Wednesday 22 June 2016 17:59, UK
A couple of weeks ago I decided it was time that I aired my views on the direction that the sport is taking with its application of the rules - or lack of, as I felt.
It was interesting to read some of the comments and feedback and I appreciate the time and trouble that people took to offer their opinions.
One of the best replies came from a retired referee. He follows the game closely both here and in Australia, watching at least three games a week, and he offered some good points for discussion.
I had originally stated that I fear that our goal of providing a fast-flowing game has come at the expense of ignoring some of the rules. We ignore incorrect play of balls and allow the game to play on.
The retired referee, let's call him Mr Smith for arguments sake, wanted to point out that I had neglected to address several other rules before we even get to playing the ball correctly to bring it back into play after a player has been tackled.
He copied and pasted the following rules from the laws of the game and asked me what I'd do about them.
Mr Smith wanted to hear what I would do with all of the other rules or laws before we even get to the bit where it says that you have to 'heel' the ball backwards. He said that the spectacle for the fans might be a poor one if I had my way and stuck to the rules. I can see his point. Principally, my point is about maintaining the integrity of the sport.
We have progressed to a stage were we need a global update of the laws of the game. I'm not even that bothered exactly what the rules are, I just think that we need to be clear and have them defined in a rulebook that accurately reflects what the sport is.
Over the last 100 years the game has evolved and adapted and it is time we upgraded or updated the rules by which the game should be played.
It is pointless having rules which we ignore, it doesn't help the credibility of the sport. I agree that the game needs to be fast-flowing, tries need to be the main aim and we need a fair balance between attack and defence. But we also need some very clear rules which fans understand and have kept pace with how the game is played today.
Last Saturday morning I tuned into Sky Sports to watch the Wallabies play against England in Melbourne. It was a brilliant win and I was delighted to see Owen Farrell score a try to clinch the series.
However, there was a moment in the match which I thought wasn't right. One of the touch judges entered the field and stopped the game to notify the referee of possible foul play by an England player while chasing a high kick downfield.
Even though the referee had played on he then stopped the match while the video referee took a close look at the incident in question.
I watched seven action replays of the possible obstruction/push by an England player on a Wallaby. The touch judge had entered the field with the intention that the Wallabies would receive a penalty. The TMO actually awarded a penalty to England, the opposite result to what the touch judge had proposed. It didn't feel right.
The incident made me wonder about the rule of replays in live sport. It is something again that needs to be clearly defined in the rules. Personally I would restrict the video referee to try-scoring decisions but understand if others think it should be something else. It just need to be in the rules.
Over the last 100 years the game has evolved and adapted and it is time we upgraded or updated the rules by which the game should be played. Then let's play to them.
Let's make it easy for Mr Smith and everyone else in the world to understand.
