Time for IRB to lend a hand in freeing up some space

LET’S FACE it, rugby union has a problem. Even for die-hard fans, the majority of games – be they Magners League, English Premiership or Top 14 – are almost unwatchable from first minute to last. Rugby union, in a nutshell, is becoming boring.

Kick-pong and, by and large, defences rule, while pile-ups and re-set scrums abound. Most referees, admittedly at a time when the game has become an utter nightmare to referee, are simply not up to it. Alas, there are very few ex-international scrumhalves turned referees, like Alain Rolland, out there.

There are a whole raft of statistics out there to show that players are becoming bigger, and there are more and more pile-ups/rucks (dilute to taste) per game as players resemble human missiles amid an arm wrestle on the deck for the ball.

The scrum has had a revival as an attacking weapon – primarily because save for a team with a strong, effective maul it’s the only way of tying down eight opposing players to one spot – but it’s still become a blight on the game. Although the number of scrums per game is down to around 18 to 20 per match, in some Tests in November re-set scrums were taking up to 15-20 minutes per match. In one England game last month under the charge of Stuart Dickinson, there wasn’t one successfully completed scrum in the entire 80 minutes.

Right across the board, tries per game are down. The Magners League has gone from 4.12 per game in 2006-07, to 3.77 the following season and 3.9 last season to just 3.15 this season – and it has the highest rate of any of the European Leagues.

In the English Premiership, it has progressed from 4.05 in 2006-07, to 4.59 in 2007-08, to 4.12 last season and just 2.7 this season. In the French Top 14, it almost comes as a surprise to learn that the ratio of tries per game has merely regressed from 3.26 last season to 2.86 this season, even though most games are an unedifying blend of countless drop goal attempts and the aforementioned kick-pong. Try rates also dropped in the November Tests (3 to 2.3) and the Tri Nations (4.7 to 3).

All manner of concerns have been raised about the way the game is going, from Graham Henry to Rob Andrew, and though it sounds like hubris from the latter given the lack of ambition displayed by England, the game clearly has issues.

So what did the game’s governing body, the IRB, decide they would do after coming together in Dublin last Tuesday? Eh, to look again at the game’s laws and consider changes after the 2011 World Cup, while “trialling” goalscan technology. It’s almost as if this is a punishment for the way their ELVs were largely thrown back at the IRB, while the feeling persists that the IRB initially over-reacted to the semi-finals and final at the 2007 World Cup.

In truth, there was little wrong with the game a few years ago. It encompassed all manner of styles, which is how it should be. Indeed, before the raft of changes which the ELVs brought in, all that’s really different is the law preventing teams from passing the ball back inside their 22 and kicking out on the full, and this season’s changed “ruling” which permitted the first player to arrive at a breakdown to play the ball and to continue playing the ball after a ruck has formed.

Perhaps it’s time to revise both, for the former – while rewarding cautious play to a degree – has clearly contributed to the kick-pong, while the latter has given too much of an advantage to the defending team.

The IRB also over-reacted to the high retention rate of teams in possession in those semi-finals and final, when the ball was retained over 90 per cent of the time, and again after Munster (and plenty of other teams, including Toulouse themselves a month later in the French final) “picked-and-jammed” to see out the end game in the 2008 Heineken Cup final. Last season, almost at a stroke, the IRB’s edicts effectively outlawed counter-attacking, as could be most visibly and risibly seen when Wayne Barnes blew Munster off the pitch every time they went into contact when counter-attacking in their opening defence of the title at home to a Montauban team that created absolutely nothing but nearly won.

Ironically, pick and jam is back, partly because no position on the pitch has seemingly become more important than the open side, once deemed an extinct species by one or two coaches not so long ago. Here again, the laws seem too heavily loaded in favour of the Heinrich Brussows, David Pococks and Richie McCaws. They can make a tackle and slide to their feet without letting go of the ball.

Too often the ball carrier has little or no chance of retaining possession or else is swiftly penalised, and there seems a compelling argument for making the tackler release the ball while getting back on his feet and then re-enter “through the gate”. The breakdown has become a feast for the spoilers, forcing turnovers or slowing down ruck ball. There are now 150 to 190 breakdowns per match, which on average attract 3.3 attackers to 1.2 defenders. Many teams, most notably Scotland and to a degree South Africa, are better off without the ball than with it, though at their best, the Boks are lethal in their strike-rate off turnovers.

And yet, how much of this is down to the mindset of coaches especially and players also? For amid the drudgery of much of the November Tests, and in stark contrast to the increasingly conservative Boks at Croke Park, the performances of New Zealand and Australia in scoring nine tries without reply against France and Wales stood out. They were rewarded for their willingness to keep the ball in hand, to have runners off the ball, to run hard and straight and make short passes, or to look for offloads and support.

Admittedly, they had the two princes of outhalf playmakers in Dan Carter and Matt Giteau, both of whom have the pace, footwork, hands and skills set to play flat to the gain line. Even so, the All Blacks showed that when players work hard off the ball and use the full width of the pitch, counter-attacking can be far more rewarding than indulging in kick-pong.

There is still space out there if teams are willing to look for it, but the IRB could lend more of a helping hand.

gthornley@irishtimes.com