Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

In defence of Eddie Jones' call to change the ruck laws

England captain Dylan Hartley talking to referee Romain Poite

Yes, Italy should be praised for their smart anti-ruck tactic. But now World Rugby needs to change the game’s laws so they can never do it again, writes James Harrington.

ADVERTISEMENT

The laughter that followed England’s struggle to counter Italy’s ‘fox’ anti-ruck policy in the third round of the 2017 Six Nations was soon drowned out by anger and disbelief as Eddie Jones suggested the laws should be changed.

Critics pointed out that Italy broke none of rugby’s laws – which they didn’t. Their tactic was both smart and legal. Jones the Fox was outfoxed for once, they said – which he was, for 40 minutes at least. Conor O’Shea deserves all the praise in the world for daring to be different. Jones should put up and shut up, they insisted. No, he shouldn’t.

Many have also argued that the England players should have been more aware of the laws of the game they play, quicker to react to Italian tactics, and generally more streetwise about the whole thing. There is no doubt that those wearing white shirts at Twickenham on that day were culpable of what could be termed, in this jargon-packed world, as Sensible Reaction Inertia.

But, make no mistake, what Italy did against England has never been done before. Yes, the no-ruck-no-offside ploy is well known, and a rugby smartarse near you will no doubt be listing all the times it has been used: David Pocock did it against Ireland, they’ll say; as did the Chiefs; it’s been around the sevens circuit since 2012; Wasps also used it against Toulouse in the European Champions Cup … then, in an aside, they may even argue that fact alone really means that James Haskell and Nathan Hughes should have recognised it much earlier.

[rugbypass-ad-banner id=”1485479950″]

Tell them to stop. Maybe even remind them that they were screaming ‘OFFSIDE!’ at the TV like almost everyone else before an even bigger smartarse pointed out the sheer cunning of ‘The Fox’. The tactic has been used before, but no side before Italy had employed it so intensively, so often, and so brazenly. Pocock did it once, Chiefs used it sporadically, and usually at restarts, and Wasps’ Hughes was as surprised as anyone when he tried it against Toulouse.

Italy, on the other hand, did it time and time and time again. For more than half the match. That’s an extreme use of a loophole – and that alone is why World Rugby should seriously consider changing the relevant law.

ADVERTISEMENT

There is a precedent for this.

The kick to touch has been an accepted and standard tactic since forever. But, in 1963, Welsh scrum-half Clive Rowlands belted the ball out of play so often that there were more than 100 lineouts in an otherwise unmemorable Five Nations encounter between Scotland and Wales at Murrayfield.

At the time, kicks could go out on the full from anywhere on the pitch, and the lineout would be taken from the point the ball crossed the touchline. But, following that match, the law was reviewed and – eventually (rugby’s powers that be always were a conservative bunch) – modified to the one known and accepted today, in which players can only kick a ball out on the full if they are inside their own 22, otherwise the lineout will be taken in line with the point from which the ball was kicked.

Even that law has been modified to stop teams taking the ball into their own 22 before passing it to the player with the biggest howitzer boot … But that’s by-the-by.

The point is the Welsh hoof-and-hoof again ploy in that one game in 1963, though entirely within the laws of rugby, was so extreme and affected play to such an extent that it prompted a change in rugby’s laws.

ADVERTISEMENT

The same is true of Italy’s anti-ruck tactics at Twickenham in 2017. Conor O’Shea and Brendan Venter should be applauded for their smarts – and for giving England a tactical shoeing for the better part of an hour. Then the law should be changed so it cannot be repeated.

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

O
Oh no, not him again? 2 hours ago
England internationals disagree on final play execution vs All Blacks

Okay, so we blew it big time on Saturday. So rather than repeating what most people have all ready said, what do I want to see from Borthwick going forward?


Let's keep Marcus Smith on the pitch if he's fit and playing well. I was really pleased with his goal kicking. It used to be his weakness. I feel sympathy for George Ford who hadn't kicked all match and then had a kick to win the game. You hear pundits and commentators commend kickers who have come off the bench and pulled that off. Its not easy. If Steve B continues to substitute players with no clear reason then he is going to get criticised.


On paper I thought England would beat NZ if they played to their potential and didn't show NZ too much respect. Okay, the off the ball tackles certainly stopped England scoring tries, but I would have liked to see more smashing over gainlines and less kicking for position. Yes, I also know it's the Springbok endorsed world cup double winning formula but the Kiwi defence isn't the Bok defence, is it. If you have the power to put Smith on the front foot then why muzzle him? I guess what I'm saying is back, yourself. Why give the momentum to a team like NZ? Why feed the beast? Don't give the ball to NZ. Well d'uh.


Our scrum is a long term weakness. If you are going to play Itoje then he needs an ogre next door and a decent front row. Where is our third world class lock? Where are are realible front row bench replacements? The England scrum has been flakey for a while now. It blows hot and cold. Our front five bench is not world class.


On the positive side I love our starting backrow right now. I'd like to see them stick together through to the next world cup.


Anyway, there is always another Saturday.

7 Go to comments
C
CO 3 hours ago
Scott Robertson responds to criticism over All Blacks' handling errors

Robertson is more a manager of coaches than a coach so it comes down to intent of outcomes at a high level. I like his intent, I like the fact his Allblacks are really driving the outcomes however as he's pointed out the high error rates are not test level and their control of the game is driving both wins and losses. England didn't have to play a lot of rugby, they made far fewer mistakes and were extremely unlucky not to win.


In fact the English team were very early in their season and should've been comfortably beaten by an Allblacks team that had played multiple tests together.


Razor has himself recognised that to be the best they'll have to sort out the crisis levels of mistakes that have really increased since the first two tests against England.


Early tackles were a classic example of hyper enthusiasm to not give an inch, that passion that Razor has achieved is going to be formidable once the unforced errors are eliminated.


That's his secret, he's already rebuilt the passion and that's the most important aspect, its inevitable that he'll now eradicate the unforced errors. When that happens a fellow tier one nation is going to get thrashed. I don't think it will be until 2025 though.


The Allblacks will lose both tests against Ireland and France if they play high error rates rugby like they did against England.


To get the unforced errors under control he's going to be needing to handover the number eight role to Sititi and reset expectations of what loose forwards do. Establish a clear distinction with a large, swarthy lineout jumper at six that is a feared runner and dominant tackler and a turnover specialist at seven that is abrasive in contact. He'll then need to build depth behind the three starters and ruthlessly select for that group to be peaking in 2027 in hit Australian conditions on firm, dry grounds.


It's going to help him that Savea is shifting to the worst super rugby franchise where he's going to struggle behind a beaten pack every week.


The under performing loose forward trio is the key driver of the high error rates and unacceptable turn overs due to awol link work. Sititi is looking like he's superman compared to his openside and eight.


At this late stage in the season they shouldn't be operating with just the one outstanding loose forward out of four selected for the English test. That's an abject failure but I think Robertson's sacrificing link quality on purpose to build passion amongst the junior Allblacks as they see the reverential treatment the old warhorses are receiving for their long term hard graft.


It's unfortunately losing test matches and making what should be comfortable wins into nail biters but it's early in the world cup cycle so perhaps it's a sacrifice worth making.


However if this was F1 then Sam Cane would be Riccardo and Ardie would be heading into Perez territory so the loose forwards desperately need revitalisation through a rebuild over the next season to complement the formidable tight five.

28 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ 'There will be no honeymoon period for Borthwick's wedding usher El-Abd' 'There will be no honeymoon period for Borthwick's wedding usher El-Abd'
Search