The Current State of Rugby
-
@antipodean said in The Current State of Rugby:
rugby is a game you really have to have played. Rugby is basically incomprehensible otherwise.
And even then....
-
@kiwiinmelb said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Windows97 I took a son and a couple of his AFL mates who had never been to live rugby to the Melbourne Test ,
They were open minded to it but overall they kind of felt it is a sport that is really over officiated , but on a positive note really enjoyed the bits where the ball was in play , but then would politely make comments like , it really has a lot of moments where nothing at all is happening doesnt it ?
And they also were really puzzled at how often players get sent from the field and asked if fans find that acceptable
My 9 year old at the last Bledisloe made the comment "why the hell does the game constantly stop for no reason at all". He was the same, loved when ball was in play, but got bored with all the stoppages. There was one part where they took ages looking at a tackle around the ankles? We had no idea what was happening. And then in another stoppage the worst thing happened, not one, but TWO Mexican waves started going around the ground. At a rugby match. Sorry but that's a pretty clear sign the crowd is getting bored waiting for the officials to figure it out.
-
@NTA said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Crucial said in The Current State of Rugby:
The biggest problem, as always, is that the NH (especially UK) teams have no problem wanting a confrontational and slow game.
Was interesting to tweet about the modificiations that QRU will run in their Challenger Series i.e. cracking down on time taken to clear rucks, set scrums, take kicks etc.
In response to this I posted to the effect of "NH will hate this" and immediately several Poms and Irish jumped in stating that some of them are already Law but not enforced properly.
Point 1 of 'Lineout'
Point 1 of 'Deliberate Knock Down'Do these fucking idiots watch rugby?
-
I have said before I dislike immensely the idea that a 9 can't advance beyond the midpoint of scrum, will allow slow 9 plenty of time to get ball etc. Too many of these trial laws are designed to cover up lack of skills of players I think. And with no pressure don't bother with 5m scrums everyone should result in easy try as 8 or 9 can get such easy metres of scrum.
-
-
@Rapido said in The Current State of Rugby:
Last weekend, wet day. I watched a couple of hours of rugby on YouTube. Some of it from the era of my youth when I like the sport E.g. some 1989 tour games, and Otago v British Lions in 1993. I also watched some from before my time (1964 NZ v France test - what absolute chaos, but can’t deny that for about 75% of the 80 minutes there is competition for possession occurring, so engaging). Some stuff from 1979 that was before my time.
Then, YouTube feed suggested highlights of Canterbury v Auckland match played the night before.
Now, NZRU’s NPC YouTube feeds are excellent, about 10 to 12 minutes long.
It’s just a shame that actual modern rugby is terrible.
I think I only lasted about 2 minutes, 2 tries (all under penalty advantage, of course) and 2 yellows. Then. Went back to watching something else.Now, I think I’ve said before on this thread that I’m probably not a good sample for “state of the modern game” as I am too invested in the version of when I actually liked the sport. And there’s just tooooo much to change to get it back to a decent state.
But … my God. The advantage law has turned from Rugby’s best feature (compared to soccer for example) to it’s biggest curse. I, for one, do not want to watch teams going side to side for 1 to 2 minutes from barely contested ruck to barely contested ruck just to come back 10 or 20m to the penalty.
Re: the NZRU Youtube videos referenced above. I wouldn’t be surprised if 7 or 8 minutes of the 10 minutes clip is action played under advantage.
I, for one, find any action played under advantage to just be a bit boring. I get Netball vibes.
Now, as an aside … why am I, a man in my 40s in the earnings peak of my life watching free sport on YouTube and not paying for a rugby/sport subscription service?
superb post. the game is gone to the dogs really.
-
English Premiership has been highly entertaining the first weeks of the season
And hard nosed as fuck
Best club rugby to watch at the moment IMHO
-
@antipodean said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Windows97 I've often told people that of the three codes (that aren't soccer) to appreciate them, league is a game made for TV, AFL is a game you have to see live and rugby is a game you really have to have played. Rugby is basically incomprehensible otherwise.
When afl people have asked me about the difference between the two rugby codes ,
I have quite often said if you compared them to cricket,
League is more like limited overs cricket ,
And rugby is more like test cricket.
-
@Rapido said in The Current State of Rugby:
Just saw a winger get sin-binned for open-palmed pushing his opposite winger over the touch line, "didn't wrap".
Mid-Canterbury v South-Canterbury.
Lol.
seriously? did he push him in the head or something? i take it you cant even grab a jersey any more
watching otago v canterbury yesterday...loads of things that i think would have been pulled back at a higher level, several line balls (read forward)...but mostly they let the game go and it was much more enjoyable
-
@Rapido yeah that was weird, ref called it a shoulder charge but geez, there was barely anything in it.
-
@taniwharugby said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Rapido yeah that was weird, ref called it a shoulder charge but geez, there was barely anything in it.
He specifically said, to paraphrase "you cant shoulder charge, you cant push, have to wrap" to the captain.
Tbh, the footage was actually hard to make out for me. Seemed to be a single camera broadcast and another player got in the way at viral moment. Going on the protestations of the 'offenders' and the refs explanation.
-
I definitely think the quality of officiating at all levels is impacting the game, granted the rule book full of interpretation doesn't help, but I don't think there are enough quality refs coming through.
But TBH, who'd be a ref?
-
@Steve said in The Current State of Rugby:
superb post. the game is gone to the dogs really.
I'm not so sure. I think modern rugby is pretty much OK apart from 1-2 areas and generally better to watch over the years. I like the mix of skills on display - from set-pieces to backline moves and cover defence. That and the way the game can change in a very short time. While it caused problems in the past, the changes to protect player's heads seems to have settled down a fair bit.
I think there's too many cards though and the Red Card situation still needs sorting out to differentiate between malicious and careless/accidental acts. And stop the water-breaks and cynical time-wasting. I'd focus on the Refs to improve the game. Some are great, don't muck about and use the TMO well while others seem to want to refer everything upstairs, allow too many delays etc. No knocking them, just think focussing on refereeing can have a major positive impact
Finally, can we have a moratorium on rule changes for a few years? Even avid followers of the game have difficulty keeping up between competitions.
-
Couple of incidents over the past 24 hours has illustrated rugby's huge issue. Protection of players, and the tools referees have to do it.
Retallick got a red for driving his shoulder in to a guys neck. The scot hit McDermott in the head from a mile back.
Now, issue we've got is, you get stories like Paul Green who killed himself seemingly out of nowhere, and they subsequently found his brain was fucked. This cannot stand.
High tackles are high tackles. Done to death. But the breakdown is now sharply in focus. Jacklers once on really can only be moved with force (goes without saying the tactic I used 12-odd years ago now kinda horrifies me, and is a red card). So what to do?
To keep options are:
Smash players with red cards until turnovers are accepted
Remove the jackle and go back to binding and pushingThe problem is see is the law of unintended consequences. Allowing more breakdown turnovers will absolutely reduce attacking intent. Heaps more kicking. More messy aerial contests.
Take the jackle out and you remove the incentive for legs tackles, you'll get more smother tackles. And more incidental head contact. And you'll get some very boring periods of play.So what ever you do, rugby has to fundamentally change. Very possibly at the expense of its entertainment value. How does a governing body risk it's entire revenue stream to protect players? Absolute fundamental changes will drive many existing fans away.
Is there really a place for rugby union in the new world. Funnily enough rugby league would be easier to legislate in to a safer sport. No breakdowns, no scrums, far more static play.
-
Breaking the Code
Something is irrevocably broken in a professional spectator sport when one of your first inquiries ahead of a big game is to check who is on the refereeing panel.
Rugby at the highest levels has become a lottery. Red and yellow cards, often inconsistently applied, are deciding the outcome of matches far too often. Video referees are calling play back multiple phases to check for suspected ‘foul play’. Games are thus stopped for tedious on-field inquisitions that destroy the momentum and leave attention-wandering watchers at home listlessly flicking back to their phones.
Attacking play too often now is disadvantaged by offside rush defences. Playmakers are loathe to chance their arms for fear of being isolated. The game is reduced to aerial ping pong, endless box kicks and rolling mauls, which appear indefensible and which, for most of the public, are like watching cement dry. Players deliberately waste time and seek to milk penalties. The aim is no longer so much to play rugby, but to play the officials.
This is not an uncommon view. Many people would now agree that the flow and beauty of the game of rugby union has been destroyed by whatever-it-takes professionalism and cynical time-wasting tactics, alongside the paranoia from the World Rugby authorities about class actions over the long-term damage created by frequent concussions.
I’ve always been a rugby union tragic, ever eager to defend the code to my Australian friends and colleagues who extol the superior entertainment value of NRL or AFL, but I am now increasingly inclined to agree with them. So many times I have sat down in recent years with excited anticipation to watch an international test, only to end up feeling cheated and disappointed in the product. And this is irrespective of who is playing.
In saying this, I am well aware of the completely understandable and justified need to preserve player welfare. No-one wants to see still young men struggling with premature dementia because of head knocks suffered on the rugby field. But I question whether the current highly legalistic approach to this issue, where every game is turned into an on-field coronial inquest, is the answer.
The onus is on the law-makers to fix this. The rules need to be tweaked so as to return the code to the way it was once played, where there was a reward for flair and risk-taking, where joyful athleticism trumped cynical gamesmanship, where officials were more focused on the spirit of the law than on its letter, and where the opinion of the paying public was given precedence.
Of course, you may well say that this criticism just boils down to a vain wish for a return to the virtues of the amateur over the professional code - in other words, a futile desire to turn the clock back. On the other hand, if money and markets now rule the game (as they are doing in every inch of our lives), the cash registers will soon go silent anyway if this dour, ugly and pointless spectacle is allowed to continue.
Meanwhile, in women’s rugby we see a glimpse of what used to be….
-
There's a fundamental issue of trying to sanitise a contact sport. It's not the big head shots that do the damage, but the ongoing repititious head contacts at training and in the game.
The unequivocal statement on that this week in teh US has dire implications for contact sports; NFL Rugby U+L, boxing. Who's going to let kids play, even if adults can understand and accept the risks?
We've got some crazy changes coming I expect. I don't have an answer, but it's going to be confrontational for long term watchers like me.
-
@His-Bobness said in The Current State of Rugby:
Meanwhile, in women’s rugby we see a glimpse of what used to be….
They don't have the power to hurt each other.
-
@Frank said in The Current State of Rugby:
@His-Bobness said in The Current State of Rugby:
Meanwhile, in women’s rugby we see a glimpse of what used to be….
They don't have the power to hurt each other.
Have you just volunteered as tackle bag at this week’s training?
Isn’t that the point though? A game based and ruled on power over skill has become very boring
-
@Frank said in The Current State of Rugby:
@His-Bobness said in The Current State of Rugby:
Meanwhile, in women’s rugby we see a glimpse of what used to be….
They don't have the power to hurt each other.
It"s relative isn't it? Compared to males they may be down on power, but I bet they can still hurt each other.
-
@Crucial in the games yesterday, there were 2 incidents that likely would have (1 probably should have, but I was at the game so didnt hear what the mitigation was) resulted in reds in the mens game:
1 was French players contacting an Italian head - for me, this was ruled perfectly; zero sanction
2 the Welsh 13 tipped Tui past horizontal, she landed heavily on her shoulder, zero care for getting her down; YCI am in the camp of less cards, better rules.
Rucks, maybe clearouts can only start from within 1m of the ruck, removing some of these massive charges in, where it becomes so much easier for things to go wrong. If you are closer, slower you need to really pick how you are going to attack the jackler rather than flying in at him. Once the ruck is formed, you can only join by binding first, then moving the body?
The tackle is slightly harder to deal with because you go low, you offer up off-loads, go high you run the risk of slipping up. Maybe no pop passes off the deck, once on the deck you place it, no popping.
Mauls are a shambles...I mean as a defender, you are making your way through the middle, opposition players can impede you, essentially grapple you, hold your arms, pull you back, despite you not having the ball...there is a massive imbalance between the attacker and defender at maul time, with attackers having the right to do almost anything, defender almost nothing.
full arm binding needs to be a thing, rucks, mauls, scrums.
As above, less cards is better for me, and I dislike the YC for attempted intercepts...i mean if you get your hand to the ball, then you have a chance at an intercept, sure there are occasion where the hand movement is down, therefore 0 chance, in these cases, maybe a YC, but when the hand is going up, you touch the ball, you are trying to intercept it.
Just my random Sunday thoughts.
