At the start of the northern hemisphere season the IRB came out and told referees to be stricter with attacking players going off their feet at the break-down. I applaud the sentiment, but like most things lately they have gone and made right ol’ dog’s ear of the whole thing.

So I decided to keep an eye out for attackers going off their feet at the ruck in the AB-Munster game. It turns out it probably wasn’t the best game to consider because the rucks were a real mess throughout. Regardless of messing nature this game didn’t help me one bit to figure out when the refs will apply the rule and when they are going to ignore it. At least half the rucks featured players going off their feet. Now the point I want to make is that the refs must either decide to clamp down hard on players going off their, or continue to ignore it. Penalty roulette doesn’t help anybody.

A further problem I have with how the rule is applied is that the refs are not clear about what evil it is they trying to cure. The way I see it there are two problems with attacker going off their feet. The first is where the player simply flops on the ball, killing any contest for it. The second is where a player launches himself like missile into players. Frankly I don’t mind the second one so much, rugby is a collision sport and since rucking has been outlawed there way too many players loitering around the ball, slowing it down. The floppers are a real problem though, just watch the last 20 min of the Heineken Cup final this year, it was enough to make your eyes bleed. Munster was passing one out to a pod of static forwards who would collapse in heap and Tollouse could do nothing about it. That is not how rugby should be played.

In summary, there is good reason for the rule, but the refs must more consistent in applying it.  Leave your thoughts on the forum here...

*SANFU - Situation Normal, All Farked Up