As seems to be a perennial event these days, World Rugby made a raft of law changes coming into the new season. Whilst these seem to be predominantly based around ‘the scrum and tackle ball area’ they have been done with a simple objective; to speed up the game , increase the ball in play time and create ‘fast ball’.
We are a few rounds into this season, so now is the time to reflect on the impacts so far, both intended and not.
Firstly the scrum changes: LAW 20.11
There will be no turnover ball on a wheeled scrum, and secondly, teams will be instructed to use the ball if the scrum ceases to go forward.
The number eight will be free to play the ball when scrums collapse, providing no-one is at risk. Scrums must be set within 30-seconds or a free kick can be given. As well as this, the scrum half can no longer go into the gap between the flanker and number eight.
What Does It All Mean?
In theory: it means that teams are being encouraged to move the ball away from the scrum as quickly as possible. This is made easier by the fact that the scrum half should be under less pressure. The scrum is an opportunity for quick, clean ball [set play] and for runners to attack a greater area of space. These changes should add to the entertainment value and allow for more line breaks and tries.
In practice: it seems to be working. The games thus far have produced plenty of line breaks, and teams are willing to attack more. Whilst it may be that good weather and firm pitches are having a greater impact than these changes, fans will no doubt know more when matches are played in December.
Still Problems With Law Changes
There has, though, been a few problems;
- Firstly the 30-second set rule is being routinely ignored. Referees seem to be stopping the clock more often at scrum time and that causes further delays to the game, and more boring spells for newcomers.
- The second issue is the directive to focus on ‘getting the ball out’. Playing seems to have led even further down the road of non-policed feeds. Given the television coverage and positioning of match day officials, it really seems that keeping an eye on a crooked feed should be a simple matter. Apparently not so, it isn’t just Brian Moore complaining about this simple transgression and its corrosive impact.
- Scrums are supposed to be a contest for the ball and lawmakers need to be careful not to remove that element from the game (more on this later) If so, they face an unfavourable comparison with Rugby League.
- The final issue is around the potential for cheating. Teams who realize their opposition has a superior pack, now have an increased incentive to ‘collapse the scrum’ and hope the referee waves play on–rather than penalize them.
Scrum tactics incentivized
Thankfully this hasn’t proven too common at the elite level yet, but at the amateur level commentators certainly have seen an upturn in (potentially dangerous) collapses through teams ‘slipping’. In this case it’s plain to see that dropping the scrum rather than wheeling it has been incentivized. The potential downsides of giving away the penalty rather than risking say ‘a pushover score’ are mitigated by the chance that the referee will call “use it.”
Administrators need to be careful that the desire to speed-up the game up doesn’t come at the price of risking player safety.
Secondly maul and ruck changes; Law 16
- The ball must now be passed back hand to hand, rather than the receiver sliding back.
- Players can no longer put their hands on the ground before attempting to win a turnover.
Whilst many people will no doubt point out that the second of these was in place last season, the rule itself has had an impact on the game more this season as teams are adapting tactically to the change.
Interpretation of New Ruck/Maul Laws
First though the big maul change. Older readers will no doubt be aware that this is actually a simple reversion to the old interpretation of the maul laws. It was only the great Leicester Tigers side of the 2000’s which changed from passing hand to hand to sliding back. No doubt this was a highly effective tactic and it’s evolution over the years had turned the maul into a nigh unstoppable force of momentum.
The Exeter Chiefs side of the last few seasons, led by the indomitable Thomas Waldrom, had perfected this art and for all their attacking intent it was the maul which truly powered them to a Premiership final appearance.
This law change then seems to be a direct response to the number of tries scored from rolling mauls. An attempt to give defences a chance to stop the score, but also a way to impose greater technical difficulty in an era of gym honed physiques.
More Balanced Contest at the Maul Formation
So far, this seems to have worked well. We are still seeing plenty of tries from rolling mauls, whilst also seeing a more balanced contest on the formation. It’s also especially pleasing to see the ‘back peel’ return to mauling, as it provides an opportunity for teams to exploit defences obsessed with driving the maul into touch. If this results in seeing a ‘rip, spin and pass’ from a maul set-up, fans may be on their feet applauding. Those are core skills that every young player learns, and it’s refreshing to see them executed properly at the elite level.
Finally, the Ruck. Law 15
Whilst I know that this change was implemented prior to this year there has been a marked shift in tactics this season. It seems that fewer teams are contesting for the ball at all, instead choosing to realign quickly and cover the pitch. The fact that ‘jacklers’ are unable to put their hands over the ball has limited genuine turnover opportunities and hence dulled the effectiveness of out and out opensides accordingly.
“Jackling” is when the tackling player regains his feet and wins the ball, or the next defender in wins the ball.
Only last year it would have been inconceivable that I would be talking about 7’s being affected but it is certainly the case. Australia were dominant with their turnover merchants in the Rugby World Cup but their ineffectiveness in the Rugby Championship has contributed massively to the Wallabies’ recent travails.
In the Premiership, defending teams are often not putting a single man into the ruck, further limiting the genuine contest for the ball and actually crowding out attacking teams. Quick, fast ball is being generated but line speed, and the trend of blitz defences is actually reducing the space teams have to attack in.
It is further worth noting that if the defending team do not commit a single player to a ruck; after the tackler has rolled away, then actually no ruck has been formed–mention of this is made as it means there is no offside line, and teams are free to pressure opposition players higher. To blow-over the ball and opposition to gain possession.
Whilst we have yet to see referees in the Premiership accept this, it has happened in both of the last two seasons of Super Rugby*.
So What is the Overall Impression Thus Far?
The law changes are more of a tweak than an ‘overhaul’ and it’s clear to see that this is an attempt to speed-up the game and eradicate large spells of time when the ball isn’t visible. So far this has been pretty successful and despite the potential for abuse, top flight officiating has been solid.
With the codifying of rules banning simulation; as well as the above changes, governing bodies seem to be determined to keep the viewer experience at the heart of all changes. Whilst this is admirable, it should not be done ‘at the cost’ of genuine opportunities to compete for the ball.
*Probably worth noting that in new ‘trials laws’ used in New Zealand, where the Ruck is being replaced with a ‘Breakdown’. It also does away with the requirement for a defender’s ‘presence’ to form.
“Main photo credit”
