SOUTH AFRICAN RUGBY

Hokitika Guardian, 6 July 1929, Page 7

SOUTH AFRICAN RUGBY

illegal hooking

. JIOAI I.VENT REFEREE’S VIEW’S

JO H ANNEUB URG, Alay 27

A bombshell Jnvs ticvni dropped into the S juth African Rugby camp. It consists of an indictment by the Union’s leading and ablest referee, Air V. Jtl. Acs-., 01 the illegal no.jKmg in South African Rugby, based, to some extent, on incidents noted by him during the recent tour of this country by the ATI Blacks. It explains the repetition of complaints by the New Zealanders that they could •not get the ball from the scrums. Now Air Neser’s indictment lias one not only as a reproof to the Rugby smugness of the South Africans, but has shown that impartial refereeing might have made a difference if not to the Tests, then certainly to some of the provincial matches. Air Neser, who refereed all five Test matches between South Africa and New Zealand, has made a most important contribution to tiie theory of Rugby football in a small booklet just issued under the title of “Refereeing and Comments on the Laws of Rugby Football.”

Many of Air INeser’s observations are of a most disquieting nature, as far as the game in South Africa r 3 concerned. He unhesitatingly condemns the near foot hook as commonly practised in South African Rugby. In fact, if one is to carry his conclusion further there can be no question that a lot of the South African hooking against tho New Zealanders last year was illegal.

In tho circumstances, the New Zealand reply, which c ns is Led of bring ing a man up from the second ro\ into the 'front rank to gain the loosehead advantage, though it sometime: cune very near to being an obstruction j must lie regal clod 'as bavin been somewhat excusable under tin circumstances.

Mr Neser points out that the rub which defines when the l/all is fairly in the scrum lavs down three requirements. First, tho ball must be put in straight; secondly, it must touch the ground; and, thirdly, it must pass, both feet of a player of each team. By means of a diagram he goes on to show that “it can - be iconlidently stated that the hooker whose pack has the loose head cannot use hi* near foot for the purposo of hooking without infringing the law, and Ik should only use his far foot for hooking.” He continues that many people arc under the wrong impression that the outside forward is wholly debarred from taking any part in the struggle to secure possession of the ball in the scrum. “As securing possession of the ball in the scrum makes

all the difference between attack and defence, it would be a boon if some

I c'-’ur law were laid down which could 1 be easily applied, but it is doubtful : whether such a law could he draft- ‘ cd.” [ Concerning the strategical move | employed by the All Blacks to gain the loose head advantage in tile Test | matches, Air Neser states:—

“There is nothing in the laws of the game to prevent a forward adding himself to he front row of the scrum after the scrum has been formed, unless by so adding himself lie causes there to be more than three forwards in the front row. This was the plan adopted by the New Zealand team to counteract South Africa s superiority in the scrum.

“It would be an improvement if the law were amended to read: ‘No player shall, after the scrum has been formed, wilfully add himself to the front row of the scrum.’ ”

Air Neser’s views on speeding-up the game by allowing the advantage rule to operate to its fullest extent in the case of knocking-on by the players, I may be quoted. He states--

“Frequently a criticism is levelled at the referee that he is too fond of blowing tho whistle, and that by so doing lie slows up flic game, and spoils it. In some cases this criticism is justified, hut only when k

referee fails to apply the ‘advantage rule’ reasonably. A referee can by intelligent application of the advantage rule allow a game to p'ciceod with perfect fairness, whereas another referee may have stopped the game by 'blowing bis whistle too quickly. “Apart from tho advantage rule, a referee has no' alternative and must stop the game if there has been any infringement, however trivial or unimportant it may seem. ‘‘The referee cannot be blamed if 'be game is full of infringements, for be has simply to do his duty, ar.d lie would be failing badly if be did nut blow diis whistle for every infrir.ge■nent from which the opposite side did not gain an advantage. The

number of stoppages depends on the ohivers and not on the referee. There is considerable speculation in Rugby circles in South Africa over the recommendation of the New Zealand Rugby Union urging on the Unions to revert to the International —or English rules; and the later decision of the unions to adhere to the New Zealand rules. In this connexion it is interesting to note that the Transvaal Rugby Union has asked the South African Board for a special disKMisation enabling Transvaal to play the New Zealand rules. . It is recognised here that the crowd wants a "aster game, and this is perhaps reflected in the lack of, patronage at local Rugby fixtures. Since the AH Slacks left this country public iriter>st in the games has languished eon- ■ idorably if the attendance at matches may he accepted ■ as a criterion.