Rugby Unions biggest curse...excessive kicking

Nine years ago this article appeared in The Guardian. It is an issue raised that has credit in the right context but it will cause division if the context is misunderstood.

Today nothings changed that much, but kicking still used, albeit a little more purposely and tactically but nevertheless the "hail Mary" kicks still occur all too frequently.

Article:

The best suggestions in life are often the simplest. Many of the finest brains in the world have wrestled with how to improve rugby union as a sport and, as often as not, have ended up making it worse. Fair play, therefore, to Mr Martin McNeill of Richmond, Surrey who penned a short, pithy letter to the Sunday Times last weekend. The last sentence read thus: "I suggest any kick that is cleanly caught by the opposition leads to....a scrum from where the ball was kicked."

Genius. Well, almost. Mr McNeill missed out six words. If you insert "outside the 22" after "kick" and "the option of" in place of the dots you suddenly have a potential remedy for the curse of excessive kicking, currently causing players and spectators alike major neckache. Think about it. All those speculative hoists and aimless punts outlawed. Scrum-halves and fly-halves forced to abandon the lazy hit-and-hope option. Heaven forbid, some teams might even opt to run first-phase ball out of their own half. Welcome to the new rugby: much like the old, only with the boring ping-pong taken out.

So what are the flaws? Well, the little lofted chips over the top beloved of modern sides would need to become grubber kicks. Every team would have to be more judicious in the use of "Hail Mary" cross kicks. Anything else? Half-backs will complain that box-kicks suddenly lose currency. Tough. Remember we are only talking about kicks outside the 22. Anyone who resorts to a box-kick on the halfway line as a first option deserves to have possession taken away from him or her.

At this stage it is also worth examining a couple of other sports. Take ice hockey, for example. If a player fires the puck aimlessly towards the other end and no one has a chance to touch it, an official stops play and a face-off ensues in the defending zone of the team who committed the infraction. They call it "Icing". Rugby league has its "40-20 rule" to reward accurate long-distance punts which bounce into touch within 20 metres of the opposing line. The attacking side, not the defending team, is awarded the scrum in such cases.

And rugby union? Increasingly, anarchy rules. The balls fly further and the people hoofing them get stronger. Fear of being penalised at the breakdown makes the aerial route even more attractive. In response, some are suggesting a cap on the number of kicks in open play. Fine in theory, a counting-house nightmare in practice. Banning kicking altogether would be more disastrous still. Certain punts are things of beauty: think Phil Bennett's spiralling torpedoes or a steepling Munster garryowen. Kicks are as much a part of the 15-a-side furniture as scrums, lineouts or H-shaped posts.

There will always be sceptics at times like this who argue that inventing new laws in the comfort of your own home is rather easier than putting them into practice at first-class level. For insurance purposes, therefore, I canvassed the views of Bath's head coach, Steve Meehan, this week. "I'm a bit of a fan of trying things and throwing out those that don't work," responded Meehan thoughtfully. "There are traditions in the game that I like to keep guarded but there are laws that maybe we could tinker with. It would be an interesting one and would open up all sorts of things. There's a real skill to putting the ball in the right spot. It would change strategies and change our approach to training and skill development. Other sides might need to change their attitude."

Hmm. Interesting. Maybe it would favour more attack-minded sides and make life harder on wet days. Frankly, neither are insurmountable obstacles. Let's hope Mr McNeill posts us his solutions to global warming and the Afghanistan conflict next weekend. In the meantime, the International Board should give his idea some thought. It is a question of balance and, as things stand, the boot is kicking the game where it hurts.

Midfield minefield

Potential England centres are not enjoying the best of times. Riki Flutey, Toby Flood, Delon Armitage, Olly Barkley and, possibly, Jordan Turner-Hall are hors de combat, Mike Tindall has not shown much in the way of prime form and Jamie Noon and Tom May are in France. The No12 jersey is a crucial one and Martin Johnson, one suspects, is not about to hand it to Jonny Wilkinson. That leaves youngsters such as Shane Geraghty, Dominic Waldouck, Anthony Allen or Brad Barritt, good players all but short of international experience. Anyone else? Step forward a proven Test athlete, qualified for England after seven years residence. If Flutey can become an honorary Englishman, the odds on Bath's ex-Bradford and Kiwi RL centre Shontayne Hape doing the same are suddenly shortening.

Worm's eye view

  Australia's heavy defeat to New Zealand in the final match of the Tri Nations season has stirred the pot down south. "Pampered poodles" and "powder puffs" were two of the kinder verdicts on the Wallaby effort but Chris Rattue in the New Zealand Herald – "You'd find more spine in a worm farm convention" – was by far the most hurtful. It won't leave him much wriggle room if the Aussies win the 2011 World Cup on Kiwi soil.

Decision-making include the fact that it requires variations in play and kicking must always be regarded as a variation and meant kicking will have the aim of having to attain a specific objective.

It is unfortunately there are too many non-explicable kicks bein made and that includes box-kicks.   The key remains that any kicks must allow for effective follow up, putting the recipient under  pressure and in the process  gaining territory or even retention of the balls by the team who kicked the ball.

However, it is insofar as SA rugby over the past years is concerned there was - under Meyer more specifically - to reduce ball-in-hand play and become more dependent on kicking.   After all it was Meyer whos said that "SA backline layers does not have the necessary ball skills to play a ball-in-hand game"

That inevitably lead to frequent kicking which was basically of an aimless nature and too many kicks was just a means to hand ball possession over to the oppositions.

Much is said about decision-making deficiency and too little about actually execution of kicks.   Some decisionmakers have been poor executors.   There are numerous executions where actual execution was poor or worse.   These include -

*    penalty line kicks where the kicker fails to find touch - an habitual with  Morne Steyn - who failed to find touch seven times in nine tests - and even Pollard who missed a penalty line kick on Saturday;

*     relieving kicks from within the 22 of the team failing to find touch and resultantly failing to allow for effective follow-up and defensive lines - allowing the opposition teams to start counter-attacks or kicks finding touch - but allow for quick throw-ins with the same negative consequences;

*      long distance kicks too far ahead for effective follow-up and opening the way for effective counter-attacks  with defensive lines often in jeopardy; and

*      ineffective box kicks too far to be followed up or too short inevitably leading to penalties against the kicking team,

So there are three basic elements to cater for insofar as kicking is concerned, namely -

*    that kicking must be used as a variation in play and that variation must be the norm;

*    that decision-making is the key to an effective kicking game; and

*    that execution of kicks must be top class.

Far too often over the last ten years iro of the Springboks team was kicking the norm and execution was poor.    The only unexceptional part still find in the recent changes made by Erasmus is to a large extent negated by too much reliance on box-kicking - often enough inaccurate and consequently problematic. 

Mike's knowledge of Bok rugby is appallingly lacking. Almost entire revisionism. 

So is yours - I tried to state facts all the time -  you put pie-in-the-sky BS on site and then claim it really happened.

No Ceradyne

Note how really  civil I am.   

Who were the backline players when Meyer was coach (I listed the players who played in most tests):-

Pienaar, Du Preez

Morne, Pollard

De Villiers, Serfontein and Fourie

Habana and Pietersen

Kirchner. Le Roux

So who amongst that lot did not have ball skills?   I would say most of the players mentioned have had ball skills - but their usage were coached out of them and they were under-utilized.

Morne Steyn at flyhalf is where the BS started -  Pollard was much better than him after Morne failed repeatedly in all facets of play.