Referee Matthieu Raynal picked the funniest possible moment to make his point. Photo / Photosport
OPINION:
We should all thank Mathieu Raynal. Not just for handing the All Blacks the Bledisloe Cup by making a call that 82 per cent of 54,000 impartial Herald readers agreed with, but for shining a spotlight on one area where rugby's murky rules need an overhaul.
Bear in mind I am very much not a referee, so what's to follow can be openly questioned if not outright ridiculed. But that's the problem with rugby's rules - they're so subjective and nebulous that any idiot with a column to fill can fire off some half-baked takes.
Starting with time wasting. Raynal picked the funniest possible moment to make his point, but he did have one.
In an average rugby match, the ball is in play for somewhere around 34 minutes. Considering games routinely take two hours nowadays, that's less than ideal.
Professional timekeepers could be introduced. At the very least there should be a timer on kicking goals and throwing into a lineout.
As for scrum resets? Each and every one is beautiful. No notes.
As plenty pointed out on Twitter the other night, Darcy Swain tried to check whether Quinn Tupaea's knee would bend in a different direction and received the same punishment he would cop for attempting an unsuccessful intercept. Seems bad.
Seems like there should be a shake-up in what constitutes a yellow card. Ensure, for a start, that maiming an opponent is open to a more severe sanction than barely failing to execute one of the most exciting plays in the sport.
Elsewhere, I've always appreciated how one unfortunate player takes the fall when their team have repeatedly infringed. But how about spicing that up and, instead of the most recent transgressor, the opposing captain chooses who's shown yellow? Those repeat infringers will think twice when their best player is sitting in the sin bin.
Which, as an aside, is one thing rugby got very right: sin bin. Whoever came up with that adorable phrase should be sent to whatever's the opposite of the sin bin. The good hood? The neat seat? *shows self to sin bin*
The advantage law has become disadvantageous to enjoying a good game of code. When entire sequences of play are rendered null by a referee eventually opting to call a penalty for something that happened eons previously, it's easy to be left wondering about the point of what we just watched.
There should surely be either a time or phase limit on how long advantage lasts. A referee can then warn the team in possession that their advantage is about to elapse, which will essentially be saying, if you're gonna try something, now is the moment.
Which, in turn, would lead to either some lively end-of-advantage action or play would continue and we could all get on with our lives.
The advantages are limitless. Well, not really. Just what was described in the previous paragraph. But still. Limitless.
Hawke's Bay fans, look away. It's good the Magpies lost the Shield. Scoring a lineout drive with the last play of the game to earn a draw and retain the Log O' Wood would have been a stain on the Shield, and the Shield knows a few things about stains.
It would have been appropriate - Hawke's Bay scored four tries from lineout drives in the previous week's successful defence - but far from heroic.
We're all a bit sick of the lineout drive, aren't we folks? Each maul is met by eyes rolling as every close-range lineout drives away new fans from the game.
But right now we're as helpless as a poor pack stuck backtracking, because once a team establishes their ascendancy, there's no reason to slow their roll.
Penalty, kick for the sideline, drive until an inevitable infringement, kick for the corner, let the hooker score untouched. Rinse, yawn, repeat.
There have to be effective and legal ways of stopping the maul - and stop us from having to watch the maul. What are those ways? How would I know, do I sound like a solutions guy?
My colleague and actual Rugby Knower Elliott Smith earlier this year half-seriously suggested an idea to lessen the impact of the rolling maul: tries scored in that manner should be worth only four points.
Dig that for three reasons: it would make people mad; it would inevitably lead to fewer rolling mauls; and it would add a new wrinkle to rugby's scoring system.
Generally, the bigger the variety of rewards on offer, the better. It's why football is boring - one point for one goal - and why American football is enthralling - teams can collect one (extra point), two (two-point conversion), three (field goal) or six (touchdown) points.
Normally this column is staunchly anti-maths but basic arithmetic can enhance the fun late in games, when a team calculates what they need to complete a comeback or hold the lead.
Imagine a rugby side trailing by six points and in possession on the final play. Do they score in literally any non-maul manner for the win? Or do they take the coward's way out and drive for the draw?
The former will be showered with praise; the latter taunted and booed until my throat is sore.