Breaking up the breakdown

Heinrich Brüssow, South Africa’s answer to the like of Richie McCaw, George Smith, Phil Waugh, Daniel Braid and Adam Thomson, will have to “adapt or die” in this year’s Super 14.

Brüssow, who made such an impression in his first season of international rugby last year with his ability to “steal” the ball at the breakdown, is one of those who will find the referees on his case in terms of a new instruction, or shift in interpretation, decided on by SANZAR.

In what smack of an admission of culpability referees have been told to tighten up on the way they blow the breakdown in an effort not only to speed up the game by eliminating the “jacklers” but also to address the most vexed facet of the game – what’s legal at a tackle.

Referees have also been instructed to concentrate on the scrum and we’ve seen them wearing a third eye (a camera strapped to their craniums) but the most significant adjustment could well turn out to be referees putting tacklers on a tight leash.

The key change is that the tackler will no longer have unfettered rights to the ball because, I can’t resist saying, referees will be “blowing the law as it is written.”

Kiwi Lyndon Bray, SANZAR’s new referee’s manager in fact admitted as much in an interview with Tony Robson of Wellington’s Dominion Post while giving a run-down on the latest episode if the laws being tweaked.

"We've agreed philosophically to change what the tackler can and can't do," Bray said. "He is doing too much. We've allowed, in the evolution of the game, to let him remain in contact with the ball and ball carrier after he leaves his feet and he stays on the ball and jumps up and rips it away.

"It looks great in the one-on-one scenario, but it's actually against the law. It creates in the game a repetitive scenario where the ball carrier ends up with no rights because he can't do anything with the ball.

"The tackler inevitability gets the penalty which philosophically goes against what we are trying to achieve. We've agreed the tackler must release everything when he goes to ground and not hold on as he gets to his feet."

Players not making a clean release after the tackle and getting fully to their feet before going for the ball will be penalised.

The result of this should be that the tackled player should have more time to either pop the ball to a support player or to place it while their should be fewer pile-ups caused by the tackler attached, limpit-like, to the ball carrier as well as the overly violent “cleaning out” that has crept into the game.

It turns out that the changes are the result of a meeting last year between referees and three coaches representing the Super 14 teams – Todd Blackadder (Crusaders), Rassie Erasmus (Stormers) and David Nucifora (Brumbies).

The four key areas referees have been told to tighten up on are:

Tackled Ball:

“The tackler, once hitting the ground in the tackle, must release the ball and the ball carrier. This gives the ball carrier a chance to ‘play the ball’, and will tidy up the tackle-ball area which has previously been weighted towards the tackler. As well, any player involved in helping make a tackle, who is in contact with the ball carrier when he is taken to ground, must then release the ball, before then attempting to contest possession, even if he is on his feet. This ensures that in Super 14, we are truly refereeing the Law at the tackle, and it provides the ball carrier with his rights, having been tackled. After this tackle, any player then on his feet, in a position of strength (his side of the tackle) may then contest possession.”

Scrum engagement:

“The scrum engagement must follow a true sequence, starting with all props required to touch, on the touch call. Props must also have their head and shoulders above their hips, and then hit straight on engagement. This enhances the chance of the scrum being contestable, and to stay up resulting in less resets.”

Players in front of the kicker:

“Players will be forced to comply with standing still or retiring in relation to being in front of the kicker. This will see referees calling for a player to stop advancing – if he continues to advance, he will be penalised and players must retire from within 10m of the receiver of a kick – otherwise an immediate penalty will be given where these players look to contest the kick. The objective is that this will improve the time and space for players to counter attack, when receiving kicks in general play, and reducing some of the aerial ping pong people we have been seeing in rugby.”

Formation of the maul:

“At the time that a maul is formed, players supporting the ball carrier will not be allowed to obstruct the opposition. This is intended to at least make the maul defendable at the set up stage.”

Bray said these initiatives are a return to the laws of the game (see my column “It’s just not rugby”) and do not represent any change in law, but are simply limiting room for interpretation and should create clarity and certainty for coaches, players, officials and fans.

It’s a move in the right direction, in theory at least. Let’s see whether the referees are able to stick to their guns in practice because a number of players (refer to my intro) are going to be penalised a great deal if the standard is to be imposed.