NH club rugby
-
@machpants said in NH club rugby:
Man there is no way the Capts Challenge is going into the law books!
“ The second half of the Blues-Zebre game lasted a ridiculous 67 minutes, with an even more ridiculous 23 of those spent waiting while TMO Ian Davies was called upon to adjudicate on seven captain’s challenges.
Mr. Davies might have been found guilty of betraying emotions a little, but he summed up quite succinctly the immediate feelings of all those watching when he said: “and now they’ve both lost their challenges, thank God!””
I completely agree with the comments and sentiment - however doesn't that mean that officials were constantly wrong for the teams to keep their challenges? They might want to look at the on field officiating, or have I just got that wrong?
-
@snowy The point is if you look with a microscope, you'll find something at every ruck, just about. Record and slow down a match and really look. There's someone offside at every ruck, even just half his boot. No effect, but you could call that with deep TMO scrutiny.
-
@machpants said in NH club rugby:
Bokke mess up their braai - ouch!
One of the dumb buggers threw petrol on the fire, hand caught alight, and then the can he was holding went boom.
-
@machpants said in NH club rugby:
@snowy The point is if you look with a microscope, you'll find something at every ruck, just about. Record and slow down a match and really look. There's someone offside at every ruck, even just half his boot. No effect, but you could call that with deep TMO scrutiny.
Oh well aware of that, but the captains were obviously seeing things that three officials weren't (and a TMO) and they had it wrong or the teams would have lost the referral. That was all that I was getting at. I hate the referral by the way.
-
@snowy said in NH club rugby:
@machpants said in NH club rugby:
@snowy The point is if you look with a microscope, you'll find something at every ruck, just about. Record and slow down a match and really look. There's someone offside at every ruck, even just half his boot. No effect, but you could call that with deep TMO scrutiny.
Oh well aware of that, but the captains were obviously seeing things that three officials weren't (and a TMO) and they had it wrong or they would have lost the referral. That was all that I was getting at. I hate the referral by the way.
the TMO is the worst thing to happen to rugby since whatever the last thing i really hated is.
-
-
@machpants said in NH club rugby:
@snowy Yeah but we have seen refereals kept when the TMO saw something different to what the Capt was whingin about. I am not sure in that case, tho
Yeah and that is just daft. I'm not sure in this case either but we have seen it. They are doing the same shit in cricket. A referral has to be for a specific event or occurrence. They can't just go back and find "something" that wasn't even asked about.
-
@catogrande said in NH club rugby:
Basically, a couple of minutes to go, Leicester 2 points down and all over Bristol, gaining 3 or 4 scrum penalties on 5m. Ref finally loses patience and cards the Bristol prop. Leicester opt for another scrum and ref calls for front row replacement. Afoa had been subbed off and was going to be recalled but Lam insisted he was injured, though Bristol had reported him subbed tactically at the time. Lam hoping for uncontested scrums. Other member of Bristol coaching team says Afoa not injured, Lam still claims he was. Afoa eventually goes on and Bristol scramble the ball into touch. Afoa taunts Leicester scrum half resulting in mass brawl.
Lam’s actions tantamount to cheating. Afoa just got a bit emotional and stupid.
To play devils advocate, perhaps he wasn't injured, but how safe would it have been for Afoa to go on at that point? I am none of a doctor, physician etc, but I do know that around 30 mins after a run, if I was to go out and do a sprint, it would likely result in a muscle tear / injury. John Afoa is not much younger than me. So lets say he plays 50 mins, subs off, then cools down for 28 mins. Then at that point, the ref claims he must come straight back on to a huge defensive scrum against a fully warmed up opposition.
Yes, there is light years difference between the fitness of a pro rugby player & me, but surely the same standards re warming up / warming / resting / recovery apply. Not least to a player much closer to 40, then 30?
-
@majorrage said in NH club rugby:
@catogrande said in NH club rugby:
Basically, a couple of minutes to go, Leicester 2 points down and all over Bristol, gaining 3 or 4 scrum penalties on 5m. Ref finally loses patience and cards the Bristol prop. Leicester opt for another scrum and ref calls for front row replacement. Afoa had been subbed off and was going to be recalled but Lam insisted he was injured, though Bristol had reported him subbed tactically at the time. Lam hoping for uncontested scrums. Other member of Bristol coaching team says Afoa not injured, Lam still claims he was. Afoa eventually goes on and Bristol scramble the ball into touch. Afoa taunts Leicester scrum half resulting in mass brawl.
Lam’s actions tantamount to cheating. Afoa just got a bit emotional and stupid.
To play devils advocate, perhaps he wasn't injured, but how safe would it have been for Afoa to go on at that point? I am none of a doctor, physician etc, but I do know that around 30 mins after a run, if I was to go out and do a sprint, it would likely result in a muscle tear / injury. John Afoa is not much younger than me. So lets say he plays 50 mins, subs off, then cools down for 28 mins. Then at that point, the ref claims he must come straight back on to a huge defensive scrum against a fully warmed up opposition.
Yes, there is light years difference between the fitness of a pro rugby player & me, but surely the same standards re warming up / warming / resting / recovery apply. Not least to a player much closer to 40, then 30?
You raise a valid point, but one that is for the rules to determine, not the head coach. Currently the rules say he should go back on unless he went off injured. Lam lied about it in order to gain an advantage. Here though I have to say that Afoa always seemed quite prepared to go back on, sure his later taunting of the Leicester 9 was a bit dickish but also a little understandable. I have no real problems with Afoa through this, but Pat Lam, a different matter.
-
@catogrande said in NH club rugby:
@majorrage said in NH club rugby:
@catogrande said in NH club rugby:
Basically, a couple of minutes to go, Leicester 2 points down and all over Bristol, gaining 3 or 4 scrum penalties on 5m. Ref finally loses patience and cards the Bristol prop. Leicester opt for another scrum and ref calls for front row replacement. Afoa had been subbed off and was going to be recalled but Lam insisted he was injured, though Bristol had reported him subbed tactically at the time. Lam hoping for uncontested scrums. Other member of Bristol coaching team says Afoa not injured, Lam still claims he was. Afoa eventually goes on and Bristol scramble the ball into touch. Afoa taunts Leicester scrum half resulting in mass brawl.
Lam’s actions tantamount to cheating. Afoa just got a bit emotional and stupid.
To play devils advocate, perhaps he wasn't injured, but how safe would it have been for Afoa to go on at that point? I am none of a doctor, physician etc, but I do know that around 30 mins after a run, if I was to go out and do a sprint, it would likely result in a muscle tear / injury. John Afoa is not much younger than me. So lets say he plays 50 mins, subs off, then cools down for 28 mins. Then at that point, the ref claims he must come straight back on to a huge defensive scrum against a fully warmed up opposition.
Yes, there is light years difference between the fitness of a pro rugby player & me, but surely the same standards re warming up / warming / resting / recovery apply. Not least to a player much closer to 40, then 30?
You raise a valid point, but one that is for the rules to determine, not the head coach. Currently the rules say he should go back on unless he went off injured. Lam lied about it in order to gain an advantage. Here though I have to say that Afoa always seemed quite prepared to go back on, sure his later taunting of the Leicester 9 was a bit dickish but also a little understandable. I have no real problems with Afoa through this, but Pat Lam, a different matter.
I do agree, but yes, my point does have some merit.
-
@catogrande said in NH club rugby:
@majorrage said in NH club rugby:
@catogrande said in NH club rugby:
Basically, a couple of minutes to go, Leicester 2 points down and all over Bristol, gaining 3 or 4 scrum penalties on 5m. Ref finally loses patience and cards the Bristol prop. Leicester opt for another scrum and ref calls for front row replacement. Afoa had been subbed off and was going to be recalled but Lam insisted he was injured, though Bristol had reported him subbed tactically at the time. Lam hoping for uncontested scrums. Other member of Bristol coaching team says Afoa not injured, Lam still claims he was. Afoa eventually goes on and Bristol scramble the ball into touch. Afoa taunts Leicester scrum half resulting in mass brawl.
Lam’s actions tantamount to cheating. Afoa just got a bit emotional and stupid.
To play devils advocate, perhaps he wasn't injured, but how safe would it have been for Afoa to go on at that point? I am none of a doctor, physician etc, but I do know that around 30 mins after a run, if I was to go out and do a sprint, it would likely result in a muscle tear / injury. John Afoa is not much younger than me. So lets say he plays 50 mins, subs off, then cools down for 28 mins. Then at that point, the ref claims he must come straight back on to a huge defensive scrum against a fully warmed up opposition.
Yes, there is light years difference between the fitness of a pro rugby player & me, but surely the same standards re warming up / warming / resting / recovery apply. Not least to a player much closer to 40, then 30?
You raise a valid point, but one that is for the rules to determine, not the head coach. Currently the rules say he should go back on unless he went off injured. Lam lied about it in order to gain an advantage. Here though I have to say that Afoa always seemed quite prepared to go back on, sure his later taunting of the Leicester 9 was a bit dickish but also a little understandable. I have no real problems with Afoa through this, but Pat Lam, a different matter.
Do we know that Lam was lying? I believe his claim was that he took off Afoa due to an injury concern, but it was mis-recorded as a substitution rather than an injury replacement. Was that his story?
-
@gt12 said in NH club rugby:
@catogrande said in NH club rugby:
@majorrage said in NH club rugby:
@catogrande said in NH club rugby:
Basically, a couple of minutes to go, Leicester 2 points down and all over Bristol, gaining 3 or 4 scrum penalties on 5m. Ref finally loses patience and cards the Bristol prop. Leicester opt for another scrum and ref calls for front row replacement. Afoa had been subbed off and was going to be recalled but Lam insisted he was injured, though Bristol had reported him subbed tactically at the time. Lam hoping for uncontested scrums. Other member of Bristol coaching team says Afoa not injured, Lam still claims he was. Afoa eventually goes on and Bristol scramble the ball into touch. Afoa taunts Leicester scrum half resulting in mass brawl.
Lam’s actions tantamount to cheating. Afoa just got a bit emotional and stupid.
To play devils advocate, perhaps he wasn't injured, but how safe would it have been for Afoa to go on at that point? I am none of a doctor, physician etc, but I do know that around 30 mins after a run, if I was to go out and do a sprint, it would likely result in a muscle tear / injury. John Afoa is not much younger than me. So lets say he plays 50 mins, subs off, then cools down for 28 mins. Then at that point, the ref claims he must come straight back on to a huge defensive scrum against a fully warmed up opposition.
Yes, there is light years difference between the fitness of a pro rugby player & me, but surely the same standards re warming up / warming / resting / recovery apply. Not least to a player much closer to 40, then 30?
You raise a valid point, but one that is for the rules to determine, not the head coach. Currently the rules say he should go back on unless he went off injured. Lam lied about it in order to gain an advantage. Here though I have to say that Afoa always seemed quite prepared to go back on, sure his later taunting of the Leicester 9 was a bit dickish but also a little understandable. I have no real problems with Afoa through this, but Pat Lam, a different matter.
Do we know that Lam was lying? I believe his claim was that he took off Afoa due to an injury concern, but it was mis-recorded as a substitution rather than an injury replacement. Was that his story?
I think his story (now) is that he always planned to take Afoa off at half-time, because he's recovering from an injury (?).
And therefore - from his point of view - it was injury-related, and why he didn't want him to go back on. But the team Manager, put it down as a tactical substitution, and that's where all the confusion arose.
Whether anybody believes that or not... I don't know. It kinda sounds plausible, but also kinda sounds like somebody back-tracking and figuring out a "fuzzy scenario" after the fact - where nobody's in the wrong, all just a big misunderstanding, nothing to see here. -
United Rugby Championship Heralds a New Era for Club Rugby
The ‘United Rugby Championship will kick off in September 2021 as the top clubs from South Africa (Cell C Sharks, DHL Stormers, Emirates Lions and Vodacom Bulls) combine with the Guinness PRO14 to create a world-class 16-team league.
CROSSING NEW HORIZONS IN RUGBY
This agreement will create a pathway for SA Rugby to become a full shareholder in Pro Rugby Championship (PRC DAC) alongside the Celtic and Italian unions. In a sporting landscape looking towards the post-pandemic future this unification of north and south provides everyone involved in the United Rugby Championship with optimism for prosperous days ahead.
Subject to contract, all teams in the United Rugby Championship will be eligible to qualify for EPCR competitions in time for the 2022/23 season.
In comparison to the Guinness PRO14 structure, the 18-round regular season in the United Rugby Championship will see the return of a single-standing table that will prevent clashes with international weekends and leave little margin for error for those chasing the title. Every game will count in the league which will be further strengthened by an expanded knock-out series that aims to deliver more jeopardy with a full schedule of quarter-finals and semi-finals capped off by a Grand Final played in a destination venue.
UNITED RUGBY CHAMPIONSHIP LEAGUE FORMAT
The URC will use one league table to rank the teams who will reach the knock-out stages and compete to reach the title and become the champions.
Fixtures: The regular season of the United Rugby Championship will take place across 18 rounds with each team’s fixtures comprising of six (6) Home AND away fixtures against their regional pool opponents and12 Home OR away fixtures against the remaining teams in the league.
Regional pools
Irish Pool: Connacht, Leinster, Munster, Ulster
Welsh Pool: Dragons, Cardiff Rugby, Ospreys, Scarlets
South African Pool: Cell C Sharks, DHL Stormers, Emirates Lions and Vodacom Bulls
Italian & Scottish Pool: Benetton Rugby, Edinburgh, Glasgow Warriors, Zebre Rugby Club
Final Series/Play-Offs: One league table will be used to rank teams and after 18 rounds the top eight sides will qualify for the Play-Offs. Teams will be seeded from 1 to 8 and will receive home advantage according to their seeding. A full round of Quarter-Finals and Semi-Finals will take place to produce two teams who will qualify for the Grand Final.
UNITED RUGBY CHAMPIONSHIP – CHAMPIONS CUP AND CHALLENGE CUP PARTICIPATION
A total of eight teams from the United Rugby Championship will qualify each season for the following season’s Heineken Champions Cup. The balance of teams will participate in the Challenge Cup.
Subject to the finalisation of contract terms with EPCR, South African teams will be eligible to qualify for the Heineken Champions Cup from the 2022/23 season if they have finished in the United Rugby Championship qualification places from the prior season.
All points won during the URC season will contribute to rankings in the regional pools and the highest-ranking team in each of the four pools will earn a place in the Champions Cup for the following season. This addition to the format is expected to add even greater intensity to these age-old local rivalries.
The remaining four places in the Champions Cup will be awarded to the four highest-ranked teams from the single-standing league table who have not already qualified through the four regional pools.
Please note: The new league is subject to approval of the World Rugby Council.
-
-
@machpants said in NH club rugby:
Starting to look like Super 18 rugby!
but no guaranteed conference winner into playoffs and you do play everyone else at least once....if we'd done this it might have actually worked
I'm a bit jealous, they just have a big old comp with loads of rugby to watch, maybe the key isn't to have only the highest quality team in a small comp...but to have enough teams at all levels so everyone has competition around them so you only really see the difference we you look at the top and bottom
-
pretty cool looking comp to be fair
i wonder how long until the South Africans whinge about their travel schedule when they have to travel to Europe (11,000-odd kms) every 2nd week. Which is way worse than travelling to NZ (11,000-odd kms) once for a couple of weeks.
-
@mariner4life I dunno the time zone is the same, so that will help. Tournament costs will be very high though
