BIASED REF

Category: Sportelizabeth

Date Added: 2 March 2010

Aargh! It's happened again. New rugby season, eagerly awaited, and the first few weeks spent trying to figure out exactly what laws now apply and what the interpretation of those laws by referees will be. When will they ever stop? The IRB, I mean? Why is it not possible to just decide on the laws once and for all and then have everyone under their jurisdiction play according to those? No other game known to man, not even the "he-who-owns-the-bat-makes-whatever-rules-he-wants" backyard cricket I played with the neighbour's kids as a boy ever saw such constant and persistent  (and unnecessary)fiddling and tinkering  an odious and annoying practise particularly prevalent since the advent of professionalism. At first I was inclined to actually buy into all the technical arguments that the advocates of change put forward each year as to why their law amendments would improve the game I love but now it's become more than just a little bit farcical. One year you can't collapse a maul, the next year you can. And then the year after that you once again can't. What exactly is the point of all that? Lineouts  when can you support the jumper and when can't you? And don't even get me started on the breakdown  annual alterations, both big and small, to the laws and their interpretation have still not changed the fact that the referee can penalise whoever he damn well feels like when it comes to this area.  Tackler didn't role away, tackled player didn't release the ball, supporting player (attacker or defender) went to straight to ground, supporting player (attacker or defender) didn't enter the ruck from behind the last feet, any player (attacker or defender) used a hand in the ruck. Pick who you'd like to penalise and blow accordingly. Not even those nasty ELV's (experimental law variations) so beloved by our Antipodean cousins could resolve that lot!

I must admit I was a little surprised to discover, upon investigation, that the majority of the law changes proposed over the past decade had, in fact, their roots in Australia and (to a lesser extent) New Zealand. I'd just assumed that all this messing with the game was due to a bunch of bored "old farts" (to quote Will Carling) indulging their own personal whims and hare-brained theories on the sport but it seems it's the younger set Down Under who are actually to blame. Unable to fully appreciate the nuances and entertainment value of an arm-wrestled 10-all draw between two well-matched opponents, this supporter demographic wants nothing less than non-stop action  and that means tries. And lots of them. At the expense of almost anything else."Fail to give them that and we lose them to other sports, like rugby league and Aussie Rules," say the voices from the ARU. "It's incumbent on us to grow the sport in our country. We must change the laws to make the game more exciting"

Now the assumption that that argument makes, that the rugby game that delivers the most tries is necessarily the most exciting, is just absurd.  15-6 Springbok win over the All Blacks or 104nil mauling of Italy? Anyone? And why is their struggle to compete with Aussie Rules any more the rest of the rugby-playing world's responsibility than, say, England Rugby having to compete with soccer for attention in their country? Australian coach Robbie Deans was quoted as saying that the Chiefs early season 72-65 Super 14 win over the Lions was "close to perfection." Close to basketball more like. It was a ragged playground game of little beauty, many mistakes and almost no organised defence. Defence has always been an important part of the skill-set required by rugby and to manipulate that out of the game is to change it from rugby union into some other new sport. Defence has also been one of the strongest features of Springbok teams since began to play the game and there are those who wonder, a little mischievously, whether the real reason the Aussies (and, to a lesser extent, New Zealand) keep pushing for changes that will negate this aspect of play is to weaken the hand of an old enemy. Personally, I'm happy to reserve judgement on that one (for now!)but I would lobby that we stop all this nonsense once and for all now and leave the Laws of Rugby alone. Play it as lies. I'm proposing a new law that outlaws new laws.