We must be on guard so extremists don’t win the day


Some time ago, a young and ambitious rugby referee was eager to impress an old hand who had been sent to assess his progress.
The ref had just handled a game in which, to put it mildly, the offside rule had been more honoured in the breach than the observance.


“What did you think?” he inquired of the assessor afterwards, with a confident smirk on his face.

“Well,” the assessor started tentatively. “Not too bad, but I think you need to tighten up on the offside law.”
“Oh, I know all about the offside law,” the young ref retorted. “But today I wanted to let the game flow!”


The International Rugby Board, mercifully, has resisted similar laissez faire in its recent tampering with the laws to let the game “flow”.


In an attempt to make the game more attractive allegedly, teams in the Super 14 early next year — and possibly even the Tri-Nations later — will be allowed more room for attack by setting new offside lines at the tackle and set pieces (5m back rather than the last-feet-in- the-scrum rule), greater freedom with quick throw-ins and further restrictions in kicking for touch from inside the 22.


Penalty offences are to be reduced and free-kicks will be more regular.


These new laws (rugby, like cricket, has “laws” rather than “rules”) were enthusiastically put on trial at that great rugby laboratory in Stellenbosch, where the popular Friday-night koshuis league often uses experimental changes such as a clean catch anywhere on the field allows the catcher a free kick.

Follow up:

The latest experiments are known as “experimental law variations” (or ELVs), and all the Super 14 teams have been using them in training sessions so that they won’t be caught short when the tournament starts.


In the southern hemisphere, the Super 14 coaches have embraced them; further north, the usual curmudgeons have scorned them. We should listen to both sides.


For the present, the changes do not appear too radical, but rugby must be on its guard in case the extremists should win the day.


They almost did with these ELVs: there were attempts to allow hands in at the ruck and pulling down mauls, both of which would have undermined the essence of rugby union.


It is still not clear if the last two suggestions have been shelved for good or will be introduced at some future date.


It is interesting to see just who is pushing for such drastic changes: the Aussies.


For years, the Aussies have had a poor scrum, especially in the front row and they were ruthlessly exposed by Andrew Sheridan and his England gang at the World Cup.


In spite of much talk beforehand about how their front row had grown up, the Wallabies were pummelled by England and are always looking to negate the potency of the scrum.


There is also the potentially huge rugby market in Australia’s neck of the woods: Japan, and possibly even China.


If the laws can be changed to benefit these nations, there will be fortunes to be made.


At whose detriment? South Africa’s certainly. Forward power has always been our strength and the Aussies have always been keen to counter this, if not on the field, then in the boardrooms.


Source: The Times (SA)