Opinion
The much-maligned International Rugby Board has proved surprisingly adept in its decision-making on the experimental law variations. Reconciling the strikingly different agendas of the nations of the Northern and Southern Hemispheres was always bound to be difficult. However, a board conference has chosen wisely in charting a path acceptable to
both the forward-dominated game of the north and the more expansive game favoured by New Zealand and Australia.
That is all the more commendable, given a process blighted by countries testing only the law variations they deemed worthy of consideration. The best of the variations have, by and large, been selected for the rule book. These include the pass-back rule, which governs kicking from inside the 22m line, and the 5m offside line at scrums.
Axed, rightly, was the variation that allowed mauls to be pulled down. This has enabled defending teams to leave more forwards out among their backlines, thereby starving attacking sides of space. More problematically, the board has sought further review of the variation, currently used in the Super 14 but not even tested in the north, that allows free kicks to be awarded at breakdowns in an effort to speed up the game. Northern critics saw this as creating a rugby league-type game and encouraging cheating by failing to impose a sufficiently strict penalty. There are elements of truth in that.
There will, nonetheless, be disappointment there is still no solution to the chaotic mess of the tackle zone. The IRB must devise black-and-white rules that bring clarity to this area, not least to referees. With rucking apparently, and unfortunately, consigned to history, these would focus most logically on extending the rights of the first tackler, as proposed by New Zealand.
