Breakdown the law

A high-powered task force is poised to propose new rules to fix rugby's chaotic tackled ball area rule.

Confusion about the law and its interpretation at the breakdown has been a problem for the better part of a decade.

The issue dominated last weekend's NPC programme, as Auckland felt Canterbury's Richie McCaw illegally influenced the game.

But there is hope that some serious thinkers are ready to come up with workable solutions to put in front of the game's governing body - the International Rugby Board.

Assistant All Black coach Steve Hansen, former All Black selector Peter Thorburn and New Zealand Rugby Union referee manager Keith Lawrence met in Auckland before the last Bledisloe Cup test.

All three have strong views on how to fix the current shambles and agreed there's much to be gained from forming a working party to explore problems and solutions.

Thorburn, who was instrumental in developing the so-called use it or lose it rule in the 1990s, said the law book needs to be rewritten.

"I met Keith in Auckland and he said he'd put together a group - Hansen, me, Keith and probably Colin Hawke [former test referee]," said Thorburn.

"If we don't fix the problem the game will continue to be a shambles. You can't even get a referee to be consistent in the same 10 minutes of a game because of the way the rules are. What does that say to players, refs and spectators?

"The law around the breakdown needs rewriting. Some referees feel that we should go back to refereeing to the letter of the law but that would make things worse. You could penalise someone at every single breakdown."

One idea is the proposal put forward by a South African working party five years ago. It suggested allowing any player to be able to pick the ball up in a ruck.

It was pooh-poohed at the time but some believe there could be mileage in revisiting the idea.

The prospect of clarity is likely to see New Zealand's working party gain support around the globe.

Complicating the issue even further is the fact teams and referees from the Northern Hemisphere interpret the breakdown rules differently.

When the Lions toured earlier in the year, they were able to blame many of their shortcomings on the different way the game is refereed in New Zealand.

While much of their complaining was a means of trying to disguise their lack of speed and organisation, it did highlight the need for a simplification of the laws to reduce the importance of referee interpretation.

The working party is likely to come up with solutions and trial them in competitive matches.

A working document will then be drawn and circulated to key figures in the game to build support and momentum for a law change.

If it gains enough support, a formal proposal will be tabled to the IRB rules committee and if they believe there is a logical solution, they will then propose it be voted for at a full IRB board meeting.

It's thought unlikely anything will happen quickly and the prospect of a law change before the 2007 World Cup is remote.

- HERALD ON SUNDAY