There is a perception that if you critique rugby today, you are not a true rugby fan.
I disagree with that premise. The devoted fan wants to see the game improve, not back to what it was, but a combination of yesterday’s laissez-faire attitude with today’s professionalism.
Or maybe that is not possible? If you watch coverage of a past game you may notice the number of player errors that are not picked up by the referees and dealt with by penalties or scrums. It is either they missed them or their mental state allowed the game to continue for its betterment.
One of the most frustrating passages of play relates to the advantage law whereby a referee allows play to continue for numerous phases and then return for the penalty.
I used to think years ago that an advantage rule would be good for the game, but as with most things, they go for the extreme. You can see today when the advantage has been gained and this is where play should continue, not with a penalty.
So, three points has become more important than five.
The objective of every game should be to score tries and all rules should focus on this direction, not halting the game for every transgression. With today’s society being so compliant and willing to adhere to every single rule it is not surprising our sport is reflecting life. Health and safety regulations have turned us into very obedient creatures who are missing the freedoms of old.
The driving or rolling maul is another feature of today’s play that has become an eyesore that will turn people away from the game. A player secures possession from a lineout, his fellow players gather around with the person at the back of the maul, who is usually the hooker driving across the line with a try he should be ashamed to tell his grandchildren about!
Brodie McAlister scores from a maul earlier this season. (Photo by Peter Meecham/Getty Images)
It is the most boring piece of play that can be witnessed on a rugby field, which will force away rather than attract new spectators. Would you rather have that or the ball being spun along the backline to the wing who scores in the corner?
I was pleased to see that Black Ferns and All Blacks coaching maestro Wayne Smith has produced the same two controversial points – lambasting the state of rugby and its lawmakers, saying he recently stopped watching a game on TV “for the first time” out of pure frustration.
I have also changed channels when rugby becomes too predictable and boring to view, finding Anthony Bourdain more interesting!
Now this is where I will get into trouble because I am about to mention rugby league, the arch enemy of rugby union fans. League has been tweaked but is basically the same game from its beginning, whereas rugby has made significant changes including the defensive line-separate the players more, mauls used as a major points scoring move and the advantage rule.
I read somewhere that league is better to watch, but union is better to play and would tend to agree while watching Super Rugby compared to the NRL.
Wayne Smith says, “I’m getting frustrated with the game. I watched the game that Nic Berry refereed the other day and the arm’s out the whole time, every single play there’s an advantage,” Smith said.
“You just know we’re going to go seven, eight phases and if it goes nowhere, we’re going to come back [for] a penalty.”
Smith and I also share a dislike of the driving maul and believe it has to be changed in some way. How can you have a player with the ball being protected by his forwards who are shielding him/her?
If in open play you had two players protecting the ball carrier would that be allowed? Disallow it within the 20m area? Wayne Smith states: “If, like me, you don’t like the constant mauls, I reckon one thing that will fix it is if you get the penalty and you kick to touch, the other team gets the throw-in. That would stop all these incessant kicks down to the corner and driving mauls and mauls that fall over.”
I reiterate that any criticism of the game is not being negative, more a case of wanting to see improvement in the winter code, which is still the better sport of the three, league, union and AFL. The state of rugby and its lawmakers need to start from scratch with a view to attracting new fans and returning old ones.
When you have a respected coach like Wayne Smith switching channels at halftime in a game to watch an animal documentary you know it is time for changes.
Aiden
Roar Rookie
No you are right, no-ones allowed to have an opinion, no-one outside of Australia things any aspect of the game needs revision, and the game has reached a perfect state after 100 years of tweaking. Right now, it’s 100% perfect. And none of the multitude of rule changes over the years has ever been advocated or supported by a Frenchman.
Rakavi Fan
Roar Rookie
If we're talking about tweaks in rugby rules to make it more attractive, here are two: (1) If attacking player (AP) kicks inside his/her half, he/she must be the first to tackle (or attempt to tackle) the receiving defending player (RDP) unless the RDP passes to his/her teammate, in which case AP's on-side team mates can attempt the tackle. This way, the RDP has the incentive to run the ball back (not return the kick with another kick, and aerial ping pong commences) and it opens up the play. (2) On any scrum outside the 22, defending team stands back 10 metres from the scrum (not 5 as per current rules) and attacking team can be as close to the scrum as possible (not 5 back, as per current rules). This way, opens up attacking possibilities. Oh, and a third rule change: for mauls, once fwd momentum is halted, halfback MUST pass (no second chances, no waiting).
Peter Darrow
Roar Guru
"It’s close to impossible to see Smith as truly grumpy and cloud-shouty, though. He’s got too much of the avuncular uncle about him to pull it off, but grousing about the lineout drive - described fairly accurately in The Roar as “the most boring piece of play that can be witnessed on a rugby field” - and refereeing is a bloody good start." Dylan Cleaver from The Bounce.
Peter Darrow
Roar Guru
Wayne Smith is silly piru?
Peter Darrow
Roar Guru
Common sense there Rugby Tragic!
Peter Darrow
Roar Guru
Totally disagree with that comment. If you like them it says more about you than the rolling maul.
Peter Darrow
Roar Guru
Watch the Breakdown video about Wayne Smith's comments.
Peter Darrow
Roar Guru
That too many of them are a bad thing.
Grobu
Roar Rookie
You are aware that rugby is played outside Australia, aren't you? You should broaden your perspective a bit, it would do you a world of good. I am more interested in the tens of thousands of French fans that have attended the 75 successive sold out games in la Rochelle than in the handful of disgruntled Aussie fans who have nothing better to do than sit in the pub and grumble about the laws, the ref, the coach, whatever...
Aiden
Roar Rookie
I’m not advocating removing advantage though. I don’t like the long advantage.
piru
Roar Rookie
Yep that's my experience too. If we want to argue that mauls aren't policed properly, I'll be right on board with that though, a lot of refs seem to have no idea what it's supposed to look like.
piru
Roar Rookie
Critiques are fine, welcome in fact. Claiming that a part of the game you personally don't like should be removed is just silly
Aiden
Roar Rookie
I agree that this is a great feature of rugby. You have to use your brain, different ways of winning. But I think the pendulum has swung too far towards penalizing some pretty soft stuff.
piru
Roar Rookie
I’m going to watch the “highlights” this weekend and see how many driving maul tries there are. OK, what will that prove?
Aiden
Roar Rookie
"Everybody knows that at many breakdowns, you may play the game of “pick the infringement”, because there are plenty from both sides." This is the key problem. It is a nonsense that almost every collision/phase can lead to mutiple infringements. When its like this, it makes me feel that the laws are not suited to the intent. Each law seems rational to some degree. And we often hear that they are there to speed up the game, or to lead to positive play, or to prevent negative play. On and on. And yet in reality, the result is constant stoppages of play, overstated impact on outcome for discretionary application of the laws, a slower and more boring game overall, and confused spectators and often players. The application of the laws is not matching the intent. So change them.
Aiden
Roar Rookie
I hear this a lot. it comes from an assumption that constantly penalizing players has led to a faster game with more open and attacking play. It hasn't. it has just lead to almost constant stoppages.
Aiden
Roar Rookie
And yet I stand in pubs and at rugby clubrooms with rusted on fans of the game who dislike league and yet constantly moan during games about the absurd outcomes of many of the laws. I know people who've stopped watching after a life-time of playing. You have zeroed in on his league comment but ignored a comment from arguably one of the greatest coaches of all time. The las of rugby have changed over time. You are aware of that aren't you?
Aiden
Roar Rookie
Those that scoff at people who critique the game are delusional. The game has constantly evolved, and it has evolved because people for different reasons called for change. Obviously not every change has worked, rugby has not existed in some a pure state since some bloke picked up a football. The changes you suggest are excellent. Can;t stand the long advantage, often for an event which did not actually pose a problem for the attacking team anyway (you know ... they still have the ball). Consider a maul, some guy lumbers round the side, attacking team barely notice it happened and carry on for 7 phases secure in the knowledge that they can come back to kick 3 poitns for basically nothing. Its an utterly absurd outcome. Its unfair, and its boring.
Rugby Tragic
Roar Rookie
100% agree with Smithy. The laws allowing mauls to obstruct the defence from getting to the ball carrier is condoning shepherding. The point difference with rugby is to have a ongoing contest for the ball and mauls structure go against that. Different if maul laws are changed to insist that the ball is carried by a player in the front or forward peak of maul where the contest for the ball can continue. Not the back where the ball carrier literally can have the whole forward pack ahead of him as a shield.. As it is the maul imo allows players to be in front of the ball carrier, effectively allowing attacking players to be offside to protect the ball carrier. Anyhow I have voiced this several times in the past, in the belief that maul laws favour the attacking side too much.
Peter Darrow
Roar Guru
"No- it isn't" we will have to agree to disagree Piru. I'm going to watch the "highlights" this weekend and see how many driving maul tries there are.