LONG READ 'Exciting' or 'a terrible rule'? Why escort runners could define the Autumn Nations Series

If the nations about to start their autumn campaigns were paying attention to England-New Zealand then Professor Brian Cox might not be the only one gazing towards the sky this weekend.

What jumped out tactically from the Twickenham nail-biter was how much difference three little words spoken by a referee – “allow the access” – can make.

While all the brimstone and hellfire ahead of the Autumn Nations Series centred around the introduction of the 20-minute red card, World Rugby’s directive to officials to outlaw kick-chase blocking may well end up having more impact.

Cross-kicks, box kicks and kick-passes are going to be a running theme this November. The high-ball contest has been cleaned up and genuine one on one competition is suddenly being allowed.

Watching coaches will have taken note and the smart ones will be preparing their ammunition. Andy Robinson, the former England and Scotland coach, was one of those struck by the change.

“My first thought was that I really enjoyed it because I thought having that contest for possession was exceptional and it created a lot of turnover ball. I thought it led to a really good battle,” said Robinson, who is now back on the Bath coaching staff.

As coaches we work out ways of manipulating the laws and the same will happen with this.

“But where the questions could come over whether it creates more scrums and whether it will change the nature of how the game is played with most of the kicks becoming contested. Does that then slow the game down a little bit more if it just goes to contestable kicks?

“You want to make sure you keep the long kick battles as well as the short kick battles because the long kick battles will open up space as well.

“What’s important to understand when you make law changes is that there are positive actions one way but also there’s a reaction on the other side. As coaches we work out ways of manipulating the laws and the same will happen with this. People will work out ways to make it positive to them and it’s not always positive in terms of the way the whole game looks.”

The law of unintended consequences.

Robinson is not opposed to change per se – he views the Dupont Law, for example, as an excellent one for the game. And he thinks more time is needed to assess this current change fully, to see how it beds in. But his experience tells him it may not work out quite how World Rugby pictured.

It was a move made for all the right reasons – why should a blind eye be turned to the obstruction that had become ingrained in the game – but if it leads to an aerial kick-a-thon then it will not represent regression rather than progress.

At the heart of the directive is a desire to see a proper contest for the ball. Retreating defenders – escort runners – are no longer allowed to sneakily build a protective wall around a catcher. Teams who ignore the new directive will concede a penalty.

It’s going to bring way too much kicking into it and I’m also fuming about the idea of catching a high ball and a bloke with a 50m run-up every time sprinting down on me and smoking me.

Neither did so at the Allianz Stadium in part because referee Angus Gardner coached them through the game with his “allow the access” instruction when the ball was airborne.

The effect on the players was clear though. You could almost hear the cogs turning inside Henry Slade’s head as he hesitated over whether to block a thundering chase from Mark Tele’a in the closing stages. Slade moved aside and the All Blacks wing outjumped England full-back George Furbank to claim the ball.

It was a stark illustration of how the balance of power has been shifted away from the defending team.

Rugby union seems to be constantly tinkering with itself. In most instances the attempt to improve the game is laudable but in a sport of many moving parts, landing the dart in the red bit is not straightforward.

Different drivers are in play simultaneously. The desire to speed rugby up and encourage more ball in play time has to be married with the need to maintain it as a game for all shapes and sizes. The requirement for more tries and big hits for highlights-hungry Gen Z has to be balanced with player welfare.

While the sport’s lawmakers strive for perfection, the reality is that rugby is an imperfect game. A great one, yes, but an imperfect one all the same.

The ideal we should hope for – the state of play when the game is at its most watchable and most playable – is when it has variety.

There was still plenty in the England-New Zealand match, particularly from the All Blacks, but there is a danger now, having seen its benefits, the high ball tactic could be overplayed with more chance of the attacking side winning back possession.

The other unintended impact is on the ribs of the poor saps who catch the uncontested kick. Launch it a little further and the catcher becomes a sitting duck for a tackler travelling at full speed. Manny Feyi-Waboso dissolved a stationary Will Jordan with a particularly bruising hit off a Marcus Smith cross-kick in the first half of Saturday’s game.

A catcher not only needs to be able to be able to spring high now but if they want to avoid a flying missile then the gift of levitation is also useful.

“It’s an absolutely terrible rule,” former England wing Anthony Watson told the For The Love of Rugby podcast.

“It’s going to bring way too much kicking into it and I’m also fuming about the idea of catching a high ball and a bloke with a 50m run-up every time sprinting down on me and smoking me. I’ve no interest in that law change whatsoever.”

There may be self-preservation at work in his take but the players’ feedback will be pivotal to whether the current international experiment is adopted across the board.

They – and we – should give it the full window before delivering final judgement but the initial signs are that for good or ill a small tweak will turn out to be a game-changer.