English refs seek law change
Uncontested scrum come under the spotlight
England's referees have urged the International Rugby Board (IRB) to confirm whether they can implement proposed new laws designed to discourage teams from deliberately forcing uncontested scrums.
Premier Rugby want to adopt the approach, which was used successfully in the French championship last year, whereby the side responsible for the uncontested scrums loses a player.
Both the Rugby Football Union's (RFU) referees panel and the Premiership clubs are ready to implement the proposal for the coming season.
But with less than two weeks until kick-off they are still in the dark as to whether it will actually be adopted.
Even though it was used in France last season, the IRB have stated that implementation of the proposal would require a change to the laws of the game. For a country to deviate from the laws of the game they need a dispenation from the IRB for a "experimental variation", which would be applicable only to domestic matches.
Jonathan Dance, the RFU's IRB representative, has written to the world governing body appealing their stance – but he is yet to receive a reply.
Colin High, the RFU's elite referee manager, said: "France implemented it with massive success last season. They had not one uncontested scrum. It is a preventative measure, not a sanction.
"If we don't bring in that regulation I see no reason to expect the Premiership to be any different this season from what it was last season.
"The IRB representatives have written saying we don't need a law change and please can we implement it next season? We have planned for it and we are comfortable with it, if it comes in.
"We don't want uncontested scrums It is an unedifying sight and it is not good for the game."
Uncontested scrums occur when one side cannot field a front row of two specialist props and a specialist hooker.
The proposal is designed to close a loophole in the laws which can see a struggling side wipe out their opponents' advantage in the scrummage with conveniently-timed injuries to the key players.
Premier Rugby are "desperate" for the regulation to be enforced and to close the loophole that exists but the final say lies with the RFU, who would adhere to whatever the IRB decided.
This time last year, the RFU's disciplinary chief Jeff Blackett announced a tougher stance on disciplinary matters.
There were 13 citings and 10 red cards in the 2005/06 Guinness Premiership season but Blackett said: "Discipline is still very good within the elite end of the game."
Meanwhile, Premier Rugby's bid to extend half-time from 10 to 15 minutes is set to be vetoed by the IRB.
The IRB says that such a move requires a change to law 5.2, which states that the interval should not be more than 10 minutes, and that a moratorium on changes had been agreed until after next year's Rugby World Cup.
The clubs want the longer break to help increase bar and food sales.
