Untidy Line-out Play Causing Most Trouble

Press, Volume CVI, Issue 31123, 28 July 1966, Page 19

Untidy Line-out Play Causing Most Trouble

(By

I. J. D.HALL)

One of the basic causes of the complaints made by the manager of the British Isles Rugby team (Mr D. J. O’Brien) on illegal tactics and obstruction in New Zealand has been the line-outs.

Until the Canterbury game- the Lions had not been able to match even provincial teams in line-out technique and it was from their loose and untidy play there that many of their problems began. Southland, Wellington, Otago, the combined teams at Timaru and Nelson, and the All Blacks in the first test were able to exploit the deficiences in the Lions line-outs, either by driving through or by forcing the Lions’ forwards into hasty and uncontrolled tapping-back, which only aggregated the troubles already confronting their backs. There have been accusations that the line-out technique practised by most New Zealand teams is basically illegal because it relies on men who, in the current Rugbyterminology, “block” to protect the man who is jumping for the ball. A letter to the editor of “The Press says: “1 see in your issue of July--18 an illustration showing All Blacks “protecting” one of the team. This “protecting” was once known as “obstructing” and that is really just what it is, A somewhat similar illustration appeared in some other paper and there again was reference made to the “protection” given to the half-back. What can we expect from our young players when they see All Blacks setting such an example?” Laws Quite Clear However, the correspondent Is not quite correct in equating “protection” with “obstruction." The laws of the game say: Law 27 (e): Until the ball has been thrown in and has touched a player or the ground ... it is illegal for any player participating in the line-out wilfully : to (1) be off-side. (2) Push, charge, shoulder or, bind with or in any way: hold another player of either team. Law 27 (f); After the ball has touched a player or the ground it is illegal for any player participating in the line-out to (1) be off-side. (2) Hold, push, shoulder or obstruct an opponent not in possession of the ball. (3) Charge an opponent otherwise than in an attempt to tackle him or secure possession of the ball. The position under law 27 is quite clear. Until the ball:

is touched by a player or touches the ground nothing can happen in the line-out except that the players can jump for the ball; once the ball is touched or touches the ground while the line-out is in operation then players cannot “hold, push, shoulder or obstruct” as in law 27 (f) (2), but they can bind, which they lare not allowed to do under the preceeding subsection 27 1(e) (2). Forming Loose Maul Binding is the art of “blocking” or “protection” for the jumper and the half-back waiting for the ball. It means that once the player has caught the ball his team-mates can, if they wish, come round behind him—but not wedge in front of him as the 195 n Springboks did and immediately form a loose maul with him at the centre, which in effect gives him protection. That is quite legal; but there is another form of blocking, and it is one carried out by most New Zealand teams. There is nothing in the laws to say that a player in the line-out must ' get out of the way of an opponent. That is, it is not obstruction merely to stay in :one place, no matter where ithe opponent or the ball is. I All Blacks of the physical i strength of C. E. Meads, C. T. {Meads, K. F. Gray, B. J. ;Lochore, and K. R. Tremain ■ have been accused of obstruction simply because they stand j firm in the line-outs when some-one else is jumping. It takes a very strong and dei termined opponent to thrust jC. E. Meads aside. By standing in the way, Meads can form an effective block and certainly it is not illegal. Arms Outstretched j Many photographs have (been published of an All Black half-back receiving the ball seemingly protected by : an impenetrable wall of black'jerseyed forwards with arms outstretched. It must be {emphasised that this is not illegal as long as no overt act ■ has been made to obstruct an {opponent. That is, they have not “held, pushed, shouldered or obstructed an opponent not in possession of the ball.” The Lions have caused their own troubles on this tour because of the immaturity of their line-out play. Instead of having two or three men to jump for the ball and the remainder either standing firm or coming round to bind, they all seemed to want to jump. The roles thus presented gave glorious opportunities for opposing teams to pour through the gaps given’ to them.

The All Blacks and most provincial teams are far better-drilled. Each man knows his alloted task and does it. Some jump, some stand firm; others come in and bind with the man who has taken the ball.

Undoubtedly on this tour there have been many instances of barging and obstruction in the line-outs. But it has been equally divided between both sides; for the Lions’ idea of blocking is to jump in to their opponent. They have been penalised often for it, just as New Zealand teams have been penalised for trying to bind with a Lions forward so as to take him out of action.