by Several aspects of World Rugby’s five-point plan to attract the next generation have struck a chord with current fans. Because as the world governing body itself knows, part of the battle is to root out bad habits rooted in the elite game.
Simply put, you won’t see amateur scrum-halves getting rid of sluggish caterpillar ruck construction. Public referees are far more likely to sanction a team that slows down the line. And the ‘croc roll’ is a recent invention of professionalism, which contravenes law 16b, which decrees that players cannot remove racks, – having come in since the practice of jackalling has grown in influence.
There was much to admire about the proposals published from this year’s Shape of the Game conference. Everyone would agree that there is a need to streamline and simplify the rugby disciplinary process, which can cause confusion. Taking advantage of the surge in popularity of the women’s game makes perfect sense, another stated aim.
It is understood that the desire for a “consistent approach to the presentation of sport across all media environments” will focus on the use of large screens and PA systems to explain referees’ decisions. World Rugby has recognized that all elite games should do this. Again, this is a sound idea. Some ‘solutions’ should not be described as revolutionary, however.
Caterpillar rack
How it should be set: Referees to call ‘use it’ faster.
‘ball-in-play time’ is now a fetishized statistic in rugby union. The higher it is, the better the game, right? Well, no need. World Rugby understands that ‘ball-in-flow time’ is more important. Stats Perform managed to play 18 minutes and 38 seconds of ball time over the second half of Scotland’s win over England on Saturday. But that doesn’t tell the whole story.
It’s unfair to say Ben Spencer, but England’s centre-forward won five kicks in the box from the ruck in that second half. First, referee Andrew Brace waited five seconds after the ball was available, and Spencer sent his England team-mates to the breakdown, to call ‘use it’. Five seconds later, Spencer finally kicked. Ten seconds, then, disappeared without anything meaningful happening. And those 10 seconds would count as ‘ball-in-play’ time.
Later, after a carry from Joe Marler, the ball was available with 73.28 on the game clock. Brace called ‘use it’ at 73.39. Spencer touched at 73.44. That equates to another 15 seconds of the ball in play. In total, 57 seconds of ball-in-play time elapsed between a ruck showing the ball reasonably well and those five strikes occurring. That’s 57 seconds out of the 18 minutes and 38 seconds that comprise ball-in-play time for the entire half, just focused on one player preparing to kick. Sobering indeed.
Happily, the answer lies in existing law. Although it should not have been his job to save England from themselves, it could have been much quicker to give Brace a ‘use it’. Law 17 states: “When a team has clearly won the ball at the ruck, and it is available for play, the referee calls ‘use it’, after which the ball must be played within five seconds. ” Enforce the first part and caterpillars will be endangered. ‘Ball-in-flow time’ is what should be taken into account.
‘Dead time’ at scrums and off line
How it should be set: Shot clocks for set pieces.
Planning before line out and setting up for scrums are major offenders when it comes to ‘dead time’ in games. Mauls are fine; they are a live competition and are part of the fabric of rugby. To comply with the organization of the Calcutta Cup last weekend, Brace issued warnings about non-continuation forward line bunching and sanctions. A more formal team timing method, with a countdown clock similar to those introduced for place-kicks, as implied by World Rugby’s recommendations, would assist officials and provide a consistent measure. If a side wanted to establish a set-piece advantage, they should hurry. That said, scrum safety must also be a factor.
Static kicking exchanges
How it should be set: Deleted the clauses of the ‘Dupont’ law 10.7, with the referees having the power to stop the game if a kicker is injured and unable to put his teammates on the other side.
Bath is very much in line with Dupont’s escape route which says you can go forward from standing outside when a catcher has five meters to travel.
But when Will Muir finally gets down, however, Gloucester take advantage of the ricochet.
Can we please close the loophole? It’s rubbish. pic.twitter.com/PZAao1Spvk
— Charlie Morgan (@CharlieFelix) January 7, 2024
The ‘Dupont Law’ is named after scrummer Antoine Dupont of France, who popularized the scheme in Test matches, and allows players to go forward from the outside after an opponent has taken a kick and five transfer a meter or pass the ball.
Super Rugby Pacific saw the stasis of the accessible tennis kick during Bath’s win over Gloucester in January and then the curious sight of Scotland and France playing backfield musical statues at Murrayfield. Then, for their own competition, they decided the clauses that will allow players to go forward from the outside when the ball is caught by an opponent and run five meters or pass the ball. Who could blame them?
Jacques Nienaber, the all-powerful former Springboks coach now with Leinster, labeled Bath-Gloucester over and over as “one minute of the ball-in-play with nothing happening but the ball flying through the air”. Nienaber, who incidentally was a member of World Rugby’s high performance committee for the men’s game, will know that the aim of kicking exchanges is to open up the field and induce fatigue, leading to more space. Dupont’s law limits both flow and fatigue. Few would miss it.
