The IRB has justified the latest sequence as a way of offering a fair scrum at elite levels and enhancing player welfare. All very noble and anything to guard against or limit serious injury is fine. If so we should eliminate tackles, cleaning out at rucks and sacking mauls.
If there is one area of the game which needs fixing it is the tackled ball and breakdown. Not the scrum but the unfathomable pileups which now carry the badge for an area of the game which used to be rucks.
When the referee whistles a halt or a penalty at the breakdown, spectators risk neck injuries as they invariably ask their neighbour "what the hell was that for"?
We're talking here about the good folk who spend their hard-earned and stump up to watch games live, not those souls who prefer to watch telecasts because they want to see the action and hear the official's explanation.
The breakdown is a bigger mystery than Loch Ness which may explain why the IRB refuses to seek any solutions. How spectators, officials or players are expected to process 73 questions and sub-sections of those inquiries, every time a tackle or breakdown occurs, is more mind blowing than Aaron Gilmore's ropey explanations.
Tack on the recent wacky theories from Lyndon Bray about the definition of forward passes and you wonder whether the IRB fog has infiltrated the Sanzar air-conditioning ducts.
Coaches and players have a mantra which works well for most. We all know it as "keep it simple stupid". While that's going on the game's administrators seem intent on making the rules more complicated.
Since they outlawed rucking, the shape of rugby has altered drastically and not for the best.
The athletes are better and they produce some marvellous contests. But if they had more space because the breakdown became a serious challenge within the game instead of a mystery, rugby would be a much better sport.
Chances of an IRB rethink on rucks? Crouch, touch pause, zzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
