The defence coach for Sir Clive Woodward’s 2003 World Cup winning England team, ex-Great Britain Rugby League supremo Phil Larder, once memorably described the difference between the two codes. We were chewing the fat in the lobby of a hotel in Perth on the British and Irish Lions tour of Australia in 2001, watching the world go by in a blur of red.
Phil toyed with an amusing, unspoken thought as the twin lineout towers, Scott Murray and Malcolm O’Kelly loped past like two giraffes in the Serengeti. “Look at those two, they would never play league! If a rugby league team walked through the lobby now, you wouldn’t able to tell the difference between the backs and the forwards,” he chuckled.
If anyone is in doubt rugby is in a state of constant transformation, they should keep an ear glued to events at World Rugby’s Shape of the Game conference which began on Thursday in London. Representatives from both hemispheres meet annually to knock heads and make decisions on the best path of development for the game in the future.
The battle lines already appear to be drawn, if a recent report by French media outlet L’Equipe is to be believed. On one side, South Africa has allied with France in the northern hemisphere to protect the traditional values around set-piece, and the greater variety of body types it encourages; on the other, Australia and New Zealand want to speed up the game even further, and promote the rugby league-type ‘one size fits all’ athlete with a raft of new law trials for Super Rugby Pacific 2026.
More protection for the number nine in contact situations, fewer scrums and more free-kicks for events such as accidental offside and delays in playing the ball, quick taps allowed anywhere behind the mark rather than directly on it. According to the proponents of further change, over four minutes of dead time has been saved by recent Super Rugby innovations, which CEO Jack Mesley says “reflect the ongoing commitment of Super Rugby Pacific to deliver the most entertaining and engaging rugby competition in the world… We want to be a competition that encourages quick taps and faster restarts, that cuts down on unnecessary stoppages, and that embraces positive, attacking rugby.”
On the other side of the argument, recently retired French referee Mathieu Raynal, who now works on the refereeing high-performance panel at the FRR, led the counter-charge on Sud Radio.
“They [Australia and New Zealand] want more passing, more tries, less time spent in mauls and scrums, whereas we [the northern hemisphere] defend these specific elements and are against directions being set by the southern hemisphere.
“Our championship [the Top 14] works. Our stadiums are full, rugby is watched more than football in the country. We don’t want to follow directions coming from countries where stadiums are empty, where they are trying to recreate spectacle and bring people back to stadiums at any cost, even if it means sacrificing fairness and the principle of player safety.”
Raynal’s words were significantly translated on X by SA Rugby’s high performance manager Dave Wessels, who previously worked as head coach of the Melbourne Rebels in Super Rugby, then retweeted by none other than Rassie Erasmus. The French official upped the ante further as the invisible power struggle came into focus with the Shape of the Game conference.
“[Set-pieces] are powerful symbols of our sport. By this route, everyone can participate in our sport: the big guys, the tall guys, the short guys, the fast guys… In the long run, the rugby that New Zealand and Australia advocate will homogenise player profiles. We’ll end up with only back-rowers or centres. This will have an impact on the democratisation of our sport.”
Perhaps the biggest irony is South Africa and France, not Australia and New Zealand have pioneered the use of league-style ‘hybrids’ in the modern game – men such as Oscar Jégou and André Esterhuizen, who can play a role in the backs and the forwards.
Arguably they are also the two sides who have innovated the most at national level over the past year. After watching his charges being slowly clubbed to death by 14 South Africans in November, France head honcho Fabien Galthié courageously decided to move away from the static power which can decide local Six Nations titles, and towards the all-court game which can win you World Cups. If you want to be the best, you have to find a game which can beat the best.
The raw mid-term stats after three rounds of the Six Nations attest to the effectiveness of the key decisions Galthié has made. The basic table illustrates the higher ball-in-play, and greater active time of possession Les Bleus have been able to manage.
Critical to Galthié’s new vision of the game has been the selection of UBB wizard Matthieu Jalibert at 10, and two mobile second rowers who have played international rugby in the back-row in Mickael Guillard and Charles Ollivon. The following table shows how France’s attack pattern changed between the first two rounds versus Ireland and Wales, when Jalibert started, and the third-round game against Italy, which he missed because of injury.
With Jalibert starting, French willingness to move the ball wide was a massive 75% higher than it was with Ramos running on in round three. Over the first two rounds, the average distribution of ball-carries into contact was 10 by Antoine Dupont, compared to 14 by Jalibert; against Italy the situation was reversed, with Dupont maintaining his average [10] but Ramos dropping below Jalibert’s [8].
It is the exquisite equilibrium between Dupont and Jalibert which is driving the French game forward. After three rounds of play, le petit générale at nine leads all kickers with an average of 18 for 516 metres per game. Jalibert ranks first for successful offloads [4.5 per game], line-break assists [2.5] and try assists [2.1]. The perfection in the playmaking scales is almost enough to make you cry. Almost.
That balance has had some interesting ripple-effects in the selection of other, apparently unrelated areas of the team. When Galthié decided on a back-row including yeoman defender Anthony Jelonch at number eight, he needed a primary wave, workhorse ball-carrier and that man was Guillard. Thus far, Guillard averages a Ben Earl-like 19 carries for 86m per game, compared to Jelonch’s modest figures of nine carries for 35m.
Then he picked wide-ranging, yard-eating Ollivon in the second row alongside Guillard to make the most out of the greater proportion of wide ball movement originating from Jalibert.
What does it look like in practice? Let’s draw a few samples from the opening round against Ireland.
— William Bishop (@RPvids1994) February 26, 2026
— William Bishop (@RPvids1994) February 26, 2026
— William Bishop (@RPvids1994) February 26, 2026
In the third round versus Italy, Anthony Jelonch was entrusted the traditional number eight role of running the ball back from opening kick-off, and he’s firmly ‘rejected’ by the first Italian follow-up tackle. The exit kick by Dupont is rendered that little bit more difficult from deep inside the French 22, and the Azzurri get the ball back near halfway.
In the second and third clips from the Ireland match, Guillard was the chosen man, able to break the first tackle and run the ball back outside the 22 from exit situations and set up a freer box-kicking scenario for his scrum-half. The picture is completed when his locking partner Ollivon becomes the first man up in support of Louis Bielle-Biarrey on the opposite side of the field.
With Jalibert starting at outside-half, both second rows were frequently sighted outside the 10 in attack.
— William Bishop (@RPvids1994) February 26, 2026
Jalibert’s late withdrawal from the XV to play Italy shifted Ramos into the 10 hot-seat, and it meant the two Toulousain second rows Emmanuel Meafou and Thibault Flament were operating inside the 10, and directly off the service by Dupont.
— William Bishop (@RPvids1994) February 26, 2026
— William Bishop (@RPvids1994) February 26, 2026
The ultimate irony of the southern hemisphere’s push for greater speed and less dead time is France and South Africa are already ahead of the game. Both are picking hybrid forward/backs, where Australia and New Zealand are not. Les Bleus are packing their back five forwards with four men who have all operated at international level in the back-row, and a fifth who filled in at centre in the 2024 Six Nations. That is not the signature selection of a coach who wants to kill the game at the set-piece.
With Jalibert at 10, France are moving the point of attack wider than it has at any time since Dupont was anointed the starting scrum-half, and the best player of the professional era. Rugby needs its giraffes picking fruit out of the lineout trees, and its rhinos locking horns at the scrum. Les Bleus, like the Springboks, are already showing they can roam the prairie, running like the wind and cornering on a dime. So, who is kidding who?
Plot your team's route to the Six Nations title with our Six Nations score predictor game!
Why do RugbyPass use these weird filters on article photos? Makes them look like leathery skinned aliens. What’s the point? Genuinely curious why the effort is made to apply it?
NB a game moving to 80-100 kicks in play is NOT and never been the soul of rugby. And from memory that is what you were predicting just a few weeks ago. Just watched the Crusaders Chiefs game - brutal in all facets. 15 scrums, 25 lineouts, and only 43 kicks in play. That is the soul of rugby. The game between Ireland and England which from memory had less than 50 kicks - brilliant high intensity - that is the soul of rugby. France v Ireland - 77 kicks in play - sorry I dont care what the rest of the analysis shows - it was dire. Great to see France innovating, but hell if that game is the new soul of rugby, give me the old one please.
The French and Saffers are totally misrepresenting the proposals. You just need to watch the Chiefs Crusaders match to understand that the scrum is still hugely important in Super Rugby.
It doesn't matter no changes will be made. NZ & OZ want to change things to be like Super Rugby and thankfully that is not going to happen.
I have to say just looking at the SRP proposals they don’t look or feel very radical JD.
Maybe there’s a political power struggle going on behind the scenes? There are often arm-wrestles over law-making law interpretation before World Cup years!