing to read that SANZAR referees boss Lyndon Bray promised a return to last year’s interpretation of breakdown rules that favor the attacking side.
The rules adopted last year were widely applauded by the public and had been described by Robbie Deans as “close to perfect.”
In contrast, the opening rounds of this year’s competition have seen a relative dearth of tries and the outcome of games more regularly determined by penalties.
But Bray’s announcement begs the question: why weren’t last year’s rules applied in the first three rounds of this year’s Super Rugby comp? Did the referees just forget about them?
Or was a conscious decision made to change them? If so, can someone please explain just who is running the show?
This week’s rugby blogs have included some vigorous debate about improving the laws of the game.
However, any contemplation of improvements to the game should not exclude some careful thought regarding the horrific injury rate in professional rugby.
The game at the elite level is being played with a much higher level of fitness, intensity, and strength then in the amateur days. The downside of this is that in almost every game we are witnessing serious injuries with potentially life-long repercussions for the player.
Rugby involves a lot of unstructured play, and many of these injuries are occurring at the breakdown where limbs are dangling in all directions and players are flying in to the ruck at speed.
Sport is supposed to promote health, not the maiming of those that play the game. It’s time to give some careful thought to improving this when tinkering with the rules of the game.
Snowman
Guest
This article has been inspired by Princess Anne - hasn't it. She is upset that her future son in law has a squashed nose and will therfore look awful in the wedding photos. Hence she is making out Rugby is the most dangerous sport in the world as a copout. Now seriously, I understand from Doctors that soocer creates more injuries than Rugby (diifferent kinds) and as for danger, I can definately think of more dangerous sports - what about seeing how deep you can dive whilst holding your breath or skydiving
Mark Richmond
Roar Guru
The headline is a beat up.......Rugby is by no means the world's most dangerous game. Potentially it is dangerous, but please do not join the hysterical masses or let the truth get in the way of a good story......unless of course you are a Telegraph journalist
bjornthor
Guest
Hard clean outs look dramatic, but how many players actually get injured by them? As said, the backrowers seem to be the least injured players. Most injuries seem to come from tackle collisions or awkward twisting in tackles, or having a saffa try to twist your head off while your legs are pinned.
ohtani's jacket
Guest
It doesn't matter if the tackler rolls away if the jackal doesn't give the ball carrier the chance to release the ball. This is what's slowing down the game not the tackler. How often do you see the jackal fighting with the ball carrier before a cleanout? The Australian sides are particularly systematic in anticipating where the breakdown will be and trying to steal the ball as arriving players, which is dubious since they simply held off on being involved in the tackle. This form of defence is the primary reason why teams flop all over the tucks and seal the ball off. The tackler rolling away is not going to speed up the ball of the ball so long as the jackal has rights to the ball.
B-Rock
Roar Guru
Rugby is a violent, dangerous, aggressive sport - that is why we all love it. If the refs started policing the breakdown more heavily with a view to limit injuries there would be a public outcry. Saying that, as technology improves so will the various forms of protection - pads/braces/etc will become more common place without limiting movement. Hopefully not everyone takes the NFL/Bryan Habana approach and pad up to the extreme but at the end of the day, keeping players on the field is the most important thing
B-Rock
Roar Guru
Completely agree I think poor skills (handling errors, poor kicking, etc) have more to do with the lack of tries than the breakdown. I know its only round 3 but seriously - these are professionals who have been in camp for several months and only finished last season in late November - they cant be that rusty. Tahs have proven that when you play well you will get over the line. I think general defence has been stronger than last season too, particularly across a wide range of teams. Everyone loves seeing tries but not if the defence is weak - it devalues them and becomes very ho - hum. I would rather see 3-5 tries per game against good defence than 8-9 tries with weak defence. This season has proven to be much more even (at least to date) than what most thought - losses by the three conference favourites Bulls, Crusaders and Tahs, as well as competitive games from expected easy beats Cheetahs, Lions and Rebels... Isnt this what fans should want?
PeterK
Roar Guru
The tackler rolling away and supporting players not leaving their feet has been enforced very inconsistently this year, a lot of the games it hasnt been and its been more like 2009 whilst in others more like 2010. I am hoping it is just because it is the start of the season and it will get better. I do hope that the refs focus on attacking teams sealing it off and well as defenders not rolling away. The ruck is a mess because the refs allow too many players off their feet and to stay there.
ohtani's jacket
Guest
This is just a beat-up by the Australian press. Oh no, the Reds aren't showing everyone how to play the game, it must be the tackle interpretation. If these journalists bothered to do their jobs properly they'd realise that the new interpretations were reassessed after players and media whinged that they favoured the attacking side too much. The tackler rolling away is still being enforced, it's the David Pococks of the world who are causing all the trouble. Do the Australian media really want Pocock's impact reduced? Hoe about getting on with it and playing some rugby?
Rich
Guest
I heard that the IRB has given directive to the refs to police the breakdown more stringently this year. Keep attacking players on their feet and penalise attacking supporting players if they seal off the ball to defenders. That's probably the reason why the balance this year has come back a bit towards the defending team. I don't know why the IRB feel they needed to step in. It's yet another rule which the refs have to consciously look out for. They already have a million other rules to look out for all in a split second and not all within eye-line sight.
warrenj
Roar Rookie
Rugby players will always get injured as it is a contact game, but they are injured, in the majority of circumstances, because they have put themselves in an awkward position. The law prohibits reckless clearing out and is carded and fined (Bakkies Botha vs. British & Irish Lions 2009). Some players are unlucky and get injured every year but other players stay the course and only pick up bumps and bruises. Some men that spend their time in the contact area are hardly injured - McCaw, Matfield, Waugh, and the likes of others. It is a contact sport and athletes realise to avoid injuries, training is important to build strength and resilience. In my personal experience, I've played at an amateur level (granted it's not pro, but rugby nonetheless) for 25 years and all I've had is a broken nose due to an accidental head clash.
Jiggles
Roar Guru
I don’t understand how people have found this year’s Super Rugby boring so far. The First round match between the Blues and Crusaders was test match quality… in round 1! How both teams where polished and ready for that performance I do not know. Additionally the Waratahs in 2 out of their opening 3 games have been ruthless as anything, clinical attack and even more devastating in defense, which is something new for the waratahs IMO. The force, while failing to win any matches so far, have played an incredibly smart game, focusing on their obvious strengths which has made up for some pretty heft deficiencies. They have been a pleasure to watch. On the NZ side the highlanders are playing incredibly solid rugby. The blokes are underdogs but are playing to their strengths in being incredibly physical up the middle; they are earning the right to go wide before forward which they do very well. It’s a lesson to all teams and proof of that old saying ‘forwards win you games, backs determine by how much.’ The only lack luster teams have been the Brumbies, Chiefs and Bulls in that order. But let’s be honest – the Brumbies didn’t exactly set the world on fire last year with their enterprising play, and it’s more of the same this year. Frankly the people in charge down their (i.e. Giteau, Holies & Elsom) are not smart enough to see the play progress beyond what they are trying to do. And on the Bulls – the writing was on the wall last year when they struggled against faster more enthusiastic teams in the Blues and the Reds, it was carried through the international season and has been picked up again by the Highlanders. They held it together through experience; however they are a year older and a bit slower this year. They were not my pick to win the comp and were below both the sharks and stormers as my top RSA teams. Rugby is a lot more then scoring tries.
High&inside
Guest
Clearouts should be the first thing to go. Nothing's more dangerous than a player hurtling out of the blue and barging into somebody who doesn't see them coming. Knees and shoulders need another 100,000 years to become injury proof. Or five years for some kind of clever high-tech protector. Meantime, NFL players, with all their pads, suffer even more than rugby players do. Contact sports need better management.