Here are some interesting views I found on the web regarding the much talked about rolling mauls and other tecniques teams apply on the pitch… So which country’s S14 teams are currently setting the tone at being the so called innovators ? Read and decide for yourself…
By GREG FORD – Sunday Star Times
As much as it pains Peter Thorburn to admit it, when it comes to setting trends and rugby’s playing agenda on the international stage, New Zealanders are now “followers rather than leaders”.
And what stings most is the game’s great innovators now come from, drum roll please, South Africa.
Not long ago you’d have been laughed out of the room for suggesting as much. South African rugby and cutting edge originality were never comfortable bedfellows.
With a couple of notable exceptions (Dannie Craven springs to mind) effective yet dour old-fashioned, forward-oriented play was South Africa’s lot: was being the operative word, as their rugby now reeks of innovation and progressive thinking.
Don’t believe me?
Take a look at their trophy cabinet.
The Rugby World Cup holders cleaned our clogs in last year’s Tri Nations thanks to their tactical superiority and their Super rugby franchises are going from strength-to-strength with the Bulls from Pretoria leading the charge.
Only the most optimistic Kiwi rugby fan would argue this current state of affairs is merely a cycle with South Africa enjoying a (brief) moment in the sun.
A power shift has taken place. The question is, how did it happen and how do we stop it? Both questions, if Thorburn is to believed, can be answered the same way.
“Creativity – that’s the key,” said the former All Blacks selector. “We need to be innovative.
“Don’t get me wrong. We have some fine coaches in this country who are doing their best. But I don’t think we are being creative enough. I have thought that for a while now.
“The big thing about [Graham] Henry, [Wayne] Smith and [Steve] Hansen is when they were appointed back in 2004 they brought back innovation.
“Rather than followers we became leaders again.
“You should talk to them about that some time. I know they have some views about what they are seeing this year.”
Nice idea that, to talk to the coaches. Unfortunately it won’t be possible for another couple of weeks. The All Black coaches are a no-go zone for the New Zealand media, for now. But what they are seeing this year, according to Thorburn, is the introduction of another innovation.
Nothing is new under the sun, so appropriately the old fashioned rolling maul which all but vanished from rugby is, as former All Black prop Craig Dowd colourfully put it last week is “back with a vengeance” and you guessed it, the South Africans are leading the charge, flexing their muscles and using it as an attacking platform to great effect.
Thorburn has a love-hate relationship with rolling mauls.
Go back 10 years and Thorburn was at the vanguard of writing the current set of laws that govern mauls. Back then everyone was fed up with the Brumbies and their repetitive phase-after-phase style of play.
The Brumbies were experts at exploiting the tackled ball laws of the day (sound familiar?) going to ground, often voluntarily, to protect possession. The ball carrier, back then, held all the cards. It was a common sight to see them recycle the ball 20 or more phases. It was effective but boring so the lawmakers intervened and tried to encourage players to keep their feet, and maul.
// A five-second grace period was proposed to allow teams that mauled to reset and go again if it became static. The lawmakers liked the idea so much they allowed teams to have two bites at the cherry: two five-second period instead of one.
As is the case so often in rugby, the game evolved in an organic and different direction. Mauls went out of fashion. But the overly protective laws stayed the same, and are now being exploited.
There were signs South Africa would maul more last year. But this year there has been a marked increase because sacking the maul has been banned.
“So they are basically impossible to stop,” said Thorburn.
“The point of mauling is to draw people into an area you have control over and open up space somewhere else. But the South Africans use it as a strike weapon. They have gone beyond creating space.
“Good on them. They are being imaginative.
“The best mauling I have seen so far this year was the Lions against the Highlanders last weekend.
“They did something different, they were putting 12 guys into a maul from a lineout close to the line. Even if it doesn’t work, it shows they are thinking, being imaginative and creative, using the talent you have in your team and looking how it can be used. Our guys should have been leading this from the start. But we have become followers in this area.”
The question now is, is the current state of affairs where the maul reigns supreme, just another cycle in the game to be endured?
Should we sit tight and wait it out, given we are not much chop at them, and seize upon the next trend to sweep the game?
Thorburn believes we simply can’t afford to. He believes mauling will define the game over the next couple of seasons; that our biggest foe will try to exploit their advantage at test level when the Tri Nations starts; that unless we can set a new trend that diffuses the maul, our five super rugby teams should be put on a strict diet of remedial maul training.
“Training is committing conscious acts to the subconscious. We can’t take a diverse group of guys from five franchises five days before a test if they have not been training mauling session after session and expect them to maul and counter the maul.
“I feel for the All Black coaches. They are worried about this, believe me. But they can’t go and tell the Super rugby coaches what to do. They can tell them what they are thinking. But they can’t instruct them. That would mean our five Super rugby teams were all the same.”
Mmmm, interesting perspective as we are perceived from abroad… and yes, the rolling maul is a potent striking weapon!
The number of times the Bulls came back into a game this year, employing exactly this tactic is staggering already.
It is a perfect means to play to your strenghts…
Morning gbs, now going to read this article.
2@ Puma – Hellooooooooo
Yes agree here, South African teams are way, way better at the rolling maul than any other country. Just have to look at all our teams, we dominate that area totally. Especially Bulls, Stormers, Sharks. That is our weapon and we must use it.
The other teams can complain all they want about this. This is our strength, we must use it. We are blessed with huge, big forwards, the kiwi ReUnion programme last week, all presenters there were complaining about our rolling maul, saying it was just about impossible to defend against. So be it they must find a way to stop it.
Hi all. Interesting article. Fact is we are bigger and stronger than teams from other countries and use this to our advantage. The only reason we have been beaten previously is that we have been out thought by opposing teams,the rolling maul is extremely difficult to stop when you have someone like Bakkies Botha leading the charge. Now if we can use these strengths of ours and out think opposing teams as well we will be unstoppable.
5 – Morning Winston, Agree with our rolling maul we are the best at it. Very tough to defend against it.
But then you have a look at a team like the Reds and they’re employing mad running skills, also very effective….especially when most of the opposition’s forwards are counter rucking…defensive lines crumble.
Morning folks,
I don’t know about us being bigger and stronger, Winston. Everytime they show the pack sizes, our packs appear lighter than the opposition.
So, its more about us getting our offensive mauling technique sorted. I’m not that convinced that we have mastered our defensive technique yet – remember the penalty try the Lions gave up after the Landers put together their one and only maul of the game.
Let’s not pat ourselves on the shoulder too early or for too long….
I will still maintain, the rolling maul is legalised obstruction.
No doubt it takes skill to develop and use, still legalised obstruction.
9@ Morne – So, if a rolling maul is legalised obstruction, what would you call a push-over scrum, where the ball is kept at the No 8’s feet, till everybody is over the line…. same difference… no difference…
GBS,
Massive difference.
Off-side lines are different, for instance, the ball is the off-side line for the opposing scrummy at a scrum.
Also, NO team is allowed to handle the ball in a scrum. In a maul, guys can effectively pass the ball to one another behind a barrage of bodies protecting them (in front of them) where players are also not allowed to play the ball/ball carrier directly or where the ball itself is used as the off-side line (as in a scrum).
Mauling is the only instance in rugby union where the ball carrier may not be tackled or challenged (contest for the ball) directly – it is daft in my books.
11@ Morne – I disagree… the only difference is that at scrum time the ball is handled at the feet, with a maul it is handled with the hands… sure the scrummie can creep up a bit but he’s still not allowed off-side
There are severe rules which apply to the scrum, you may not pop up, you may not work your way through to the ball handler, you may not break away till the scrum is over, hou have to take the hit, you may not deliberately swing the scrum whereas on may swing the maul… there are always 7 players between you and where the ball is held, neatly bound and packed in formation…
So, rolling mauls and scrums are part of rugby… I say it’s a good thing, both of them!
The ball can also be played with the feet in a ruck, point is, you are not allowed to play it with your hands.
There are also many laws at all phases of rugby (line-outs, rucks, etc).
The question is how can you contest for the ball?
At scrums and rucks (where they are not allowed to handle the ball)?
Easy, push them off the ball.
Can you do the same at a maul?
No, because they are handling the ball and can shift possession and if they do get shoved back, they can effectively just end the maul by giving it to the scrummy before they are blown up (hell they even get warned to use it now or lose it!!!!).
At a scrum or ruck, if you get shoved off the ball you lose possession.
And rugby is about an equal contest for possession.
At a maul, it is not.
13@ Morne – Do you think that scrums and line-outs are equal contests for possession… then why is it such a big achievement to win a tight head and why is it also a big achievement to win a lineout on the opposition throw?
Is the new interpretation of the tackle rule, where the daylight principle applies, a fair and equal contest for the ball or does it clearly favour the attacking team?
The defence against the rolling maul is to counter shove them back, as is the case with the scrum… oh and you have the additional luxury that players can work their way to the ball through the middle, there is no such luxury come scrum time.
GBS,
In rugby, in ANY situation in rugby you are allowed to contest for the ball by directly contesting the ball carrier – apart from the maul.
In a ruck, scrum, line-out (phases) there is an equal contest for the ball (you can hook a tighthead, you can jump in a line-out to win the ball where the ball is thrown into both set phases down the middle of both teams) – so equal contest for the ball slightly favouring the team in possession (which it should) because they get to throw it in but still, the ball is up for graps to both teams equally (not held in possession).
At a ruck (and scrum) too you can contest for the ball, by driving over the ball or the other team off the ball where they are not allowed to handle the ball in those phases to ensure possession even if driven back.
IN a maul, a team can put any number of players in front of the ball carrier and those players may not be tackled (bring the maul down) whether they are the ball carrier or not. Making it difficult, if not impossible to ‘drive through’ 6 to 10 bodies tightly bound to get to the ball carrier legally who is hanging off all of them at the back with a single limp arm on the last player in front of him.
Even if you do shove them back, they get warned not once, but TWICE to use the ball or lose it.
You may call this an equal contest for the ball, I certainly dont.
15@ Morne – You can colour it pink white and blue… the fact remains that rugby (as it currently stands) is not a game of game phases which is a fair contest for the ball… it never has been and it probably never will be… get used to it.
Someone who does not recognize that scrums and line-outs heavily favour the team throwing in and contends that those 2 phases (and add the new tackle rule application) are equal opportunity situations, has got blinkers on…. I mean, be serious!
You deem rolling mauls not a good thing… fair and well… but don’t give it the slant or do it under the guise of unequal opportunity, for that the rest of rugby is too full of exactly the same thing!
Come out and say it is drab forwards rugby, come and say that they can improve on it by allowing sacking or pulling down of the maul to limit it’s effectiveness… just do not contend that it is the ONLY AREA where there is no equal opportunity towards the ball…. that my friend, is ludicrous and simply not true!
OK, Pretoria se kliente roep hard, ek’s uit…. gaan mal… ek’s nou nie meer hier om balans te bring nie… hehehehe
I am very serious and have been for 4 odd years now.
A ball is thrown into the middle of the scrum, as it is into the middle of the line out.
The only advantage the team in possession has at the line out is knowing the trajectory of the ball which the other team does not, and in a scrum, the hooker is slightly closer to the ball for hooking than his opposition hooker thanks to the way the scrum packs down.
Thus, although the team in possession has a slight advantage over the opposition, the laws allow for the opposition team to contest for the ball.
And as stated, teams with possession should have a slight advantage, but not a landslide no chance in hell of losing the ball advantage while in possession.
Otherwise we can just follow league and give free kicks instead of scrums.
Techniques in scrumming, rucking, and tackling allows you to turn the ball over and win possession mainly on your ability in these areas and your technical proficiency, but also largely because the laws of the game allows you access to the ball, or ball carrier.
In a maul you have access to neither. And if you by some miracle do gain access to this medium (ball carrier) the ball is simply shifted (all legally) to another player, or you are driven out of the maul by players not in possession and in-front of the ball carrier forcing you to join from the back again with 10 bodies between you and the ball carrier obstructed from you.
And again if by some miracle you do stop 10 obstructing players from moving forward they are warned not once, but twice to either reset and have another crack at doing their best to obstruct the ball carrier from you or pass the ball out to the scrummy and still keep possession.
I have studied the laws of the game for a long time now, and although there is always some slight advantage for the team in possession which there should be, no-where in the game of union is the game as bias to the attacking team obstructing the defending team from contesting the ball or ball carrier as it is in the maul.
Morne,
What do you say about a situation where players from team A at a ruck clean over the ball legally and then, playing through the ruck or from it, actually play/drive off/tackle incoming players from team B by exiting the ruck on team B’s side? Is that a way of legally escaping? the offside line? Is it tackling a man without the ball? Is it obstruction? Or is it legal? Nobody seems to know.
afternoon everyone
wouldve logged on earlier
but
i’m
busy as a bee
busy
busy
busy
Blue @ 19,
I hope I am understanding your question correctly.
If the defending team cleans out over the ball at the ruck legally, meaning they enter through the gate and from the back, they can legally clean out players from the opposing team who is part of that ruck, i.e. players on their feet and bound to the ruck over the ball.
They MAY NOT tackle or obstruct players not part of the ruck (like the opposition scrummy or players standing off the ruck).
Also once a player cleans out legally over the ruck, and has moved beyond the ruck to the opposition side with the ball still in the ruck (i.e. ruck still formed) he is now off-side, and has to retreat back behind the line of the last man’s feet of his own team before he is allowed to take part in the game again.
So in practical terms, a player can legally come through the ruck right to where the ball is right in front of the face of the opposing scrummy.
He is;
a) Not allowed to play the ball if it is still in the ruck (he is allowed to drive players off standing over the ball however to make it available)
b) Not allowed to play the scrummy or any player standing off the ruck, pull them in or obstruct them.
If he drives through or over the ruck and is no longer bound, he is no longer part of the ruck, if you are not part of the ruck, the off side line for such a player is behind the hind-most feet of his own team mate.
Players not bound to the ruck must retreat to their own side of the ruck and stay behind the off-side line, or re-enter the ruck legally again.
Players are not allowed to loiter close to or around a ruck.
Also remember at a ruck it is vital that a player stays on his feet.
Does that answer your question?
First Paul Marks and Pro Legoete were stood down as on-field referees in the Super 14 for performances regarded as inadequate. Now Garratt Williamson, a referee who was performing as an assistant referee, has also been stood down, as was Josh Noonan earlier in the Super 14.
Williamson was the assistant referee in the match between the Crusaders and the Hurricanes, when the Crusaders took a quick throw-in outside of the laws and scored a try in their way to drawing with the Hurricanes. (See http://www.sareferees.co.za/news/ref_news/2340651.htm)
These actions against referees are consonant with the SANZAR referees’ policy of acting publicly against what is perceived to be inadequate performance by match officials. The action is not new; going public with it is new, and appears to be more rigorous than action against player error.
Williamson did not act against a quick throw-in by Crusaders scrumhalf Andy Ellis in the first half even though the Hurricanes reserve players and Conrad Smith had touched the ball before Ellis threw it in. The quick throw-in resulted in a try by Zac Guildford. Williamson, who recently refereed just his second Super 14 match, has been taken off assistant referee duties and sent “upstairs” to become a television match official.
The same happened to Josh Noonan when his touch-line decision “cost” the Highlanders a try against the Blues. He was taken to task and off the line to be a TMO.
Williamson will not be an assistant referee when the Crusaders play the Waratahs on Saturday, but a TMO.
SANZAR’s referee boss, Lyndon Bray said: “We’ve agreed with Garratt this morning just to stand him down from the touchline this week,
“Our general premise for that was to be entirely consistent and fair to the other guys we’ve stood down as this was in the same ballpark as the other decisions we’ve taken action on.
“Garratt fully understands the decision and accepts it. It doesn’t change the fact that he’s refereed with great potential in the competition and he will get another game in the middle before the end of the competition. He deserves that opportunity.
“This is just reflective of the accountability on this particular decision in that match.”
Bray was confident the move would be seen as a strong enough response by the Hurricanes.
“They are not out for blood, so to speak. They are just out to see the referees and assistants are, in the same way as players and coaches are, accountable for isolated decisions. In this case I think Colin Cooper and the Hurricanes have had that accountability.”
The Hurricanes also questioned the awarding of the try to Crusaders hooker Ti’i Paulo in stoppage time, but Bray has backed referee Jonathan Kaplan’s decision.
Morne i wish we could listen to re-union again, they said something that upsets me. Hope i heard wrong, they said that players within a meter from that ruck can be cleaned out. I must have heard wrong, because that is total grid iron style.
Absolutely not Super.
Your offside line at a ruck if you are not bound to the ruck (and you need to clearly define bound to the ruck as a person on his feet, bound to a team mate or opposition player over the ball) is behind the feet of the last man towards your own goal line.
Players on the ground at the ruck are not allowed to do anything, in fact, they need to make a clear attempt to roll away from the ruck area or ball.
You may only enter a ruck from the hindmost feet of your own player by binding onto him or an opposition player.
The line of the ball is not the offside line, thus you may not clean out or tackle or obstruct player close to the ball not part of the ruck.
You may also not come in from the side to clean out at the ruck.
You may also not go off your feet entering a ruck (of cleaning out).
So you may not ‘tackle’ players in a ruck, in fact, it is an offense to ‘collapse’ a ruck similar as to collapsing a maul.
Once not part of a ruck anymore, you must retreat beyond the offside lines of a ruck to either re-enter the ruck, or take up a defensive position.
super,
How many of those refs and ass. refs are kiwis?
Sorry that i share this tragic news here.
I knew about this loss as early as 9,0 clock but I could not put words together, i was so shocked to hear this news.Until Ross their Lodge manager and great friend of Rugby-Talk sent me the mail at the bottom.
Ala Sussens and her son Ian died in a fatal car crash a mere 500 meters from their lodge gate. Ala was the most kind person i ever met. Knowing them for almost 18 years i had the freedom to ask them to sponsor our prize on the right.
RIP Ala and Ian
Your memories will stay with me forever.
The Photos of Savanah and her Cubs and all the others on your beautiful Game farm will always be treasured. Just click on my nick to go to some of them.
Superbul
Please leave any message on the following email.
friendsoftshukudu@gmail.com
Mail from Ross Dunbar.
We are writing to you with tears in our eyes on this very sad day.
Two special lives have been taken from our midst.
Ala Zofia Sussens and Ian Mark Sussens tragically passed away this morning in a fateful car accident.
We will appreciate your kind thoughts and understanding in this time as we try to support the family in this very distressing time.
Kindly
Ross Dunbar
Manager
Tshukudu Game Lodge
26 – Super, So sad to read that. Terrible for you especially if you knew the family.
Puma it was a hard day for me, million times more for the family, but i will, try and go on with the faith that memories are forever. Dont want us to dwell too much on it here.
See the next History article is up.
Wish we could get Pietman , Old Griquas and McLook on here tonight.
28 – Super, Still sorry to hear about it.
Just saw the history article going to read it now. Thanks Super I always enjoy those.
It would be great to get Piet, Old Griquas, Mclook and even 4man on at the same time. We all around the same age, well about 6 years difference.
Okay off to read that 1970 AB tour article now.
26@ SuperBul – Ou tjom, jammer om the hoor van Ala en Ian se dood.
Die feit dat Tshukudu ons Super 14 Kompetisies se pryse borg maak die Tshukudu familie deel van die Rugby-Talk familie!
Doen asseblief vir ons hier by Rugby-Talk ‘n guns en dra die medelye en sterkte en beste wense van Rugby-Talk asseblief oor aan Ross en die mense by Tshukudu.
Ek sal more formeel, van die Rugby-Talk Mail Addie, ook ons medelye uitspreek.
Die lewe is kortstondig en dinge soos die dood van Ala en Ian herinner mens daaraan dat mens elke kans op geluk met mag moet aangryp en die lewe ten volle moet lewe. Mens moet positief wees en elke dag met ‘n blye gemoed benader.
Users Online
Total 203 users including 0 member, 203 guests, 0 bot online
Most users ever online were 3735, on 31 August 2022 @ 6:23 pm
No Counter as from 31 October 2009: 41,298,677 Page Impressions
_