Busted, when I was at school it was the same, schools ran and grade rugby rarely – few teams ran, they mostly played percentage rugby as did test matches. This is one of the reasons the BarBars V All Blacks of ’73 was so brilliant. Rep rugby just wasn’t played that way.

The generation of Oz schoolboys of 77/78 – (from both Qld & NSW) resulted in a team that was typical of schools rugby, but with the extra magic the Ellas provided. (Sometimes I wonder just how much that single BarBars game influenced that generation of boys who were playing U13 & U14).

I was fortunate (maybe unfortunate 🙂 to be part of that generation. And then, they ‘graduated’ as seniors to the test arena of the 80s which was arguably Australia greatest ever era. Certainly the depth of players we had then has never been repeated.

TCFB, I’m pretty sure it was Daryl Haberecht.

FYI: The teams with Test status (with the date of each team’s Test debut) are:

Australia (15 March 1877)
England (15 March 1877)
South Africa (12 March 1889)

West Indies (23 June 1928)
New Zealand (10 January 1930)
India (25 June 1932)
Pakistan (16 October 1952)
Sri Lanka (17 February 1982)
Zimbabwe (18 October 1992)
Bangladesh (10 November 2000)
Ireland (11 May 2018)
Afghanistan (14 June 2018)

There is no doubt Geoff Mould was a brilliant coach and laid the foundation for the era of success in the 80s.

I didn’t know he was a Wagga man. It’s not surprising as Wagga has put out more than their fair of brilliant sportsman.

It wasn’t just the ‘wicks playing running rugby. Many teams did. But it was the ‘wicks they were the team prepared to do it from deep in their 22 and even behind their goal line.

Many other teams played field position more, running once outside the 22. I was fortunate that all my club rugby played this way. I never played for a team that kicked incessantly. At one of my clubs where we had a lot of blow-ins and moves became difficult because it could be a new player, we had a saying, “pass it wide and back up, back up, back up.” One of our wingers scored 40+ tries in a season. One blow-in at half time said he’d got more ball in this one half than he did in his entire season.

I played against Randwick 1st Colts in the late 70s when I played for Manly. My coach in Colts was Manly stalwart Barry “Tizza” Taylor. From memory we won at least one home/away, but lost the GF. (I didn’t play the GF as I was injured – my replacement went on to play for the Wallabies)

Tizza had a great strategy, force the 10 back inside by having our 10 leave him and run at their 12. But… waiting for their 10 was our 7 & 8. Crunch. It stopped their running game dead in its tracks.

I recall in the 80s watching a test with my brother-in-law. I saw something happening and said that they would do this next, and that the 15 would score. Sure enough it happened as predicted. My BIL was amazed and asked me how I knew. I told him it was a move we did as well, one I’d be doing since high school.

I do so much miss the running rugby of the past, where intelligence, speed and aeobic fitness, deception and backing up was the key to the game; not the head down, one out barging, barging, barging, barging, one out runs and take a rest before a 45 minute replacement and bring on another player to do the same of the modern game.

Unfortunately those days are gone. The modern game requires 16 forwards who play half a game, and backs who no longer specialize in a position and are expected to play out of position from one week to the next. With players assuming a new position from week to week the fast passing that relies on combinations and understanding cannot exist.

I don’t have a problem with lowering the tackle height from below the shoulders, , but why sternum, which is not that obvious when someone has a jersey on. What happened to “below the armpits”, which is much more obvious.

Wasn’t “below the armpits” a thing at one time?

It would be easy enough these days to have a line that goes across from the where the arm holes join the chest on a jersey.

However, one thing that needs to be addressed as well is the ball runner ducking into tackles or attempting to go through a tackle by bending at the waist.

There needs to be a law change that a player with the ball cannot duck into a tackle (by bending at the waist.)

The only time a player with the ball should be allowed to “avoid” a tackle by ducking is when they are attempting to score a try.

Anyway, lets see how it goes.

Aidoc, Kapo o Pango
Tana Umaga was the first to lead it.

I toured NZ as a teenager on a 10 day trip. We played 5 games (won 3/5 🙂 Papatoetoe (x2), Tarankai, Taupo & Palmerson North. After the games there was a hangi and lots of music and lots of fun. (Taupo was particular fun as 4 of us were billetted with a bachelor butcher who fed us very, very well, watered us with Speights and then took us out to the hot pools to recover. )

After dinner there were the usual speeches and then a haka was performed by the home team. Of course we had nothing to respond with, other than to face up to it. Nevertheless, we were invited to learn the Ka Mate haka. Everybody in the team got involved; players and coaches. The fact that we weren’t kiwis was irrelevant.

The only expectation was that you respected the haka. I rememeber the phrase along the lines of, “Put your mana into it!” and as long as you were fair dinkum and gave it your best shot, there was a lot of good natured comments and laughs (probably about how crap we actually were.)

As far as cultural appropriation…

I did think that that specific haka was designed and reserved specifically for the All Blacks. I also understand it was created to reflect the modern multi-cultural make up of the All Black team.

I am a little surprised that there isn’t a local option for the SA team. Maybe something to look into for them. If I was a SA player I’d feel better if they developed their own local war dance that reflects their own traditions, but on the other hand, using the All Black haka may be the ultimate respect.

On tour, each game was started with a haka. I’m pretty sure I would not have felt comfortable responding with a haka, but I’m sure if we’d have responded with mana, it would have been taken in good spirit.

Anyway, before if start getting too hungup on cultural appropriation, it will be only the English playing the game.

DaveJ conning the ref into awarding one.

AKA “Dark Arts”
AKA Cheating

LP, Agree, if the ball is there to be played, play on! That’s when I get most frustrated, when the scrum has been won, the ball is there and they get a penalty.

And your comment on backwards scrum ball is so true.. retreating backs have to stop their momentum when going backwards and then go forwards, while the defense is already moving toward them and can hit full pace immediately. So hard to attack with bad ball – the scrum might not have won the ball, but it has spoilt the attackers ball. Good observation.

RE: 5metres from locks (#8) feet… Let’s open that up and be consistent with the lineout, that is 10m from middle of the scrum.
(The 5m was a mistake made with the ELVs, in 2006 which went from offside at locks feet to 5m. They didn’t think it through. They should have made it the same as the lineout.)

Brett,

“Dignity of Risk” is a term that specifically refers to those who are in the care of others being able to make their own decisions. In this situation I believe you are using the term out of context.

Dignity of risk is the idea that self-determination and the right to take reasonable risks are essential for dignity and self esteem and so should not be impeded by excessively-cautious caregivers, concerned about their duty of care. The concept is applicable to adults who are under care such as elderly people, people living with disability, and people with mental health problems. It has also been applied to children, including those living with disabilities.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dignity_of_risk

Mount Everest and Niagara Falls tight rope walking are what I consider to be examples of extreme risk taking.

Are you really saying that playing League (or union for that matter) is extreme risk taking?

Gary, what an awful experience. I don’t see how you could ever forget. Thank you for sharing this, It’s a sobering reminder of how important the concussion issue is.

So I accept that when I played that if I got concussed when making a tackle, (and I always tackled low, thigh high or lower, so if I copped a knee in the head every so often) it was my error not the player with the ball

However, if the rules do not allow head high tackles, and a player gets hurt by a head high tackle, why should that player not be allowed to sue when it is outside the rules of the game?

He did call time off ! He he then called time on. I totally agree 100% with the ref.

Law 5a. “The referee is the sole judge of fact and of law during a match.

But you dead right on all the other time wasting. But you’ll find no argument from me from the water break coaching, walking to scrums and lineouts and general time wasting so the big fellas can get a breather.

Don’t forget the coaching by the ref, the explanations to so called professional players by the ref. Every Single Week – And Every other Stoppage. It’s absurd for these players to be called professionals if they don’t know the rules.

But in this case, Foley should have known better. Foley’s actions were insulting and disrespectful and rugby supporters should expect better from players.

Mirt, some of the reasons a scrum can be called are inconsistent with the purpose of the scrum: The purpose of a scrum is to restart play with a contest for possession after a minor infringement or stoppage..

Reasons to call a scrum would be simplified and made consistent with the above statement. I take minor infringement to mean ‘knock on” or ‘unplayable. ”

As mentioned there are 16 reasons to call a scrum. And there are 20 scrum infractions. So, for the scrum:

A. Scrums only awarded for following 5 reasons (not 16)

1. A knock on. (Infringement)
2. A player takes the ball into their own in goal and is made dead. (stoppage)
3. A restart after the ball is unplayable. (tackle, ruck or maul) (stoppage)
4. A reset scrum, where the ball has not been put into the scrum. (stoppage)
5. A restart after the ref calls a halt. (eg For injury or contact with the ball or any other reason.) (stoppage)

B. Abolish all technical scrum penalties so they become free kicks, there would still be all the same sanctions, but there would be 19 free kicks, one scrum and one penalty for deliberately collapsing a scrum. (and foul play)

Free Kicks:
1/ All current technical scrum penalties: eg hand knee on the ground, popping a front rower, losing the bind etc..
Penalties:
2 / Dangerous play: Collapsing or attempting to collapse a scrum
3 / Penalties for foul play (in a scrum:) Punching, kicking, biting, head-butting etc..

There are other areas to look at as well, such as scrum offside v lineout offside

In keeping with 10m for a lineout, offside for a scrum should be moved to 10m from scrum centre aka line of touch, (not 5m from #8s feet.)

It is therefore consistent with the lineout and means that defending backs would be back 10m for a scrum free kick (as they are in a lineout) and could move forwards without having to retreat before being onside. Currently most defending inside backs would be offside should a quick tap be taken from a scrum free kick.

Maybe it’s a case of how it’s done with soccer. Off the field with a solo TV screen rather than in front of 60,000 spectators, where half will be offended regardless of how clear cut the decision is.

Maybe we need to go back to respecting Law 5a. “The referee is the sole judge of fact and of law during a match. “

If every ref is making mistakes — and these are the top professional refs in the world, pity the poor 16 year old kid reffing u12 on a saturday morning infront of rabid parents.

It’s not the ref. It’s the Laws of Rugby.

They need to be simplified and made consistent with less exceptions so that the game is easier to understand and easier to referee.

For example, there a 39 sections to the scrum law. There are 16 reasons to call a scrum. There are 20 scrum infractions; 9 result in free kicks, 10 in penalties and 1 as a scrum.

Anyone care to list them?

Generally I’m unhappy with the wasting of time involved with players — not captains — seeking clarity on decisions AND that the ref takes time to explain them or even coach on aspects of the game. Every. Single. Week.
As far as I’m concerned these are professionals, its not up to the ref to teach them the Laws. I’d much prefer to revert to the old days of zero interaction with players, and only captains AFTER the penalty kick has been taken.

No Cec, sorry you’re wrong on that.

Foley is standing still when the whistle blows. He starts to run after the whistle.

Check out the video, and while the ref is off screen, the whistle is in real time. The ref explains his reasoning. Right at the end, in the replay just before the whistle the Australian #12 Foketi, is screaming at Foley to kick it.

This was my comment at the time:

I put the blame for that loss squarely on the Wallabies.

In particular, the forward huddle of forwards to Foley’s left, and as well Foley, with his experience should have known better and kicked the ball out when told to. And to be clear… Foley was NOT moving or starting his run when the ref blew the whistle for the scrum.

The Wallabies celebrated the penalty as if the game had been won and then showed a total lack of respect to the Ref’s instructions to play.

And agreed, the Wallabies were in still in front. They needed to dig deep and show some grit and determination to hold out the ABs. They didn’t.

It’s not a popular position to take, so much easier to blame the ref, but the Wallabies forced the ref to take action.

JD Kiwi, no I feel that is too big a penalty, to play the remainder of a game a man down when it is possible that a scrum isn’t formed. It is basically a red card.

This is my alternative.

If a team cannot contest a scrum (and it is not their feed) — for failing to contest a scrum the sanction is a free kick (to the other team).

For the team that cannot contest a scrum and it is their feed, a non contested scrum is formed with both teams forming the scrum as the current situation is.

In this way the sanction is only applied at scrum time, not for the whole of play.

I hope that makes sense.

PS, If I’m not mistaken, a tactically replaced front row is allowed to return to the game, in the event that a replacement is injured.

No, nobody wants to remove the contest. No one is suggesting that. That’s a furphy.

Brendan, really? You know you can tap and go, right?
.
I envision that where possible the half taking a quick tap (from behind the mark) and the backs making use of fast quick ball and open spaces. Teams / backlines would actually train for the quck tap and go.
.
A quick tap might even forcing an offside penalty as the inside backs would be inside the 10m – remember with the exception of the outside backs, probably 12 of the team would be offside.
.
And with that in mind I would change the scrum laws to be in line with the lineout, offside line is 10 metres from the mark. In that way all backs except the half would automatically be onside at a free kick. Having the scrum offside lines 10 m from the mark, rather than 5 metres from the last foot was a mistake made when they changed the law from No8s feet to 5 metres.
.
The occasional garry owen, if the full back is out of position… or a 50/22
.
But just kicking it away… That’s not how I’d be coaching it. Not at all.

Further to my first post, about moving most penalties to free kicks at the scrum, I did a little more research:

Law 9 The scrum. Has some 39 sections and a multitude of sub-sections.

There are 20 sanctions listed:

9 x Free Kick (1 x in Section 38. Dangerous Play / Restricted Practices
10 x Penalty ( 2 are in Section 38. Dangerous Play / Restricted Practices )
1 x Scrum.

Anyone care to list what the 20 sanctions are? (check your answers below?)
https://www.world.rugby/the-game/laws/law/19

==========

Just a thought…. It has become fashionable to comb over a refs game and then tear to to shreds. In the press….. On sports forums….. On on video tape…..

Before we start pillorying them for the decisions they make, maybe we should consider that the problem is not actually the ref, but the complexity of the laws of the game they are asked to enforce.

If a international referees at the highest standard of the game are going to be treated the way we have recently seen by some coaches, supporters and press, how on earth do we expect a 14 or 16 year old to know and understand all the laws.

It’s quite clear that the vast majority of professional players, and their coaches don’t know the laws. Or they are playing silly buggers. In almost every game we see referees coaching / explaining the laws to these ‘professionals’. Every. Single. Game.

(Imagine if a professional, like a truck driver didn’t know the laws of the road? How long would he last in their job. Not long in Oz, that’s for sure.)

Maybe if coaches did there job properly there wouldn’t be this need, (and again, it’s slowing down the game, slowing down play allowing the big men to get their wind back. )

Personally I say refs should stop explaining the laws to players and simply educate them with the whistle.

And the stats from the past few years show forwards are carrying the ball more in close while making fewer yards.

It would be interesting to see exactly how many passes are made in a game, if the one out pass to a forward barging ahead was taken from the statistics. A whole lot less I imagine.

The modern game of union reminds me of the old league days of no tackle count, just barge a yard at a time and in 100 tackles we’ll score a try. The 4 tackle count was introduced in 1967 and the 6 tackle count in 71, which restored the free flowing game rather than the head down and charge one-out.

And in those days leaguies could compete at the tackle; aside from jarring it loose in a tackle, the tackler could rip the ball as a player was going down OR the marker could attempt a rake back as the tackled player played the ball.

The trouble was, it went from being a rarity to every scrum – it became quite tedious.

CPM, you say” The scrum is not for restarting a game. It is for contesting the ball in every country except for Aus where league says it’s for restarting.”
.
That is a popular furphy that bears no relation to the facts. Here’s what World Rugby says:
.
The purpose of a scrum is to restart play with a contest for possession after a minor infringement or stoppage.
.
But don’t take my word for it. You can acquaint yourself with the law 19 the scrum below.
https://www.world.rugby/the-game/laws/law/19