<
>

Speedier, simpler rugby on its way with law amendments: Craig Dowd

Julian Savea pushes the ball back to Aaron Smith during Rugby World Cup 2015 MARTIN BUREAU/AFP/Getty Images

Anything that can speed the game up is a positive and I think the law changes that have been made to start in the northern hemisphere on August 1, and for southern hemisphere teams during the November tours, have been made with positive intentions.

You have to give credit to World Rugby for taking the emphasis away from looking for penalties at scrum time and getting on with the game, something I have been banging on about for years.

The team putting the ball into a scrum should enjoy a slight advantage. But now what we are likely to see is the halfback possibly getting away with a little bit more. He has to put the ball in straight but being allowed to align his shoulder on the middle line of the scrum means he stands closer to his own side of the scrum.

Striking for the ball is a lost art, and we've lost it in the set-up anyway. So if we are going to go down the route that it is about the rugby and get the ball away from the scrum then going back to make it a contest where anyone can strike for the ball is great. We will probably end up seeing loosehead props striking for the ball because then you don't have to go to the middle if anyone can do it.

That means you will get the ball back through the scrum really quickly, and with the No.8 allowed to put his hands in to get the ball out -- that is a win for the game of rugby. Really, we want the referees to worry about the game and not about the scrum. While the changes may be minor they are done for the right reasons of getting the ball out and carrying the game on.

The opportunity will be there for the more inventive teams to come up with different ideas. I don't think it will take anything away from the scrum because the teams that want to scrum will still scrum while a lesser scrummaging team might get the ball in and get out and play.

The law relating to the ruck, which occurs when one player, on his feet, is over the ball is somewhat against how the laws were originally written in rugby where a ruck involved two players making contact over the ball.

Until an opposition player makes contact anyone can pick the ball up, so they are trying to speed play up in and around the ruck while also making it easier for referees to identify who can, and who can't, play the ball. Players will also not be allowed to kick the ball forward in rucks, they must rake it back. What they tried to do with the laws surrounding the ruck last time - which was a trial in the Mitre 10 Cup - was an absolute farce because everyone just tried to kick the ball through and put everyone under pressure.

Now, having gone away and thought about it, they have created the situation where you can actually ruck for the ball with no hands involved. That's great because at the moment everyone is sticking their hands in making it so hard for a referee to determine who can play the ball and who can't.

When there is contact everyone should leave the ball alone and use their feet.

There will be players from four or five generations back who will be just loving the thought that rucking could possibly make its way back into the game because out of all the changes they've made the one that has probably influenced the game in the biggest way is removing the ruck. It has become a pile-up where everyone has dived on the ball, or got their hands on the ball and it became a free-for-all.

If you could bring it back in any form, and not worry about hurting anybody, it would be great. It's the same with the tackle law change where it makes it simpler for the referee. Anything that can simplify the game and make it easier to understand, easier to see from the spectators' point of view and it makes life less difficult for referees is a positive.

In regard to the Super Rugby semifinals, I think the Hurricanes have got a huge task ahead of them in Johannesburg. They looked off the pace against the Brumbies in Canberra on Friday and they will need to improve.

There has been a lot of talk about whether the Lions will suffer through not having played any New Zealand teams but we should acknowledge that they have clearly been the best team in South Africa, and Australia, and they won their own Conference hands down.

But it also cuts the other way, we haven't played them and we don't know how good they are. You would have to say that the Sharks left it all out on the field and played their best rugby of the year against the Lions, as you would do in finals rugby where it is all about stepping up.

The Lions got home with that late, long-range penalty goal, but it's worth remembering the Crusaders have been winning in that fashion all year. It's about winning, not how you win. And if you win ugly it's about whatever it takes to score the points.

It is tough ask for the Chiefs, too, having flown back from Cape Town for a showdown with the Crusaders. The Crusaders have had luck on their side and the rub of the green all year and you have to be a pretty good team on the day, and to have a bit of luck to beat them, because they seem to know how to win the close ones.

It was interesting that the miserable conditions were something different for the modern-day Highlanders because traditionally, before the covered Forsyth Barr Stadium was built, they knew all about playing in wet conditions.

However, I think there was a bit more to it than that. There was a bit of adversity thrown the Highlanders' way with their delayed flight and there was talk that perhaps the game should have been delayed; bad luck, it's done and it is a winter game after all.

The Crusaders' pack, with all its All Blacks, was outstanding last week. They stepped up and certainly laid down the platform for all those young guns like Richie Mo'unga, Jack Goodhue and David Havili to do their jobs a touch more easily. They are one of the most feared packs in Super Rugby and they showed that from the way they played on Saturday night.