Dave Rennie has expanded his critique of the Springboks' scrum tactics beyond the July series, now framing it as a broader law-reform argument ahead of the November Nations Championship Tests. His central case: the 2024 brake foot law made referees' jobs harder, not easier — pulling their attention toward a difficult-to-see foot position while allowing more obvious illegalities, specifically the angling of South African tightheads, to go unpunished. Rennie's argument is that the Boks' tightheads shear immediately off the mark at 45 degrees, making it structurally impossible for an All Black loosehead to stay square — and that if the set-piece were simply refereed to keep scrums square, New Zealand could compete on power alone.
The piece is as much about World Rugby governance as it is about the Springboks. Rennie is openly sceptical that a pre-November coaches' meeting in London will produce genuine reform, noting that self-interest typically overrides what's best for the game in those forums. He also flags several other laws he considers incoherent — the nine's ability to handle the ball outside the ruck, the absence of a kick clock, and the freedom to flood rucks after they've formed. For Springbok supporters, the interest here is partly in Rennie's continued fixation on South African scrum legality, but more pointedly in whether World Rugby's upcoming meeting produces any framework changes that could alter how Bok set-piece dominance is refereed between now and the World Cup.