D. B. Clarke, The ‘Law Maker’?

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30286, 12 November 1963, Page 16

D. B. Clarke, The ‘Law Maker’?

[Bp our Rugby Correspondent] The flurry in British Rugby circles caused by the initial goal-kicking success of D. B. Clarke may earn the 1963-64 All Blacks the nomenclature of the “Law Makers.’’ It is certain that if Clarke continues to be a successful and match-winning kicker he and the All Blacks may be an unwitting instrument in having the laws relating to penalties altered. No doubt Clarke will kick many goals on this tour and his goal-kicking ability must be an important part of the Ail Blacks’ plan for victory, but it could be that if he has the success expected from him; he may be sowing the seeds of self destruction for that particular Rugby species, the penalty goal-kicker. For some years now there have been many proponents for a change in the points scoring systems in Rugby that would allow for a try to be worth more than a penalty and in Clarke those persons will have the perfect example of how one person by gaining an outstanding skill in kicking can superimpose the matter of penalty kicks on the entire game. Early in January the International Rugby Board will meet to discuss proposed changes to the laws and if

Clarke has continued to make an impact with his kicking it could well be that the penalty goal will receive as much attention from board members as the depredations of loose forwards, which matter at the moment seems the main cause of concern for Rugby countries. Penalties, as evinced by even the most casual perusal of Rugby records, have always played a major part in the results of matches. But it has needed episodes such as Geffin kicking five penalties against New Zealand in 1949 and Clarke’s mammoth effort of six penalties against the British Isles in 1959 to stress the relative efforts of kicking and try scoring, for in both those matches penalty goals far outweighed the most brilliant of tries

Penalties have loomed so large in modem Rugby—with apparently a reduction in back play—that it is understandable that many critics have called for some amelioration of the laws relating to penalties as a first step towards invoking better and more attractive back Play. The point is obvious: if the number of occasions on which points can be gained from penalties is reduced, or if the points that can be gained

from kicking are also reduced. then there should be a commensurate desire by teams to score more tries. But like most schemes for improving Rugby there is no unanimity on what should be done to penalties. At present there are four major suggestions for reducing the effectiveness of penalties: Increase the points awarded for a try to four. Reduce the points for a penalty to two. Reduce the numbers of laws relating to penalties. Differentiate between different types of offences. The first two points are complementary and either would be satisfactory as means of reducing the importance of a penalty. The third and fourth pointe bring difficulties. There is no likelihood of offences now regarded as penalties being made into scrums; but it is possible that there could be a differentiation between offences which allow a kick at goal or an indirect free kick (such as in soccer). If the more heinous Rugby offences such as off-side, obstruction, dirty play and late tackles were regarded as allowing a kick at goal and technical breaches in the

scrums and line-outs, allowing only an indrect fret kick to re-start play then perhaps the penalty goal would be placed in its proper perspective. The decisions as to which offences should receive free kicks might be hard to decide; buit the lessening of the shackles imposed on Rugby by the penalty goal would be well worth the close consideration of the administrators. Most Rugby followers, other than those completely possessed with their team winning, view with distaste the winning of matches by penalties rather than tries. And there is an even more insidious effect of having a player who can kick goals with regularity. It is certain that the presence of Clarke has had a marked effect on New Zealand Rugby in recent years. The very fact that the All Blacks have had a player capable of kicking 60-yard goals has—as been agreed to by members of current All Black teams—had a stultifying effect on much of the AH Black play, for »t has been realised that as long as a powerful pack is fielded which can gain a territorial advantage Clarke can kick the penalties which must come as a matter of course.