Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Diamond demands law change while accusing Tigers of illegal activity

Steve Diamond/ PA

Newcastle Falcons consultant director of rugby Steve Diamond wants to outlaw the driving maul from an attacking five metre lineout to improve the spectacle for fans.

ADVERTISEMENT

The former Worcester Warriors boss has also claimed Leicester Tigers, who arrive at Kingston Park on Friday night, use illegal blockers when they implement this try-scoring tactic.

Leicester scored three tries in their 27-25 loss to Gloucester last Friday night with all of them coming from driving mauls close to the opposition try line. Diamond is promoting the idea of stopping this as a try-scoring tactic from five metres but retaining it as a lineout option elsewhere on the pitch.

Video Spacer

How do the Springboks beat Ireland in July series? | RPTV

The Boks Office on what the Springboks need to do to beat a very strong Ireland side in their series in July. Watch the full show on RugbyPass TV

Watch now

Video Spacer

How do the Springboks beat Ireland in July series? | RPTV

The Boks Office on what the Springboks need to do to beat a very strong Ireland side in their series in July. Watch the full show on RugbyPass TV

Watch now

He said: “The sooner we get the five metre maul from a lineout taken out of the game the better spectacle it will become. You cannot defend it at the moment and most of the time you never see the bloody ball put over the try line – it’s just a melee.

“Leicester must be using a new Australian technique with Dan McKellar (Tigers head coach) because they have got blockers all over those driving mauls and they are quite illegal and I am hoping the (RFU) referee department will be looking at them this week.

“They scored three driving maul tries against Gloucester and will be kicking the ball a lot against us and we are going to have a really tough game on our hands.

“One of the first things I would do is take that (five metre driving maul) out of the game. I think you should only be able to move the ball off the top of the lineout and at the moment it is the opposite of running rugby and you could say that you can kick a penalty to the corner but you have to come off the top, not maul it over.

ADVERTISEMENT

“We are trying to make the game commercially better and also better on the eye by speeding up the game but we are world class at shooting ourselves in the foot. People don’t want to see a melee of 16 people moving a metre and it’s a fantastic try! They will catch on in the end.”

Newcastle gave away 17 penalties losing 25-16 at Exeter Chiefs on Saturday and also saw two players handed yellow cards to further hamper their bid to end their winless run in the Gallagher Premiership.

“I will give the players nine penalties a match but 17 is far too many,” added Diamond.

Related

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

3 Comments
C
Clive 269 days ago

Don’t like Diamond but the maul is a joke, the sight of a choke tackle creating a maul then players in offside positions flopping on it killing the ball but then getting the put in?

Banal.

F
Flankly 269 days ago

Don’t agree about banning 5m mauls, but he is generally right that illegal blocking should be better managed. Refs are completely inconsistent about binding, offside and obstruction in mauls.

If the 5m maul is proving too hard to defend then change the rule to make it 10m.

A
A 269 days ago

Teams will just kick it 6m out then, won’t they …

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 3 hours ago
Does South Africa have a future in European competition?

I rated Lowe well enough to be an AB. Remember we were picking the likes of George Bridge above such players so theres no disputing a lot of bad decisions have been made by those last two coaches. Does a team like the ABs need a finicky winger who you have to adapt and change a lot of your style with to get benefit from? No, not really. But he still would have been a basic improvement on players like even Savea at the tail of his career, Bridge, and could even have converted into the answer of replacing Beauden at the back. Instead we persisted with NMS, Naholo, Havili, Reece, all players we would have cared even less about losing and all because Rieko had Lowe's number 11 jersey nailed down.


He was of course only 23 when he decided to leave, it was back in the beggining of the period they had started retaining players (from 2018 onwards I think, they came out saying theyre going to be more aggressive at some point). So he might, all of them, only just missed out.


The main point that Ed made is that situations like Lowe's, Aki's, JGP's, aren't going to happen in future. That's a bit of a "NZ" only problem, because those players need to reach such a high standard to be chosen by the All Blacks, were as a country like Ireland wants them a lot earlier like that. This is basically the 'ready in 3 years' concept Ireland relied on, versus the '5 years and they've left' concept' were that player is now ready to be chosen by the All Blacks (given a contract to play Super, ala SBW, and hopefully Manu).


The 'mercenary' thing that will take longer to expire, and which I was referring to, is the grandparents rule. The new kids coming through now aren't going to have as many gp born overseas, so the amount of players that can leave with a prospect of International rugby offer are going to drop dramatically at some point. All these kiwi fellas playing for a PI, is going to stop sadly.


The new era problem that will replace those old concerns is now French and Japanese clubs (doing the same as NRL teams have done for decades by) picking kids out of school. The problem here is not so much a national identity one, than it is a farm system where 9 in 10 players are left with nothing. A stunted education and no support in a foreign country (well they'll get kicked out of those countries were they don't in Australia).


It's the same sort of situation were NZ would be the big guy, but there weren't many downsides with it. The only one I can think was brought up but a poster on this site, I can't recall who it was, but he seemed to know a lot of kids coming from the Islands weren't really given the capability to fly back home during school xms holidays etc. That is probably something that should be fixed by the union. Otherwise getting someone like Fakatava over here for his last year of school definitely results in NZ being able to pick the cherries off the top but it also allows that player to develop and be able to represent Tonga and under age and possibly even later in his career. Where as a kid being taken from NZ is arguably going to be worse off in every respect other than perhaps money. Not going to develop as a person, not going to develop as a player as much, so I have a lotof sympathy for NZs case that I don't include them in that group but I certainly see where you're coming from and it encourages other countries to think they can do the same while not realising they're making a much worse experience/situation.

144 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ 'Springbok Galacticos can't go it alone for trophy-hunting Sharks' 'Springbok Galacticos can't go it alone for trophy-hunting Sharks'
Search