• Categories
Collapse

The Silver Fern

The Current State of Rugby

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Sports Talk
1.5k Posts 90 Posters 154.3k Views
The Current State of Rugby
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • nostrildamusN Offline
    nostrildamusN Offline
    nostrildamus
    replied to Kiwiwomble on last edited by
    #678

    @Kiwiwomble said in The Current State of Rugby:

    @nostrildamus that would make the overall situation worse...the tv viewing audience seeing clearly (imagine the graphics on screen counting players off) something very difficult to judge on the ground....isn't that part of the problem? we all see loads of stuff the ref misses

    being able to see gameplay? The horror, the horror!

    KiwiwombleK 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • voodooV Offline
    voodooV Offline
    voodoo
    replied to nostrildamus on last edited by
    #679

    @nostrildamus said in The Current State of Rugby:

    for mauls one could limit the overall number of number across of players binding?

    I like it! But why not just limit the number of attacking players? Let's say to 4 players, then the defense has the option to try to stop it with 4 themselves, or if they need to, they can commit more than that but risk leaving holes in wider channels?

    nostrildamusN 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • KiwiwombleK Offline
    KiwiwombleK Offline
    Kiwiwomble
    replied to nostrildamus on last edited by Kiwiwomble
    #680

    @nostrildamus said in The Current State of Rugby:

    @Kiwiwomble said in The Current State of Rugby:

    @nostrildamus that would make the overall situation worse...the tv viewing audience seeing clearly (imagine the graphics on screen counting players off) something very difficult to judge on the ground....isn't that part of the problem? we all see loads of stuff the ref misses

    being able to see gameplay? The horror, the horror!

    if you're going to oversimplify the idea to that generic statement then yeah....its great....but that doesnt address the comment it would be even harder for refs to officiate and so might to even more frustration with how the game if officated

    do people serious think adding MORE complexity to the game will help? imagine off the lineout players either piling in and immediately getting pinged...yay, more penalties...or all holding off like when you awkwardly try and pass someone in the street and keep walking into them..."no, you go..."no, please, after you"

    nostrildamusN 2 Replies Last reply
    1
  • nostrildamusN Offline
    nostrildamusN Offline
    nostrildamus
    replied to Kiwiwomble on last edited by
    #681

    @Kiwiwomble said in The Current State of Rugby:

    @nostrildamus said in The Current State of Rugby:

    @Kiwiwomble said in The Current State of Rugby:

    @nostrildamus that would make the overall situation worse...the tv viewing audience seeing clearly (imagine the graphics on screen counting players off) something very difficult to judge on the ground....isn't that part of the problem? we all see loads of stuff the ref misses

    being able to see gameplay? The horror, the horror!

    if you're going to oversimplify the idea to that generic statement then yeah....its great....but that doesnt address the comment it would be even harder for refs to officiate and so might to even more frustration with how the game if officated

    but you only answered part of my suggestion (I think).
    And there is the injury concern with extra weight.
    And a limit on numbers may give attackers pause to consider who should lead it.
    And it may reduce penalties or illegalities.
    And the game could flow better.
    And it would reduce the scaling factor if a team has consistently bigger / stronger players.

    KiwiwombleK 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • nostrildamusN Offline
    nostrildamusN Offline
    nostrildamus
    replied to Kiwiwomble on last edited by
    #682

    @Kiwiwomble said in The Current State of Rugby:

    @nostrildamus said in The Current State of Rugby:

    @Kiwiwomble said in The Current State of Rugby:

    @nostrildamus that would make the overall situation worse...the tv viewing audience seeing clearly (imagine the graphics on screen counting players off) something very difficult to judge on the ground....isn't that part of the problem? we all see loads of stuff the ref misses

    being able to see gameplay? The horror, the horror!

    if you're going to oversimplify the idea to that generic statement then yeah....its great....but that doesnt address the comment it would be even harder for refs to officiate and so might to even more frustration with how the game if officated

    Well, I am working off the principle that if gameplay in rugby is good we should be able to see as much of it as possible. Oversimplified or principled? Up for debate.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • nostrildamusN Offline
    nostrildamusN Offline
    nostrildamus
    replied to voodoo on last edited by
    #683

    @voodoo said in The Current State of Rugby:

    @nostrildamus said in The Current State of Rugby:

    for mauls one could limit the overall number of number across of players binding?

    I like it! But why not just limit the number of attacking players? Let's say to 4 players, then the defense has the option to try to stop it with 4 themselves, or if they need to, they can commit more than that but risk leaving holes in wider channels?

    I don't know if that would work but it does have an interesting aspect-attackers would probably be much more adverse to wasting time and letting defenders mass/regroup..

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • nostrildamusN Offline
    nostrildamusN Offline
    nostrildamus
    wrote on last edited by
    #684

    I don't see how b. can be policed effectively and a. is interesting, why can we clean out in rucks but not drag out in mauls?
    (a) A player must not try to drag an opponent out of a maul.
    (b) A player must not take any action to make the opposing team think that the ball is out of the maul while it is still in the maul

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • KiwiwombleK Offline
    KiwiwombleK Offline
    Kiwiwomble
    replied to nostrildamus on last edited by Kiwiwomble
    #685

    @nostrildamus said in The Current State of Rugby:

    @Kiwiwomble said in The Current State of Rugby:

    @nostrildamus said in The Current State of Rugby:

    @Kiwiwomble said in The Current State of Rugby:

    @nostrildamus that would make the overall situation worse...the tv viewing audience seeing clearly (imagine the graphics on screen counting players off) something very difficult to judge on the ground....isn't that part of the problem? we all see loads of stuff the ref misses

    being able to see gameplay? The horror, the horror!

    if you're going to oversimplify the idea to that generic statement then yeah....its great....but that doesnt address the comment it would be even harder for refs to officiate and so might to even more frustration with how the game if officated

    but you only answered part of my suggestion (I think).
    And there is the injury concern with extra weight.
    And a limit on numbers may give attackers pause to consider who should lead it.
    And it may reduce penalties or illegalities.
    And the game could flow better.
    And it would reduce the scaling factor if a team has consistently bigger / stronger players.

    pause to consider who should lead? would that be good, people pointing at each other or themselves and counting?

    and do we really think adding another rule...will limit penalties?...its just more things for the ref to penalise

    @nostrildamus said in The Current State of Rugby:

    I don't see how b. can be policed effectively and a. is interesting, why can we clean out in rucks but not drag out in mauls?
    (a) A player must not try to drag an opponent out of a maul.
    (b) A player must not take any action to make the opposing team think that the ball is out of the maul while it is still in the maul

    i agree with this though

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • RapidoR Offline
    RapidoR Offline
    Rapido
    replied to nostrildamus on last edited by
    #686

    @nostrildamus said in The Current State of Rugby:

    for mauls one could limit the overall number of number across of players binding?

    I've read this post about 10 times now and still can't understand it. I, for one, am impressed that you guys seem to have managed to have an entire page's worth of conversation around this post.

    nostrildamusN KiwiwombleK 2 Replies Last reply
    5
  • RapidoR Offline
    RapidoR Offline
    Rapido
    wrote on last edited by
    #687

    Let's see how much conversation this can generate:

    For rucks one could seagull the seagulls of players hooking?

    BonesB 1 Reply Last reply
    2
  • nostrildamusN Offline
    nostrildamusN Offline
    nostrildamus
    replied to Rapido on last edited by
    #688

    @Rapido said in The Current State of Rugby:

    @nostrildamus said in The Current State of Rugby:

    for mauls one could limit the overall number of number across of players binding?

    I've read this post about 10 times now and still can't understand it. I, for one, am impressed that you guys seem to have managed to have an entire page's worth of conversation around this post.

    Like a scrum sets number of players and number of rows (and sets the order/positioning but that aint' gonna help here)

    Law 20 - Scrum
    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • KiwiwombleK Offline
    KiwiwombleK Offline
    Kiwiwomble
    replied to Rapido on last edited by
    #689

    @Rapido said in The Current State of Rugby:

    @nostrildamus said in The Current State of Rugby:

    for mauls one could limit the overall number of number across of players binding?

    I've read this post about 10 times now and still can't understand it. I, for one, am impressed that you guys seem to have managed to have an entire page's worth of conversation around this post.

    i admit to doing some assuming and interpretation...but you're not wrong

    @nostrildamus said in The Current State of Rugby:

    @Rapido said in The Current State of Rugby:

    @nostrildamus said in The Current State of Rugby:

    for mauls one could limit the overall number of number across of players binding?

    I've read this post about 10 times now and still can't understand it. I, for one, am impressed that you guys seem to have managed to have an entire page's worth of conversation around this post.

    Like a scrum sets number of players and number of rows (and sets the order/positioning but that aint' gonna help here)

    Law 20 - Scrum

    but a scrum is a break in play with a predetermined number of participants....you can see how thats different to a maul that can form in open play

    nostrildamusN 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • nostrildamusN Offline
    nostrildamusN Offline
    nostrildamus
    replied to Kiwiwomble on last edited by
    #690

    @Kiwiwomble said in The Current State of Rugby:

    but a scrum is a break in play with a predetermined number of participants....you can see how thats different to a maul that can form in open play

    of course I am suggesting more parameters like a scrum has (but not as many) but here I don't think one is really sacrificing that much in individual expression given the best mauls are like phalanxes anyway..and there is so much to adjudicate with a maul I don't frankly see how it is possible for a single ref to do so consistently...

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • BonesB Offline
    BonesB Offline
    Bones
    replied to Rapido on last edited by
    #691

    @Rapido said in The Current State of Rugby:

    Let's see how much conversation this can generate:

    For rucks one could seagull the seagulls of players hooking?

    That's all well and good until you remember hot chips are extremely common in the stands.

    We've finally got Perenara playing proper rugby and you want him to regress back to old ways.

    Unless the players hooking are side on to seagull the reverse seagull, then unseagull, it's not even close to a good idea.

    Moran.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • CrucialC Offline
    CrucialC Offline
    Crucial
    wrote on last edited by
    #692

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/all-blacks/300739125/why-sir-steve-hansen-watched-the-all-blacks-v-scotland-test-on-mute

    BonesB 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • BonesB Offline
    BonesB Offline
    Bones
    replied to Crucial on last edited by
    #693

    @Crucial he didn't really go into much detail eh. But I assume he's talking about TJ.

    KirwanK 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • KirwanK Offline
    KirwanK Offline
    Kirwan
    replied to Bones on last edited by
    #694

    @Bones said in The Current State of Rugby:

    @Crucial he didn't really go into much detail eh. But I assume he's talking about TJ.

    Gets worse every year. However, Kane Hames makes him sound like a genius.

    NepiaN 1 Reply Last reply
    2
  • NepiaN Offline
    NepiaN Offline
    Nepia
    replied to Kirwan on last edited by
    #695

    @Kirwan said in The Current State of Rugby:

    @Bones said in The Current State of Rugby:

    @Crucial he didn't really go into much detail eh. But I assume he's talking about TJ.

    Gets worse every year. However, Kane Hames makes him sound like a genius.

    I actually thought Hames was good on this most recent test.

    KiwiwombleK 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • KiwiwombleK Offline
    KiwiwombleK Offline
    Kiwiwomble
    replied to Nepia on last edited by
    #696

    @Nepia me too

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • mariner4lifeM Offline
    mariner4lifeM Offline
    mariner4life
    wrote on last edited by
    #697

    quite frankly, one off rugby's biggest issues right now is the culture around the current South African team. Yes, i am calling you out directly.

    Rassie's weekly whinge dumps of stupid. Kolbe's missus got in on the act after the weekend too. And lets face it, saffer fans have a years-long reputation for epic ref-related whinge fests.

    Wait, i say current, but remember "justice for Bakkies" (justice for bakkies would have been a few months in prison)

    Social media the day after a test is already a fucking dumpster-fire of 10-second videos of alleged missed calls by refs. When actual team officials are leading it? how has this fuckhead not been entirely rubbed out yet?

    KiwiwombleK 1 Reply Last reply
    7

The Current State of Rugby
Sports Talk
  • Login

  • Don't have an account? Register

  • Login or register to search.
  • First post
    Last post
0
  • Categories
  • Login

  • Don't have an account? Register

  • Login or register to search.