Change the interpretation of the rules governing the tackled ball, offside play and scrums, as SANZAR has done this season, and you change the way winning rugby needs to be played. The successful teams in the second round of the Super 14 tournament understood this truism. The losing sides, except for the ACT Brumbies, did not.
The new interpretations have created one of the most dramatic rounds since the tournament started in 1996. There were three upsets: with the Blues (NZ) defeating the Highlanders (NZ); the Reds destroying the Crusaders (NZ) 41 -20, their first victory over these opponents in 11 years; and the Cheetahs (RSA) defeating the Sharks (RSA) in their first away win in three seasons.
Then we had a bizarre try-a-thon at Johannesburg with the Lions (RSA) losing to the Chiefs (NZ) although scoring 65 points, enough to win two Super Rugby contests in the past. Each side scored nine tries, a Super rugby record.
To understand what is going on we need a little theory. Many years ago I had a conversation with Danie Craven, a legendary Springboks halfback and coach.
In the 1950s and 1960s Craven was Mr Rugby, the game’s most influential administrator. He was in charge of writing the various changes to the laws. Craven told me that the laws were wrong.
”How do we know this?” he said. ”Because, unlike the laws of soccer, they are too complicated and can’t be written down on a single sheet of paper.”
Craven, a double PhD, taught at Stellenbosch University (where the ELVs were devised and trialled). He told me he often experimented on law variations using students as guinea pigs. Craven learnt from this experimenting that if you changed one law, it would affect how others worked. He used the metaphor of pulling a thread from a jersey and the old garment ”unravelling”.
The key change in the new rulings is that it gives an absolute control, provided no mistakes are made (this was the problem with the Crusaders with 17 handling errors) to the side that has the ball. The best-coached side in the tournament, so far, the frontrunning Bulls (RSA), have understood this basic truth. They have totally changed their style of play from last year. Last season, when most of the rights went to the kicking and tackling side, they kicked virtually every ball away. In one match their great halfback Fourie du Preez kicked the ball more than 40 times. And when he wasn’t kicking, his five-eighth partner, Morne Steyn, was.
This season du Preez and Steyn have hardly kicked at all in general play. They use the tough inside-centre Wynand Olivier to smash the ball up from set pieces, using the old-fashioned ”crash ball” system. Then they had their big runners such as Pierre Spies making further inroads before moving the ball wide. The Bulls scored five tries against a good Brumbies side. With five conversions, five penalties and two tries, Steyne scored 35 points from the Bulls’ tally of 50.
Sides that lost games they might have expected to win, such as the Highlanders, the Sharks and the Waratahs, kicked away far too much ball. The Waratahs, particularly, unlike the Bulls, the Hurricanes (NZ) and the Reds, do not seem to have a system of getting the ball to the centres and wingers after an initial charge. Tom Carter got his first pass from his inside-centre, Kurtley Beale, in the 43rd minute of play against the Stormers. Luke Burgess stands over the ball like an emperor penguin guarding an egg. The Reds have Peter Hynes launching brilliant counter-attacks from fullback. The Waratahs do not generally run back kicks. They have scored two tries and 36 points in two games.
They cannot hope to beat the Bulls (101 points in two games) on Saturday at Pretoria playing this way. They have to make radical changes in personnel and systems to exploit the new interpretations. The game has changed but the Waratahs, so far, haven’t changed with it.
spiro@theroar.com.au
Matfield and Frans said as much at the after-match news conference, that only your own mistakes will prevent you from scoring… due to the new application of the Laws. The attacking team has most of the rights to the ball and should they be patient without making mistakes, a score WILL FOLLOW!
This is good on one hand but very worrysome from the point of view of a fair contest and allowing defending teams or defending players to contest for the ball on EQUAL footing.
The most patient team who makes the fewest mistakes WILL win, simple as that!
Is that what we want?
Or do we want every movement to be a contest?
I’ll tell you which way I’m leaning (despite my team doing well under these current Laws)…. I want every ball to be an equal contest between opposing players, so that the team who is naturally stronger and who exhibits the best guile and game strategy comes out on top.
At the moment each TACKLE is an excercise in DAMAGE LIMITATION and not a fair contest for possession, as it should be.
Think about it…. and you’ll agree….
Nee, goeie grote gom…. ek is weer heeltemal te intellektueel en tegnies vir julle vandag…
Flokken stom bliksems wat niks se nie!
Helloooooooooooooo, is iemand wakker?
Word wakker, word wakker, die dag raak al hoe kakker!
The tackle however has been one of the only ways in wich to regain the ball.
A realy big hit, with enough support from team mates, driving over the ball ensuring a turnover…
There must however be a clever balance in this because when too many players are commited to that ,holes will appear in the backline. This however stays crucial when you want to turn over the ball in your own 22 to prevent another team from scoring.
Funny enough, more SA teams seems to have adapted to this, whereas in the past we were labelled the “dummies”…
Maybe an ANZAC plan backfiring a bit…?
Hallo grootblousmile
4 & 5 @ Blouste – Net ons 2 slim Bulls wat slim rugby kan gesels, lyk dit vir my!
…. en ja, ons Bulle, die Cheetahs en die Stormers het moer gou aangepas by hierdie toepassing van die Laws.
Jy moes daai geskokte Brumbie afrigter en kaptein gesien het Saterdag na die wedstryd…. op hulle gesigte het gestaan.. “Hoe de flok het die Bulle so gou by die reels aangepas?”
Maar dit maak nognie die toepassing korrek en regverdig nie!
Die een groot ding vir my sal wees om “rucking” terug te bring…natuurlik moet daar reels ook wees soos om nou nie ‘n man se gesig te “re-arrange” wanneer hy aan die verkeerde kant le nie, maar min dinge het manne so vinnig laat wegrol en wegbly soos ‘n paar stud merke op sy rug….
Ek dink die reels moet nog kans gegee word. Met die ELV’s het almal ook eers na 4 of so rondtes begin aanpas.
Tyd sal leer, ons kan dit nie onregverdig noem nie, dieselfde reels geld mos vir beide spanne en altwee word geblaas volgens dit.
Dink julle manne die Sharks gaan een game op toer wen ?
Die Cheetahs maak dit ook moeilik vir predictions… hulle lyk goed, maar die geskiedenis dwaal nog hier in ‘n ou se kop rond…
My siening is anders. Toeskouers bring die geld in, hetsy op die paviljoen of voor ‘n TV. Op die oomblik is daar meer toeskouers wat die rugby geniet as verlede jaar. Die huidige interpretasie van reels is wat my aangaan beter as die ELV’s.
dWeePer
Soos ek hierbo gese het, ek dink die reels moet nog kans gegee word.
Spanne sal wel met nuwe idees vorendag kom en beter begin aanpas.
Die Bulle bv. het in hulle twee games altwee spanne sonder ‘n 4 driee bonus punt gelos, so dit is nie onmoontlik bie. So ook die Stormers game van die naweek.
Ja, 2 rondtes is miskien min om ‘n oordeel te vel… maar vir my gaan dit steeds oor gelyke kanse om bal te wen by die afbreekpunte en met die huidige toepassing van reels is daar nie sprake van gelyke bemagtiging by afbreekpunte nie.
Noem die Nuwe Tackle Reel dan maar “Affirmative Action teen die tackler”… of so iets… want hy staan agter in die tou, net soos met AA.
So kry die bal en hou hom !!!!
Eenvoudig man gbs 😆
Hoe kry die Bulle dit reg om die spanne te beperk tot minder as 4 driee in ‘n game…
GROOT tackles…
Sal interessant wees om die “posession stats” vir die games te sien. Dit opsig self sal ‘n verhaal vertel.
‘We’re two weeks into the tournament, I’d cut the referees a bit of slack,’ Frans Ludeke said
‘I received a mail from (Sanzar referee managers) Lyndon Bray and Andre Watson dealing with that issue. They’re aware of the concerns there and are committed to ensuring a fair contest through better law application, while not softening the stance on the tackler releasing the ball carrier.
‘It’ll take time for all the refs to get on the same page, and in a couple of rounds in think there’ll be a more consistent application of the breakdown law and more freedom for the defending side to have a go at turning it over. There already are opportunities to do that if you’re smart. On Saturday, Deon Stegmann, Wynand Olivier and Derick Kuün managed to steal balls.
It’s funny, the Waratahs actually had most of the possession and territory in that match – i.e., they were the attacking side for a longer period of time than the Stormers.
The Stormers won comprehensively, yet they were’nt the most attacking team…
So is’nt it just a case of adapting ?
The big hits makes that possible !!!
GBS,
Ek glo daar is ‘n gelyke kans by die afbreekpunt. Maar dit is die span se besluit of hulle die voordeel by die afbreekpunt wil he en of hulle verdedigers in die agterlyn soek.
My 2sent: Indien die aanvallende span met 2 ouens by die afbreekpunt is en jy het 4 sal jy die bal kan afneem. Maar dit los gapings in die verdedigingslyn.
Die bulle het vir die opsie gegaan en dus 6 drie in 2 wedstryde afgestaan.
Maar……deur meer ouens op die verdedigers te stuur het hulle meer omgekeurde besit gekry en soos jy gese het, met geduld gaan druk.
Dit is ‘n give and take situasie en ek glo dit is hoe hulle te werk gaan.
Met die stormers en ander spanne wat eerder gaan om die strafskop te kry speel die bulle vir die turnover en almal weet dit is een van die beste maniere om te druk.
Die bulle wag tot die 2de of 3de fase en dan stuur hulle die Cavalry in om die bal te vat.
Look, I say embrace the Laws as they are applied… Bulls were slow to embrace the ELV’s and it cost them in 2008, whereas this time they are the quickest to adapt and play according to the New Application of the Laws.
But it does not mean that I’m FOR the New Application of the Laws, specially the Tackle Law, where the “Daylight” principle is now in force.
In fact, I’m trying to highlight the shortcomings of this new interpretation.
In essence, what I want is a bloody good contest for possession in stead of favouring the attacking team in the contest for the ball.
Teams will work on counter measures… and refs will adapt as well as time goes on…
It seems however that the Northern Hemisphere interpretations and Southern Hemisphere interpretations are worlds apart at present though… just compare the Super 14 games of the coming weekend to the Six Nations matches and you’ll see what I mean.
Sure NH and SH inerpretations are vastly different at present…
Question is, what interpretations will prevail…
Wel,” all said and done”.
Die interpretasies is hier om te bly vir die S14.
Ek is bly die Bulle het so goed en vinnig aangepas , iets waarmee hul voorheen gesukkel het.
Dit wil voorkom asof die BULLE unie meer en meer professioneel word.
Dit my liewe vriende is ‘n BAIE goeie teken vir my !!!
Blouste,
Dit maak die val net al hoe moeiliker. Maar ek dink hulle weet dat hulle die rugby wereld kan domineer en nie wil wegsak wanneer ysters soos vic en fdup waai nie.
Die contingency plan is klaar daar en ons sal minimaal be-invloed word. Ek sien ‘n swak jaar in 2012 en weer beter in 2013. Dan is manne soos J Kruger en Flip al hardebaarde en F Hougaard gemaklik as 1ste keuse ss.
Users Online
Total 107 users including 0 member, 107 guests, 0 bot online
Most users ever online were 3735, on 31 August 2022 @ 6:23 pm
No Counter as from 31 October 2009: 39,434,074 Page Impressions
_