Boffelli buffoonery and the blight of the boot

There goes 45 minutes of my life I’ll never get back. I’m talking about two rugby internationals at the weekend: France-Australia and England-Argentina.

45 minutes was the total time taken off the clock for 24 attempted penalty kicks at goal (22 of them successful). That comprises the total time from the referee blowing the whistle to the next kickoff at halfway (or from the 22 for misses).

Counting only penalty kicks awarded outside the 22, there were still 19 in all, a total of 37 minutes.

Apart from the enormous waste of time, why else do I hate long-range penalty goals?

1. They are disproportionate
A prop slipping over in a scrum on halfway, or a jackler holding the ball onto a player in a ruck to milk a penalty 40 metres out, can earn 60 per cent of a fine team-try.

2. They are often contentious
Every game has examples of dubious or head-scratching decisions, especially at the breakdown and the scrum. Sometimes it’s just a case of different referees making different interpretations.

For example, Dave Porecki was pinged for not rolling away from a ruck he couldn’t extricate himself from. Three points from 40 metres out. Whereas the ref in the England-Argentina match focused on telling the half to get the ball out and stop waiting to milk a penalty.

The point is, these three points can be random and arbitrary, and often require little from the team awarded the penalty. Unlike tries, they are rarely subject to TMO review. And often the spectator is in the dark as to what really happened.

3. They rarely reflect pressure
Don’t buy the argument that these three pointers are the result of getting into the opposing half and applying pressure. Penalties 22-55 metres out from the tryline seldom happen because the offending team’s defence is about to crack under cumulative pressure. Defences are usually able to hold. More often than not it’s just an individual error in execution or judgement.

All you need is one good garryowen to get in the other half. Or have a try scored against you – then you get to kick off into the opponent’s half!

A classic case was in the 2015 RWC quarter-final: Australia scores a great try. Scotland tries shortish kickoff, knocks on. A scrum 35 metres out – Australian prop slips over. Bingo, three-point kick to Scotland!

John Barclay of Scotland (Photo By Ramsey Cardy/Sportsfile via Getty Images)

4. They can distort results
Two more obvious instances of penalty goals distorting the result were the much-hailed recent Argentinian wins against New Zealand and England, thanks mainly to dead-eye dick Emiliano Boffelli.

Normally, I’d cheer for a Puma win in such contests, but these were beyond ridiculous.

Argentina only penetrated the England 22 three times with ball in hand last Saturday, including their two tries. They also got into the 22 once from a penalty and once from a scrum after England dropped the ball.

England, by contrast, had six carries with the ball into the Argentinian 22, plus two entries thanks to penalties. Argentina also made two to three times as many tackles, underlining that Argentina’s penalty goals had little to do with cumulative pressure.

Argentina made even fewer attacking inroads against the All Blacks in Christchurch on 27 August. They won 25-18, but only once carried the ball into the NZ 22 under their own steam.

Meanwhile, New Zelaand scored two tries and entered the Argentina 22 nine times, including five times with ball in hand in open play and three from penalties. Apart from one try from poor defence, the Pumas never threatened the Kiwi line and hardly ever got over the gainline.

Of Boffelli’s six penalty goals, four were from miles out from the NZ line – 48 metres, 49 metres, 45 metres and 38 metres. Two of these were for holding on a nanosecond too long after the tackle, with the All Blacks running the ball 49 and 45 metres from their own line.

The total time taken off the clock for kicks at goal in that match was even longer than last weekend’s games – 26.3 minutes, or 33 per cent of total game time!

4. They give players too much time to rest
As well as speeding up the game, having fewer two-minute breaks for penalty kicks would mean big bodies in particular would tire sooner. This should create more open play towards the end of the game and a better viewing spectacle.

5. Penalty kicks are fetishised and given privileged status
Play not only stops for two minutes: the kicker gets a special prop in the form of a tee brought onto the field with a reverence befitting a holy relic. And the opposition must stand still as statues so as not to disturb the poor dear.

Is it because they actually like watching goal kicks in the Northern Hemisphere? Is it the element of suspense? This is no help at all in Australia where rugby faces fierce competition for players and spectators from other codes.

6. They are unnecessary as a deterrent
Outside the 22, penalty goals aren’t needed to deter infringements: a kick to the corner with a lineout throw a few metres out is more than enough.

Some might say this will encourage too many rolling mauls. Maybe, but at least we would get some action, and mauls require teamwork, skill and execution.

7. They give excessive weight to one player’s goalkicking
It’s better to encourage all-round rugby skills and what the team rather than one individual can do.

8. They incentivise negative play
It can be easier to score points by loitering and waiting for the opponent to make a mistake, or to milk a penalty. At least put the onus on teams to be constructive and do something inside the opponent’s 22.

Solutions
Rugby is the only game I can think of where a large part of the scoring consists of penalty points for infringements, often minor ones, way outside the ‘red zone’ where the tryline or goal is under real threat.

This is quite different to other team ball games where the object is to advance the ball over a line or into a goal.

The only reason rugby has this system is history and tradition – from its beginnings where the goal kick was everything and a try was merely an opportunity to kick a conversion. You wouldn’t design it from scratch.

The point-scoring system, along with other aspects of the game like lifting in line outs, evolved over the years. But for some reason rugby time stood still after 1995.

As you can guess, my solution is to have no goal kicks from penalties awarded outside the 22, the only practical red zone in rugby. There might be exceptions for foul play or yellow-card offences where a player ‘cynically’ fouls to stop a potential try.

Simply changing the points ratio more in favour of tries vs penalty goals (e.g. 5-2 or 6-3), as in rugby league, would just be tinkering in my view. There are already too many stoppages. In rugby league, penalty goals are rarely taken because there are more opportunities for tries for various reasons, and fewer infringements.