Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

'The laws should change NOW' - calls for action after 'horrible' Jack Willis injury

Jack Willis is carted off the pitch /Getty Images

There have been calls to change the laws around ‘crocodile rolls’ and ‘can opener’ clearouts after a brutal looking injury to England flanker Jack Willis saw him stretchered off the pitch at Twickenham today.

ADVERTISEMENT

England ran out winners against a resilient Italian side, but the injury to Willis has overshadowed the victory. Willis suffered a twisting injury to his knee and could be heard screaming in pain on the matchday audio. While the severity of the injury is not yet known, some speculate that the back row’s season could be over.

As it stands, variations of the practice are legal and are coached as an efficient technique to clear players from rucks, with video review of the incident cleared Italy of any wrongdoing.

Video Spacer

Calcutta Cup and George North v Jamie Ritchi‪e | RugbyPass Offload

Video Spacer

Calcutta Cup and George North v Jamie Ritchi‪e | RugbyPass Offload

While the technique is outlawed when used around the neck, there is still a gray area among officials when it’s used to twist torsos, judo style out of the way. Last year World Rugby attempted to address the issue, suggesting that there would be stricter officiating of laws 14 and 15 from July 2020, with particular focus on these areas:

Tackler (Law 14): 14.5 – must a) Immediately release the ball and the ball-carrier after both players go to ground and b) Immediately move away from the tackled player and from the ball or get up.

Ball Carrier (Law 14): 14.2 – Being brought to ground means that the ball-carrier is lying, sitting or has at least one knee on the ground or on another player who is on the ground. 14.5 – Tacklers must: d) Allow the tackled player to release or play the ball.

First arriving player (Law 15): 15.11 – Once a ruck has formed, no player may handle the ball unless they were able to get their hands on the ball before the ruck formed and stay on their feet. 15.12 – Players must endeavour to remain on their feet throughout the ruck.

Other arriving players (Law 15): 5 – An arriving player must be on their feet and join from behind their offside line. 6 – A player may join alongside but not in front of the hindmost player. 10 – Possession may be won either by rucking or by pushing the opposing team off the ball.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Former Scotland lock Jim Hamilton called on authorities to change the laws to clamp down the maneuver, one that former Ireland coach Joe Schmidt dubbed ‘the can opener’. “Feel sick for Jack Willis. The laws should change NOW. Don’t allow players to roll out players in Rucks. So ****ing dangerous.”

“And I rolled many players out. No criticism on players doing it. It’s currently legal. Some serious high profile injuries in the last few years. Dan Levy. Ellis Jenkins (I think) similar.”

“Why does rugby continue to allow exposed, vulnerable players on the jackal to be rolled sideways while their feet are planted?,” wrote rugby writer Jamie Lyall. “Jack Willis is one of the most flexible athletes in the game but his knees don’t bend laterally. Hideously dangerous and very avoidable.”

Rugby and the Law tweeted: “It seems an appropriate time to share this again… Jack Willis suffers a horrible knee injury after a ‘crocodile roll’ at the breakdown. By the letter of the law, it’s illegal. But the laws aren’t properly applied. Feel terrible for Willis.”

ADVERTISEMENT

A more explicit Law change could potentially outlaw the technique and leave less to referee interpretation.

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

J
JW 2 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 Return of 30-something brigade provides welcome tonic for Wales Return of 30-something brigade provides welcome tonic for Wales
Search