Soon, I think, we may know.
Very shortly, World Rugby will hold a major meeting to discuss what it will do about the tackle and the (post-tackle) ruck, which has become universally known at the breakdown.
It will be a seminal moment for the game – it is hard to think of a more important “mode of play” meeting since rugby went professional. Contributions will be made by the major stakeholders in all unions.
In the summer World Rugby judiciously appointed a specialist group to study all aspects of this vexed problem and this is the next step in the process of finding a solution.
An alternative solution is to cease the practice of poaching completely, which would be a very major change to the mode of play. It would require all players to stay on their feet and drive over and past the ball
First and foremost, I’m hopeful that leading coaches will repeat a previous “pitch”made to World Rugby that they want side entry to be eliminated and that they want the concept of the tackle “gate” to be re-established.
With Joe Schmidt
Having worked with Joe Schmidt I know that this was and, I'd be certain, remains his position; I can't imagine Andy Farrell's being different.
It would be a welcome contribution by the coaches to finalising the solution. Provided, of course, that World Rugby is on the same page – why wouldn’t it be?
There may have been concerns that such a move would result in a significant increase in penalties. Such concerns are unfounded.
Sure, we would see a few more penalties in each match at the start, but it would achieve a much-needed change in behaviour. That is without doubt. Once the bedding-in period is over, it has always been so.
But even that will not provide the full solution. Also, to be sorted, is the speed and force of the arriving players as they hit the breakdown. This may prove more difficult but it cannot be left alone, otherwise the solution would only be partial
Consider the poacher bending down in an ostrich-like position and his exposed back and neck being hit hard by anything up to 130kgs arriving legally through the “gate” at high speed. It is extremely dangerous. What’s the answer here?
Well, again, part of it is to be found in the laws which state that a player cannot go off his feet at the breakdown, nor collapse it. If enforced, that would require the arriving player to bind onto the poacher and attempt to push him off the ball – not easy, and it may give the poacher a better chance to turnover the ball. Why not?
In turn, that might result in fewer arriving players joining the ruck. Of course, there would be consequences but would they all be bad?
They wouldn’t. It’s not hard to imagine ball carriers being less inclined to charge into contact without the assurance that their next wave of support can blow the poacher away.
Another concern may be that less players joining would increase the numbers in the defensive line. Maybe. But equally a quick turnover would lead to faster ball for attack, and that might well balance the books.
If World Rugby can come up with a solution along these lines then a huge step in the right direction will have been made in making the game safer, across all levels. It has to be done.
Practice of poaching
An alternative solution is to cease the practice of poaching completely, which would be a very major change to the mode of play. It would require all players to stay on their feet and drive over and past the ball. While there may be some in favour of this, it would be much harder to control the velocity and force of one or more opposing players driving into each other to get past the ball first.
I am sure the “caterpillar” ruck will also be addressed by the meeting. There are all sorts of solutions that are available, such as referees calling “use it” quicker. But this would still allow an extra player to come in and clear the ball within the time limit.
The extra player or, worse, players, are not there to help to win the ruck or even to push. Their sole purpose is to extend its length, and it is a relatively new phenomenon. The idea behind it is to put greater distance between the kicking scrumhalf and the opposition backrow, enabling a lower trajectory of kick with greater distance achieved.
So, probably an addition to law is needed – outlawing any extra players from joining once the ball is clearly won and at the back of the ruck.
Back to the breakdown for a moment – in implementing the necessary change in direction I don’t think anyone wishes to see more protocols written for referees to follow with slide-rule precision.
The game is anything but precise, and requires a balance between the letter of the law and judgment. Those who best achieve this balance are the elite.
Referees must be a lot more than protocol processors.
It all needs to be in accordance with the laws of the game – including offside, which often comes into play at side entry. Then, by all means, produce video clips which demonstrate the written word; not clips which bend and break the law.
Because so much is already in law and as it is also a safety issue, there should be no need for this to undergo a trial. It should be introduced without delay.
Key to this whole thing is that all officials know the laws inside out and they must accept and be prepared to implement these fully without fear or favour.
Not pushing the boundaries until they no longer exist.
Owen Doyle is a former Test referee and former director of referees with the IRFU
