Rugby law changes mark an insidious weakening of the scrum

South Africa used the election battles to its advantage. Photo: REUTERS/SARAH MEYSSONNIER

As part of three legislative amendments that will be implemented from July 1 this year, along with the abolition of the Dupont Law and crocodile coups, it will no longer be possible to perform scrums from a free kick.

Compared to other changes, this seems like a fairly minor tweak. How often do teams actually prefer free-kick scrums? Not so often; in fact only if the side has an advantage in that area.

Flip the coin, however, and it is worth wondering why, despite such a rare occurrence, World Rugby even considered this amendment. The focus is on «both spectacle and safety» but if that is the case then surely there are thousands of other issues that World Rugby can address?

The hidden reason here, of course, is the insidious deprivation of the force of the grip; one of the fundamental elements of rugby, what makes rugby union rugby union. The problem is that World Rugby, under pressure from everyone, decided that scrums do not amount to spectacle.

Simply put, the governing body is wrong. Scrums, when done correctly, are thunderous and wonderful. This happens too rarely today, but World Rugby's challenge is to find a way for one of rugby's unique assets to thrive, rather than start to wind down.

In tactical terms, there is also something to pay attention to. One of the last World Cup moments — a defining step in the Springboks' rise to glory — came when defender Damian Willemse elected to scrum after recording a goal (a free kick in all but name) in his 22 appearances. France was in turmoil and dismay as dreams of a first World Cup on home soil faded. South Africa's embrace of scrum and its willingness to use it should be applauded, not ridiculed.

Underhanded tactics must also be taken into account. What stops a team under pressure during a scrum from deliberately violating a free kick (such as early engagement or missing a braking leg) to avoid further scrums?

The diversity of approaches is what makes international rugby so attractive. If teams want to clash, the opposition must stop them and find other ways to win (as England almost did in the semi-final stage of the World Cup). Otherwise we're heading towards global rugby homogeneity.

World Rugby bleats about 'spectacle and safety' but is set to force scrums to be played within 30 seconds at this year's Under-20 World Cup , clearly not much thought or attention to the latter. Regarding the first, rugby is a much richer product with functioning scrums than without them.