In front of your TV screen, you must have, like us, sighed and groaned.
On several occasions in the second half, at the initiative of the Scottish fly-half Finn Russell, the two teams faced each other in “ping-pong rugby”, these long exchanges of kicks, often from 22 meters to 22 meters, in waiting for a player to miss and offer an opportunity to attack.
Often in vain.
To discover
Ranking Tournament 6 of Nations
Calendar and results 6 Nations
These moments of abysmal boredom for (tele)viewers are not new.
But, “because” of Antoine Dupont, they became even more static and horrifying.
Why is the former captain of the Blues, who is defecting from this Six Nations Tournament to devote himself to his 7-a-side Olympic dream, concerned?
It was he who, with good advice, had, a year and a half ago, warned the referee that he was going to exploit the rules so as not to exhaust his forwards in incessant back and forth from dropping the ball to another one.
Read alsoXV of France: against Scotland, Gaël Fickou (finally) raised his head
Articles 10.4.c and 10.7 in fact legislate these exchanges of kicks.
And if the first stipulates that the players in front of the kicker will be considered offside and penalized if they
“interfere with the game”
, the second considers that, if they freeze more than ten meters from the ball carrier while waiting whether he takes another kick, passes or runs five yards with the ball in hand, they are put back into play.
As a result, the solution becomes obvious.
The forwards play the statue game and the kicker is careful not to cover the fateful distance.
This is why Finn Russell, on the XV side of Chardon, Thomas Ramos or Matthieu Jalibert, on the XV side of France, gained so little momentum on their return to the sender.
We therefore found ourselves with motionless players watching the missiles pass above their heads in general indifference.
The game then finds itself in an impasse since an attempt at a counter-attack would come up against the close presence of opposing players who remain static outside this 10 meter zone.
Referee Nic Berry tried to lecture Finn Russell on Saturday but, legally, he couldn't do anything more.
Anglo-Saxon observers did not fail, after the meeting, to attack what they call
“the Dupont law”
.
Or the
“Dupont fault”
, as Telegraph journalist Charlie Morgan dubbed it, adding on X
“it’s his fault”
.
Former Irish international and coach Bernard Jackman thus pleaded, on the RTE Sports TV set, for a regulatory correction to overcome these lunar sequences.
“It was smart of Dupont and everyone is copying it now, but lawmakers need to change the rule!”
Supported by the former back of the XV du Trèfle, Rob Kearney, who rightly points out that
“this rule does not show rugby in its best light”
.
In his weekly column on WalesOnline, the former and emblematic international referee Nigel Owens, very annoyed by this exploitation of the rule, provided ideas for overcoming it.
“One solution might be to say that whether or not you are within 10 yards of where the ball lands, you must always move back towards your own goal line until you are put into play. This will of course require more work from the referee and his team because they would then have to ensure that the players move back well, explains the Welshman.
But whatever the solution, it is clear that we need to reduce the number of kicks.
The grotesque situations caused by this flaw give the impression that we are sometimes watching tennis and no longer rugby!”
But if Antoine Dupont is at the origin, it is clear that the Scots have particularly appropriated this possibility.
A week ago, against Wales, Finn Russell had already used it, causing panic among the opponents and the referee.
A lunar sequence where the actors took several seconds before knowing what attitude to adopt on the ground…