The spiral started 30 years ago in 1992, when the blundering Laws Committee abandoned the law which gave possession after indeterminate rucks and mauls to the team which had been going forward at the time. So, the other team got the next scrum feed, a corruption of everything rugby was.
It's rare these days to see an unplayable ruck at the top level with refs finding a penalty or saying "let it come", but I'm sure the feed still would go to the team going forward?
So, try this. Replacements reduced from five to eight: three front-row forwards, one further forward and one back. This would bring back what we used to call the utility player — on a huge salary. And real scrums absolutely must return after the depowering of the decades.
Uh, "reducing" from five to eight subs?
There's no way the game will go back to boots on body and smashy-smashy scrums.
... but I'm all for no hands at the breakdown, stepping over with someone to pass away as one or two have been advocating on here for a while.
Last edited by Niegs on Sun Sep 25, 2022 1:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Rugby no longer caters to all shapes and sizes, only monsters – here is how we can get back to proper game
Stephen Jones
How compelling were the two recent South Africa-New Zealand games? But they were also brutal, smash after smash in what seemed to be a million tackles. Rugby was never, ever meant to be like that.
Danger? High. Light and shade? Nowhere. Space for the gifted individual? Drastically limited. Depressingly, the sport no longer caters to all shapes and sizes — only monsters.
Why has this happened? How can we revert to the proper game? The spiral started 30 years ago in 1992, when the blundering Laws Committee abandoned the law which gave possession after indeterminate rucks and mauls to the team which had been going forward at the time. So, the other team got the next scrum feed, a corruption of everything rugby was.
Ruck and mauls were no longer so important, so almost all the forwards were released to simply line up across the field. The sublime David Campese reflected that he kept being tackled in the newly packed field by “a bunch of props”. The shape and the rhythm changed utterly, as the two teams strung out in parallel lines.
This was where the brutality came in. Because forwards were no longer committed and were strung out, the game became an endless series of head-down bashing, with more than three times as many tackles as previously — treble the chance of a head blow — just to try to clear the field of defenders.
Then there are the monstrous regiments on the substitutes’ bench. With more than half the starters likely to be replaced, teams are often relatively fresh at the end and that robs rugby of so, so much. “We must reintroduce fatigue into rugby,” Eddie Jones says, and he is so absolutely right. Fatigue creates space in which attacking backs can operate.
So, try this. Replacements reduced from five to eight: three front-row forwards, one further forward and one back. This would bring back what we used to call the utility player — on a huge salary. And real scrums absolutely must return after the depowering of the decades.
More yet! Rucking must come back. Yes, rucking. The ruck clears the pitch of lingering players better than 30 head-down smashes; it is a dynamic phase. The game was much quicker and less grinding when the players could ruck.
Jackalling must be banned — no hands on the ball at the tackle, no pressure on referees to rule on the jackal being on his feet or leaning on bodies. Sam Warburton, a brilliant jackal, speaks well of the dangers inherent in the practice.
And what about this? No box-kicks needed. Who on the planet would miss them?
The fear that head injuries will be caused as the studs crash down on prone heads? Nonsense. Rucks very rarely led to serious injury. All the blood from heads appeared because referees and administrators failed to crack down when rucking became assault by upraised boots. Every player who ever played and every referee and television match official know the vast difference between stamping on a player, and rucking. Stamping is a long ban, rucking a salvation.
They are so few true professors of rugby law around anymore; no Syd Millar, no Lee Smith, no global view, only piecemeal reactions. But how visionary is World Rugby? Can it get ahead? Has it the guts to slash match squads, to return a host of forwards to the forward battle?
You are welcome to tell me why the measures would not work, and also explain why you like your sport so brutal.
Raggs wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 5:34 pm
Not even going to read it, it's clearly just guff for clicks.
Well, quite.
The reason props were lining up in midfield defence was because the game went pro and adopted Rugby League defences - that was the easiest first step and it was one that was bound to happen when we went to livelihoods being on the line for losing, but I don't want to lose the point that Rugby League defences were far superior to ours.
I actually like his ideas... though why he thinks scrums have become depowered over the decades I don't know.. scrums used to be like a League scrum now.. just a restart... plus I agree about reducing the number of subs... and should be for injury only...
But I like the idea of rucking.. and no jackals.. and no box kicks!
This is nonsense, the game is all about the breakdown, you get players, coaches and experts saying so week in week out over decades and yet rucks aren't so important?
The maul is so inconsequential that teams kick to the corner at every opportunity to get their maul going - how many hookers these days have a high try tally compared to those playing at 10, 12, 13?
I've already posted about the defence.
The head injuries and concussions are a result of professionalism and players getting bigger - League doesn't have a better record than us.
The huge increase in numbers of tackles probably coincides with ball-in-play time as professional hand skills took over from training under floodlights twice a week in the pissing rain.
The only part of the article I agree with is the ruck - if you have to play the ball with your feet you don't get 120kg missiles launching at prone players.
If we get the game playing faster the big lumps won't be playing at the pro level
Grandpa wrote: Sun Sep 04, 2022 8:36 pm
I actually like his ideas... though why he thinks scrums have become depowered over the decades I don't know.. scrums used to be like a League scrum now.. just a restart... plus I agree about reducing the number of subs... and should be for injury only...
But I like the idea of rucking.. and no jackals.. and no box kicks!
If it wasn't S Jones, I'd be wondering why tf anyone who's watched a bit of rugby the years would say such a thing. Rugby scrums were once much quicker in forming and concluding, assuming no resets / penalty, albeit a bit looser. More to the point, they were a genuine contest for possession to the extent refs enforced straight put-ins.
The fact the side with the put-in usually gained possession proves that having the loose head confers real advantage; it does not mean the contest was merely notional. (The same was true of league scrums back when they were still contestable).
MungoMan wrote: Mon Sep 05, 2022 1:40 amIf it wasn't S Jones, I'd be wondering why tf anyone who's watched a bit of rugby the years would say such a thing. Rugby scrums were once much quicker in forming and concluding, assuming no resets / penalty, albeit a bit looser. More to the point, they were a genuine contest for possession to the extent refs enforced straight put-ins.
The fact the side with the put-in usually gained possession proves that having the loose head confers real advantage; it does not mean the contest was merely notional. (The same was true of league scrums back when they were still contestable).
Yep, scrums were far quicker 30+ years ago.
So, try this. Replacements reduced from five to eight: three front-row forwards, one further forward and one back.
Depressingly, the sport no longer caters to all shapes and sizes — only monsters.
Was it another Stephen "you don't win anything with kids" Jones who decried any and all flair players as flash in the pan dandies who'd get found out playing against the bigger boys?
I thought they'd put him out to pasture after he made a total arse of himself over the summer tours, but sadly not.
Depressingly, the sport no longer caters to all shapes and sizes — only monsters.
Was it another Stephen "you don't win anything with kids" Jones who decried any and all flair players as flash in the pan dandies who'd get found out playing against the bigger boys?
I thought they'd put him out to pasture after he made a total arse of himself over the summer tours, but sadly not.
Ask Jeff Tordo or Doddie Weir if they think its a good idea. Shameful acts by Garry Pagel and Marius Bosman took them out in SA. As a Saffer I'm conflicted about the old days. Proud of our savagery but ashamed of the consequences. A 130kg modern forward could do a considerable amount of damage with his shoe. If the law said that rucking of a no.9 was allowed... I'd be all for that though.
Paddington Bear wrote: Mon Sep 05, 2022 9:50 am
Sport struggling with concussion related issues reinvents itself by allowing people to stamp on prone body parts
Not sure I completely see the link here. Even when rucking became too much like stamping the head was very much off limits even for most nutters.
All the money you made will never buy back your soul
The notion that "proper" rucking was an effective deterrent that helped speed up the game is total bollocks anyway. Firstly, the game is faster than it ever was, with the ball in play for longer, and secondly, the fact that people had to stamp on one another suggests it didn't work. I got shoed a fair bit in my playing days, and even suffered a nasty head injury from "proper" rucking, and the threat of some cunt stamping on me had sod all effect on how I played the game.
Similarly, the notion that "it did no harm in the good old days so it won't do now" ignores the fact that players are much bigger and stronger than they were back then, hence the increase in injuries from stuff that didn't used to have an impact.
Paddington Bear wrote: Mon Sep 05, 2022 9:50 am
Sport struggling with concussion related issues reinvents itself by allowing people to stamp on prone body parts
Not sure I completely see the link here. Even when rucking became too much like stamping the head was very much off limits even for most nutters.
I'm not convinced parents will love the idea of sending their kids to play a sport where 'proper rucking' is caught on slow mo footage.
Old men forget: yet all shall be forgot, But he'll remember with advantages, What feats he did that day
Paddington Bear wrote: Mon Sep 05, 2022 9:50 am
Sport struggling with concussion related issues reinvents itself by allowing people to stamp on prone body parts
Not sure I completely see the link here. Even when rucking became too much like stamping the head was very much off limits even for most nutters.
I'm not convinced parents will love the idea of sending their kids to play a sport where 'proper rucking' is caught on slow mo footage.
Not quite sure how I'm going to coach my kids on the best techniques of stamping on the opposition...
Give a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
Brazil wrote: Mon Sep 05, 2022 10:27 am
The notion that "proper" rucking was an effective deterrent that helped speed up the game is total bollocks anyway. Firstly, the game is faster than it ever was, with the ball in play for longer, and secondly, the fact that people had to stamp on one another suggests it didn't work. I got shoed a fair bit in my playing days, and even suffered a nasty head injury from "proper" rucking, and the threat of some cunt stamping on me had sod all effect on how I played the game.
Similarly, the notion that "it did no harm in the good old days so it won't do now" ignores the fact that players are much bigger and stronger than they were back then, hence the increase in injuries from stuff that didn't used to have an impact.
TLDR: Jones is an arsehole.
Can't we just have rucking under the theme that there are no hands in the ruck, ever? Forget the stamping... just make it that you have to clear the ruck legally to get the ball... and make hands on the ball illegal... the ball has to be "out" before it can be played...
Brazil wrote: Mon Sep 05, 2022 10:27 am
The notion that "proper" rucking was an effective deterrent that helped speed up the game is total bollocks anyway. Firstly, the game is faster than it ever was, with the ball in play for longer, and secondly, the fact that people had to stamp on one another suggests it didn't work. I got shoed a fair bit in my playing days, and even suffered a nasty head injury from "proper" rucking, and the threat of some cunt stamping on me had sod all effect on how I played the game.
Similarly, the notion that "it did no harm in the good old days so it won't do now" ignores the fact that players are much bigger and stronger than they were back then, hence the increase in injuries from stuff that didn't used to have an impact.
TLDR: Jones is an arsehole.
Can't we just have rucking under the theme that there are no hands in the ruck, ever? Forget the stamping... just make it that you have to clear the ruck legally to get the ball... and make hands on the ball illegal... the ball has to be "out" before it can be played...
I'd absolutely agree with that. It's interesting that even without that rule counter-rucking has become more of a force in the game.
Brazil wrote: Mon Sep 05, 2022 10:27 am
The notion that "proper" rucking was an effective deterrent that helped speed up the game is total bollocks anyway. Firstly, the game is faster than it ever was, with the ball in play for longer, and secondly, the fact that people had to stamp on one another suggests it didn't work. I got shoed a fair bit in my playing days, and even suffered a nasty head injury from "proper" rucking, and the threat of some cunt stamping on me had sod all effect on how I played the game.
Similarly, the notion that "it did no harm in the good old days so it won't do now" ignores the fact that players are much bigger and stronger than they were back then, hence the increase in injuries from stuff that didn't used to have an impact.
TLDR: Jones is an arsehole.
Can't we just have rucking under the theme that there are no hands in the ruck, ever? Forget the stamping... just make it that you have to clear the ruck legally to get the ball... and make hands on the ball illegal... the ball has to be "out" before it can be played...
I'd absolutely agree with that. It's interesting that even without that rule counter-rucking has become more of a force in the game.
I like how counter rucking has become a thing again... and if hands were made illegal it would be a lot easier for players to stay on their feet.... and counter rucking would flourish...
I broadly sympathise, but the questions that exercise me are:
If you have a tackle in open play, and a defender who was not involved in the tackle arrives with no other attackers anywhere near, are they not allowed to pick the ball up?
And if they are allowed to pick the ball up, how does that differ from the current laws?
The problem at the moment is that the first defender grabs for the ball a split second before the first attacker arrives, the tackled player resists briefly, and now there's a ruckish mess with two people holding the ball, one of whom is bent double and it's dubious if they are supporting their own bodyweight.
I want a sort of "you can only try and pick the ball up if there's no chance of anyone from the attacking team entering the tackle area before you've got it" law, but that's going to be a complete nightmare to officiate.
My other option would be to say that the first person from the defending team may never pick the ball up at the tackle, they can only drive over it and wait for a second defender to pick it up, but that could lead to some peculiar situations...
Not sure I completely see the link here. Even when rucking became too much like stamping the head was very much off limits even for most nutters.
I'm not convinced parents will love the idea of sending their kids to play a sport where 'proper rucking' is caught on slow mo footage.
Not quite sure how I'm going to coach my kids on the best techniques of stamping on the opposition...
if it's coached well it's not a stamp. I'd rather see my kids play a game with rucking than see one of them bent over a ball as a player arrives at full pace and hits them on the neck.
All the money you made will never buy back your soul
I'm not convinced parents will love the idea of sending their kids to play a sport where 'proper rucking' is caught on slow mo footage.
Not quite sure how I'm going to coach my kids on the best techniques of stamping on the opposition...
if it's coached well it's not a stamp. I'd rather see my kids play a game with rucking than see one of them bent over a ball as a player arrives at full pace and hits them on the neck.
What's to stop it being a stamp? Surely a stamp would be more effective?
Give a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
Not quite sure how I'm going to coach my kids on the best techniques of stamping on the opposition...
if it's coached well it's not a stamp. I'd rather see my kids play a game with rucking than see one of them bent over a ball as a player arrives at full pace and hits them on the neck.
What's to stop it being a stamp? Surely a stamp would be more effective?
Rucking was defined as a backward movement of the foot, whereas a stamp was straight down. The rucking motion would hopefully move the body quickly out the way, the stamp would just hurt them and, as Brazil said, usually just encourage you to be an even bigger pain in the arse.
I take it you didn't play during those times? Not being a smart arse, just asking.
All the money you made will never buy back your soul
if it's coached well it's not a stamp. I'd rather see my kids play a game with rucking than see one of them bent over a ball as a player arrives at full pace and hits them on the neck.
What's to stop it being a stamp? Surely a stamp would be more effective?
Rucking was defined as a backward movement of the foot, whereas a stamp was straight down. The rucking motion would hopefully move the body quickly out the way, the stamp would just hurt them and, as Brazil said, usually just encourage you to be an even bigger pain in the arse.
I take it you didn't play during those times? Not being a smart arse, just asking.
I didn't. Do you genuinely think that moving your foot backwards could genuinely drag a body clear, or it was still mostly the body themselves moving out the way that cleared the route? It seems like the idea behind rucking was that it hurt, so you didn't want to be in the way. Rather than someone having the physical capability of dragging you out of the way with their foot?
Give a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
Well Walrus is a tosser and I'm not interested on clicking on his bait.
The game is now professional, so of course everyone is trying their hardest to find a way to win at every type of play / set piece. Careers and salaries depend on it, not just a bit of extra boot money, pride for your club and the prospect of international call up - as was once the case.
I don't honestly know whether he actually watches any rugby now (or cares about it), but his arguments are just tosh.
Scrums depowered?! The reason we have slower engagement protocols is an attempt to reduce and manage the impact on the front rows' necks... because the power and weight has increased so much since the dawn of professionalism. It's ludicrous to suggest otherwise.
It's great to read that rucks are light on serious injuries... so let's change it up and increase the injury risk?! No thank you. It's actually pretty clear that rucks are still dangerous when it comes to lower limb injuries, hence the law clarification/amendment this year to prevent weight being brought to bear below the hips through croc rolls etc.
I think it was a bit of both - I remember the All Blacks back in the early 90s could absolutely rocket people out the back of rucks. Two or three of them would rush into the ruck and the player would come rolling out as if the ABs were running on a cylinder. I suspect some of that motion was self propelled once two or three pairs of boots started scratching at you...
Mahoney wrote: Mon Sep 05, 2022 1:48 pm
I think it was a bit of both - I remember the All Blacks back in the early 90s could absolutely rocket people out the back of rucks. Two or three of them would rush into the ruck and the player would come rolling out as if the ABs were running on a cylinder. I suspect some of that motion was self propelled once two or three pairs of boots started scratching at you...
Seriously, how much force do you think you can generate raking a foot back? Find a 20/25kg bag of cement and try and move that with a raking foot. The chances of doing much to a full grown, often large, adult is slim.
I've watched footage from those days too, and in general, it was bloody dire. Rucks weren't fast, they were a goddamn mess.
Give a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
Mahoney wrote: Mon Sep 05, 2022 12:21 pm
I broadly sympathise, but the questions that exercise me are:
If you have a tackle in open play, and a defender who was not involved in the tackle arrives with no other attackers anywhere near, are they not allowed to pick the ball up?
And if they are allowed to pick the ball up, how does that differ from the current laws?
The problem at the moment is that the first defender grabs for the ball a split second before the first attacker arrives, the tackled player resists briefly, and now there's a ruckish mess with two people holding the ball, one of whom is bent double and it's dubious if they are supporting their own bodyweight.
I want a sort of "you can only try and pick the ball up if there's no chance of anyone from the attacking team entering the tackle area before you've got it" law, but that's going to be a complete nightmare to officiate.
My other option would be to say that the first person from the defending team may never pick the ball up at the tackle, they can only drive over it and wait for a second defender to pick it up, but that could lead to some peculiar situations...
Or - if a ruck has not formed, the tackler or another person from the defending team may play the ball with their foot in any direction, after which they may pick it up.
Keep the players on their feet. Tackler release tackler, who releases the ball. Immediately. No playing the ball on the ground. Any "clean out" that collapses the ruck to be penalised. Straight scrum feeds. Straight (forward) scrumming. Stamping/treading players disallowed.
The recipe is there, but WR is amoured with "contest for the ball" while players dive around like ninepins ..
Paddington Bear wrote: Mon Sep 05, 2022 9:50 am
Sport struggling with concussion related issues reinvents itself by allowing people to stamp on prone body parts
Not sure I completely see the link here. Even when rucking became too much like stamping the head was very much off limits even for most nutters.
I'm not convinced parents will love the idea of sending their kids to play a sport where 'proper rucking' is caught on slow mo footage.
"It's done a serious injury to Senatla," Stormers coach John Dobson confirmed after the match.
While the initial concern was that Senatla could have sustained a concussion or a neck injury, Dobson confirmed that Aki's cleanout had actually injured Senatla's shoulder and pectoral muscle, given his position in the ruck.
"I feel a bit sorry for Aki, because I know what he's trying to do. It's tough, but we can't have Senatla out for the season," he added.
"We'll scan him tomorrow [Sunday]. Rugby is just evolving fast ... big people moving fast."
Connacht director of rugby Andy Friend, meanwhile, had no complaints over the decision.
"There is contact to the head, so we need to protect players, bottom line. So, it's a red card," said Friend.
"My only frustration is that we had a player [Senatla] who was not supporting his own body weight, so it's an illegal act. And then we have a player who comes in, but you shouldn't hit the bloke in the head.
"The bottom line is we need to protect players, and there was contact to the head.
"It's hard enough to beat the Stormers away from home, but with 14 men, it makes it very hard."
