Stellenbosch Laws: Fools rush in ...

The coaches' perspective...(source: PlanetRugby)

Stellenbosch Laws: Fools rush in ...
Saturday 27th October 2007

Several leading coaches have warned against the "foolish" act of rushing the new 'Stellenbosch Laws' into the Super 14 competition next year.

It has been reported, but not confirmed, that SANZAR (South Africa, New Zealand and Australia Rugby - which governs the Super 14) will bow to pressure from the International Rugby Board (IRB) to take the experimental law variations (ELVs) to a new level after trials in South Africa, Scotland, Australia and the New Zealand this year.

And Super Rugby has been mooted as the new testing ground, a move that has met with some resistance from SANZAR coaches.

New Blues assistant Greg Cooper is one of those questioning the wisdom of rushing the experimental laws into next year's Super 14, suggesting more analysis is needed before they are introduced into a competition as tough as the Southern Hemisphere's provincial extravaganza.

There has been positive feedback on the new five-metre law and the increased running opportunities.

Most criticism is centred on the free-for-all breakdown that allows hands in the ruck and players entering from all angles.

Cooper who has just finished a paper for the Blues on the new laws, after consulting the three provincial B coaches in the franchise and watching taped matches, has doubts about that key area of the game.

"Personally I think it would be a bit early to rush them in," Cooper told RugbyHeaven.

"I think there needs to be some more consideration and analysis done on it. I say that based on one key area of the laws. I think there are some very good laws and some very logical ones that are looking to come in. But the one key area that everyone will always talk about will be the tackle-breakdown.

"The end product that came out of the B competition was, at best, as good as what we have got at the moment. But at times it was an inferior product."

Chiefs coach Ian Foster, Waikato development coach Andrew Whelan, former Wallabies coach Eddie Jones and Brumbies coach Laurie Fisher are others who have raised questions over the new laws and their introduction to the Super 14.

Crusaders assistant coach Mark Hammett is concerned that New Zealand players will start well behind the Australians if new laws are introduced to next year's Super 14.

Hammett is worried the laws will take New Zealand teams longer to adjust to.

"The Aussies will have the jump on us because a lot of players will have been involved in their provincial competition which was played under the new laws," Hammett told The Press.

"I'm not sure if they should be brought in the Super 14 this early."

Hammett said it was still unknown whether the Crusaders will have to start learning how to operate under the new regulations. There has been no word from SANZAR.

"It will be very hard for us if we do have to. It will be the same for the referees because a lot of them will not have been involved with them yet."

I agree that the breakdown area is still an area of concern, it is worse off under the new laws...

I'm with FR - NOT YET. the ruck/maul thing doesn't work well.
Still want to see : Feet in a Ruck; Hands in a Maul. Dead simple really

Sounds like they are more worried Australia will have a jump on them more then the rules themselves....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hopep

I'm with FR - NOT YET. the ruck/maul thing doesn't work well.
Still want to see : Feet in a Ruck; Hands in a Maul. Dead simple really

---

Right on the money here Hopep

Did you guys watch the ARC? I watched every game that was filmed. Admittedly, the first few weeks with the hands in the ruck at the breakdown was very scrappy and the ball slow to come out, but by the end of the comp things had really changed. The ball was being recycled MUCH quicker than it was in the RWC (for example) as the other team would steal it if it was not. Admittedly, there were still far more turnovers, but I thought that was great! Just look at the average number of tries per game. That's where most of them came from- broken play and turnovers (and quick taps).

Overall, I thought that the overall effect of the ELVs was very positive. The fact is that at some point they have to be trialled at the very elite level. I think this coming S14 season is perfect. Unfortunately the 'cant kick out if taken back' rule means there's no less kicking, but still less time wasted setting up lineouts. If you examine the actual stats, the only big differences (assuming I remember correctly) are that the ball is in play a lot more, there are more tries, and more tackles. (There's an interview with an analyst from ARU on ABC website).

Personally, I think the trial is a waste of time. The SH is already derided in Europe for playing basketball rugby and this will just be seen as more of the same. If 10 man rugby is what the IRB wants to modify, why didn't they go to the source and trial it in the Heineken Cup?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyS

If 10 man rugby is what the IRB wants to modify, why didn't they go to the source and trial it in the Heineken Cup?

---

It's not 10 man rugby we're fighting against, it's 1 man rugby


Am I right Bulldog?.........Bulldog?.............wherefore art thou Bulldog?

I want to watch the game as it is supposed to be played with players taking the ball and running through other players to make line breaks and then tries. I don't care which set of rules we have but as long as it isn't stagnant and one set piece after another where in 10 minutes you have 2 lineouts and 2 scrums and 8 minutes of stoppage. They say fools rush in but whats the worst that could possibly happen? If it doesn't work we don't play it next year players will quickly re-adapt to the old style and the only seriously important test fixtures are the 3Ns anyway so we are all in the same boat. There are a few things that should be unquestionably added: offside lines at the scrum and lineout (to encourage attacking rugby) and no passing the ball back into the 22 (even if the change isn't huge its something at least).

The worst that could happen is that the S14/TN play the new rules for the next three years, gaining some fans, losing others, getting a repeat of the injury rate seen in the MARC and placing an emphasis on mobile rather than technical props. The IRB then decides that the case isn't proven or the rules need tweaking before being generally applied so the 2011 RWC will be played to existing rules.

I think the mistake was to introduce all of the rules simultaneously in the MARC, as it makes it difficult to distinguish what has a the positive and negative effects. The breakdown is an obvious point of contention, so opinions - was the game sped up by the new rules allowing hands if the player is on his feet, or by the free kick if he was off his feet? Personally, I thought the tap kick sped things up whereas the risk of being outnumbered just produced a lot of kicking and the turn-over risk produced a lot of dangerous clean-out. The kicking may have been attacking, but it was seldom actually chased and it just looked to me like a big game of "forcies back". I reckon there would be more counter-attack and the game would be just as quick (or quicker) if the old breakdown rules were applied but with free kicks rather than penalties. Add in the other non-contentious rule changes and I'd be very interested to see how the game would look. Leave the maul alone though!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyS

I reckon there would be more counter-attack and the game would be just as quick (or quicker) if the old breakdown rules were applied but with free kicks rather than penalties. Add in the other non-contentious rule changes and I'd be very interested to see how the game would look. Leave the maul alone though!

---

Got to agree about the free kicks. The breakdown looks like it is a mess and should be left alone.

The ability to pull down a maul concerns me a bit. Aren't these laws supposed to make the game safer?

most mauls get pulled down anyway.......just takes out the stoppage in play and easy penalty

Yes, well that's true enough. Actually it was interesting to note that by the end of the season mauls were being pulled down but the players were a lot better at keeping the ball up and moving forward.

Coaches warn: New laws a minefield
By MARC HINTON & DUNCAN JOHNSTONE - RugbyHeaven | Thursday, 1 November 2007

New Zealand's Super 14 coaches are becoming increasingly nervous over the spectre of the experimental laws that may or may not be introduced for next season, with a strong message being sent that some have no place on the rugby fields for 2008.

A special IRB working party has been trialing a series of new rules, called the Experimental Law Variations, aimed at speeding up the game. They were first tested in Stellenbosch and since have been used in Sydney club rugby, the Australian national championship and the New Zealand B provincial competition.

Now it is being mooted they be introduced for the Super 14 to enable a true reflection to be gained on how successful they are at one of the highest levels of the game.

The problem is Sanzar (the governing body for the Super 14) has yet to decide which, if any, of the new rules they will bring in for 2008, with discussions still ongoing on that matter.

The NZRU will decide on November 15 whether they will support the introduction of the rules. Then Sanzar and ultimately the IRB will have their say.

So frustrated New Zealand Super 14 coaches have had to select their squads not knowing which rules they will be playing under next year, a situation they acknowledge as being far from satisfactory.

Most have gone for a 16-12 forwards-backs mix in their squads with the expectation that the men up front could have a higher attrition rate under the new laws. But there is clear frustration that they're having to play a guessing game this close to the start of preparations, with all five teams due to start pre-season training around November 27.

Blues coach David Nucifora said the subject had had a thorough airing at the meeting of all Super 14 coaches in Wellington earlier this week.

"There was a lot of good rugby thinkers in the room, and they added a bit to the conversation," said the Blues coach. "People obviously had different views, and I won't say we were all in agreement, but whatever happens we have to go with it and do our best."

But Nucifora acknowledged that any introduction of new rules for the Super 14 season would present significant challenges. "In saying that there's also some very good things they're proposing for the game, so it's a matter of making the right decisions and letting the right things come through."

Nucifora said the frustrating thing was there was no real timeline set for a final decision, though he said it needed to be before the start of training if at all possible.

"There are some very sensible proposals amongst them," he added. "Some need to have further thought put into them. They might be the ones hopefully that are parked up. But there are some that could come into this competition and add value to it."

Asked by RugbyHeaven if there was a concern that the Super 14 could end up being a three-ringed circus as a perverse sort of IRB testing lab for the new laws, Nucifora made it clear there had to be sensible decisions made by Sanzar.

"Common sense has to prevail. This is a very high level of rugby, and in some cases it might be good to look at what these players make of the new laws and how they adapt to them.

"If common sense is used then some of them will be brought in but not all of them."

That was a view that appeared to be backed up by Nucifora's colleagues.

Hurricanes coach Colin Cooper said he expected there to be a bit of a "mix and match" of the old and new rules.

"I would be surprised if there were big changes or variations in what we play in the Super 14," he said.

"I think there are some good variations in amongst them. Hopefully we can work through those and perhaps the more controversial ones like the tackle ball area, we look at that one a bit more closely and decide later on what we do with that."

Chiefs coach Ian Foster said the new laws had certainly been a big talking point in the leadup to the Super 14 selections.

"It's fair to say that there has been lots of debate and conversations. We went through them in some detail and had a reasonably good debate about the (in Wellington)," said Foster.

"It wouldn't surprise me if some of them get brought in but it wouldn't surprise me if they all got brought in."

Foster felt he had "covered his bases" to cover any new laws that may be introduced and admitted it did factor in his selection process as he was sure it had in the minds of his rival coaches.

Highlanders coach Glenn Moore also conceded he had selected his squad with an eye on the potential need for more athletic forwards.

The process from here sees recommendations go to the New Zealand board on November 15, then to Sanzar and on to the IRB.

It appears Australia, who have already had the luxury of many of their leading players experience the experiemental rules, are keen to play under the new laws immediately while South Africa's position is unknown.

Sanzar need a unanimous decision to make any changes to their competitions.

It's a messy scenario and given that pre-season starts in less than a month, the clock is most definitely ticking.


ROUGH GUIDE TO THE EXPERIMENTAL LAWS

*One of the key changes will be the downgrading of most penalty offences to free kicks. Long-arm penalties are to be given only for offside and foul play.

*Hands in the ruck used to be a penalty offence but under the new rules handling in the ruck will be allowed.

*At the scrum, all backs except for the two halfbacks must be at least five metres behind the hindmost foot of the scrum, instead of level with it in the current laws.

*One contentious new rule will allow defending teams to collapse a maul, which is a penalty offence under the current laws.

*Either side will be allowed to use as many players as they like in the lineout, at any time, providing they fit inside the 15-metre line.

*The opposing hooker in a lineout no longer has to stand between the five-metre line and touchline. He can stand anywhere he wishes as long as he conforms to the laws.

*On a quick throw-in the ball can be thrown straight or back towards the defenders' goal line, but not forward towards the opposition goal line.

*There are unlikely to be any more of those corner-flag grazing tries as the new rules propose doing away with the corner flag entirely. Under the current laws, a try is disallowed if a player touches the corner flag while attempting to touch the ball down, even if his body and the ball are not in touch.