The Current State of Rugby
-
@taniwharugby said in The Current State of Rugby:
@mariner4life ah didnt see that...that'd be great, but I dont see that happening (in fact, cant see most of that happening, WR seems to hate the game...)
Would also see a return to smaller more mobile athletic locks I reckon.
or really tall ones!
oh dude absolutely none of that would ever happen. It's just the shit i like
real rugby heads, you know, the "game they play in heaven" fuckheads, love to crap on about rugby being a constant contest. It becomes less of contest every year IMO. scrums and lineouts are rarely turned over. rucks are less of a contest than ever. mauls are not a contest. Remove a heap of modern rugby's contrivances and just maybe the game opens up again
-
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
no jackal
Kind of feel that this is inevitable to reduce risk at the ruck. With no jacklers, there's much less need to smash or grapple players off the ball.
-
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
mariner4lifes rugby 2.0
no jackal
allow lazy tacklers to get trampled if they don't roll outno kicking from the base of the ruck, there must always be a pass before a kick.
Agree with no jackalling, if the ball on ground it can't be played by hand, and you don't need to trample anyone, just blow over top (as way back when I played), and move players back with soles of boots in backwards motion.
Got to allow kicking from base of ruck, otherwise everyone up in defensive line, just allow to tackle halfback as soon as he touches ball, with hand (or feet), he won't have time to kick, have quick passing halves again.
-
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
@taniwharugby i reckon the maul becomes way less of a weapon if there is no lineout lifting, and that facet goes back to a 50/50 contest.
I would be happy with it being back to lifting etc, but f*** me there would be some moaning about it being scrappy and everyone doing the shit in lineouts that we all did!
-
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
@taniwharugby i reckon the maul becomes way less of a weapon if there is no lineout lifting, and that facet goes back to a 50/50 contest.
Lineouts with lifting looks impressive compared to without. I doubt this change will be made
-
@Winger said in The Current State of Rugby:
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
@taniwharugby i reckon the maul becomes way less of a weapon if there is no lineout lifting, and that facet goes back to a 50/50 contest.
Lineouts with lifting looks impressive compared to without. I doubt this change will be made
oh, well, if it looks better, no worries then.
-
@mariner4life 100% agree with your musings. Carding players is pretty clearly just trying to fix a symptom with no real analysis of the root cause, and it's just fucking up the spectacle for paying fans. I'd really like to see the game sped up so the huge blokes get exposed pretty quickly and become a liability to their teams, that alone would massively reduce the impact of the collisions we are seeing. I know that won't happen though, because it'd favour teams like the ABs and Wallabies, and that's the last thing WR would want to do.
-
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
@taniwharugby said in The Current State of Rugby:
@mariner4life ah didnt see that...that'd be great, but I dont see that happening (in fact, cant see most of that happening, WR seems to hate the game...)
Would also see a return to smaller more mobile athletic locks I reckon.
or really tall ones!
oh dude absolutely none of that would ever happen. It's just the shit i like
real rugby heads, you know, the "game they play in heaven" fuckheads, love to crap on about rugby being a constant contest. It becomes less of contest every year IMO. scrums and lineouts are rarely turned over. rucks are less of a contest than ever. mauls are not a contest. Remove a heap of modern rugby's contrivances and just maybe the game opens up again
The only way any of this ever happens if we suddenly became the best in the world at all the things we hate about rugby (and won) and the NH teams all became the guardians of running rugby (and lost). None of this is happening ever. Ever.
-
I read this article by The Times David Walsh a few days ago (he's really good - the bloke who exposed Lance Armstrong) and keep thinking about it. The points he makes on how we, the public, think about dangers to players on the rugby field are thought-provoking and worth sharing.
Four years ago the former British & Irish Lions and Wales captain Sam Warburton released his autobiography. He thought to call the story Too Big, Too Fast, Too Strong only to shy away from a title that judgmental. He opted instead for Open Side, a safe name for an unsafe game. Towards the end of the book, Warburton wrote that “if something isn’t done soon, a professional [rugby union] player will die during a game, in front of the TV cameras”. A lot of people watching the Bengals play the Buffalo Bills at Paycor Stadium in Cincinnati last week feared they were witnessing such a death after the Bills safety Damar Hamlin, 24, collapsed in the first half. Tackling the Bengals’ receiver, Tee Higgins, Hamlin was hit in the chest by his opponent’s helmet. It seemed nothing more than a routine tackle in a high-velocity collision sport. The blow caused Hamlin to fall over. He quickly got to his feet. Then he just crumbled. It was clear something was very wrong. 65 thousand were inside the stadium, 21 million watched ESPN’s coverage. After Hamlin lost consciousness, the TV audience rose to an ESPN Monday Night Football record of 23 million. Everyone understood it was a life or death moment. Though nothing has been confirmed, medical experts believe Hamlin suffered commotio cordis, a cardiac malfunction that happens after a blow to the chest at a specific point in the heart rhythm cycle. Coming at that moment, the hit can interrupt the internal electrical signal and cause the heart to stop. It is a relatively rare phenomenon, and luckily for Hamlin, he happened to be in the right place. At every NFL game, there are up to 25 medical personnel on duty. Hamlin was unconscious when they got to him. No pulse. No heartbeat. CPR and defibrillation got his heart going again. Two days would pass before he regained consciousness. Having been intubated, he communicated in writing after he came round. His first question was: “Did we win?” Doctors told him he won the game, the game of life. Since then Hamlin has made good progress and though it is not certain he will return to the NFL, he is expected to recover enough to lead a normal life. There was no neurological damage. The crisis also highlighted the degree to which Christianity is embedded in the NFL. As the ambulance took Hamlin away, Buffalo’s players and support staff knelt and prayed on the pitch. The Cincinnati crowd applauded them. A group of Bengals fans in the stadium recited the Lord’s Prayer and ESPN’s analyst Dan Orlovsky said on the live broadcast that he needed to pray. His eyes closed, his head bowed, he began: “God, we come to you in these moments we don’t understand. I believe in prayer, we believe in prayer, and we lift Damar Hamlin’s name in your name.” His colleagues whispered: “Amen.” The next day fans staged a candlelit vigil and prayed outside the University of Cincinnati Medical Centre, where Hamlin was being treated. As genuine as the concern for the player was, no one is arguing for changes that might better protect NFL players. Take away the violence and it isn’t the NFL any more. Hamlin almost lost his life on Monday night; the day before that the Indianapolis Colts quarterback, Nick Foles, convulsed on the pitch after being tackled by New York Giants’ linebacker Kayvon Thibodeaux. It was another perfectly legal tackle. On Christmas Day the Miami Dolphins’ quarterback, Tua Tagovailoa, suffered another concussion. Three months before, Tagovailoa had been sacked and slammed head first into the ground. His hands and fingers were splayed and frozen after the impact, a sure sign of brain injury. Too soon he was back in action. We know now the damage caused by these brain injuries; sometimes it’s immediately apparent, more often the problems come later. Ten or 20 years after a player retires, cognitive function can diminish and this may be followed by a torturous journey into dementia. We have heard the accounts of so many rugby union players; young men and women in their thirties and forties suffering now and frightened by the future. We know that the Scotland international Siobhan Cattigan lost her life because of a rugby-related brain injury and understand too that — so far, at any rate — the Scottish Rugby Union doesn’t seem to want us to know the circumstances. In America, the general view is that the players understand the risks and are well compensated for taking them. The authorities say player welfare is their No 1 priority while at the same time they expand the league and increase the players’ workload. More games, of course, deliver bigger profits. We, the fans, are complicit in all this. The legitimate violence that is central to both American football and rugby is part of the attraction. “The sport exists for a reason, and that reason tells us things about ourselves that we might not want to hear,” Sam Warburton wrote in Open Side. “The meaning fans get,” says Nathan Kalman-Lamb, a sociology professor at the University of New Brunswick told The New York Times, “is based on the idea that when they watch these games, something really profound, powerful and important is happening — and life or death stakes are part of it.” For the most part, the violence that leads to brain injury and terrible outcomes for so many players is on us, the fans. We like the games as they are; the hits, the collisions, the danger, the sense that these athletes are laying it all on the line. Antoine Blondin, a distinguished French novelist who wrote beautifully about the Tour de France, once explained why he, as a fan, never felt any desire to reprimand Tour riders who doped. “There is a certain nobility in those who have gone down into Lord knows what hell in quest of the best of themselves. We might feel tempted to tell them they should not have done it. But we can remain, nonetheless, secretly proud of what they have done. Their wan, haggard looks are, for us, an offering.” I’m not saying NFL players or rugby players dope but the ferocity, the hits, the brain injuries are, as Blondin said 50 years ago, an offering. -
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Crucial said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Bones said in The Current State of Rugby:
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
@MiketheSnow said in The Current State of Rugby:
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
@MiketheSnow for what?
Dropping the shoulder into his head
Lol what?? The guy fell over into tuilagi who was at nearly knee height
I watched this on reddit a few times this morning
That's a rugby incident. No fault anywhere
Tuilagi wasn't even looking from like 3 miles out and just launching a shoulder to try and maim in some way. If he'd hit Tupaea in the knee we'd all be having a sook.
Yep. It is the lack of control and care flying in with a shoulder that is the bad thing here. Forget body heights and intent. That is plain recklessness.
lol what? all tackles use shoulders. Tuilagi was no more reckless than the guy that gets clobbered who runs from depth, jumps in to a cluttered zone, loses the ball and falls over trying to regain it.
I'm starting to think some of you guys think that players at the top level see everything in slow motion and have all the time in the world to make adjustments for every variable that comes to pass.
I saw a lot of incidents over the past week or so. Some carded, some not. I am starting to believe that it is impossible to legislate head contact out of rugby without fundamental changes to laws and interpretations.
The ruck is the most obvious example. I saw two reds for cleanouts in Japan. Cruden's was a red all day, and really dumb. But, if you can find it, have a look at the video, and the guy he goes over. Cruden is deadset 5 feet tall. And he goes over a guy with barely a jump. How is that possible if that player in the ruck is on his feet? The interpretation of what is considered on your feet and supporting your body weight has completely got lost.De Allende got marched for a basic cleanout. Yes arrived at speed, but it was on a line break. Didn't launch uncontrolled, corrected his feet, and even bound as he hit. There is no where for him to clean out when the defending player has his head over that ball. So red. If you want that rugby action taken out, you need to remove the ability to pick the ball up with your hands, otherwise maintaining possession becomes almost impossible, when every single player now has to be good at the breakdown.
Removing hands at the tackle area, and being far harsher on body height are fundamental changes to rugby that would do far more to reduce head contact than just carding as many people as you can find (or not carding them aye Farrell?)
I’ve skied with Olympic medalists
They are superhuman
They do have the agility and reflexes us mere mortals can’t fathom
Tuilagi is a dirty fluffybunny from way back
This was another example of it
-
And Farrell, a recidivist offender, still gets two weeks reduction (instead of 3 cos he's done it twice before), and could be available for the start of 6 Nations (it's complex). Oh and he get's a week off for tackle school, hopefully, he takes lessons on board.
If you've been done before there never should be a reduction, a second time. The third time, like Farrell you should have time added on
-
@Machpants said in The Current State of Rugby:
If you've been done before there never should be a reduction, a second time. The third time, like Farrell you should have time added on
I wonder if you're onto something here.
We are all concerned/pissed-off by lack of consistency and games being ruined by cards, but a solution might be to increase the threshold for a red card so we get more yellows, but carry the yellows over to the next 1, 2 or 3 games.
It would reduce games being wrecked by Red Cards and people like Farrell would need to be on their best behaviour in their next few games. And any inconsistencies could possibly be evened out too.
-
@Victor-Meldrew firstly, fuck David Walsh, arrogant sanctimonious self-aggrandizing dickhead
secondly, bringing Hamlin in to this is fucking idiotic considering what actually happened and what he is trying to point out. Tagovailoa is a far better example. Although, even a modicum of investigation would find a huge number of fans on NFL chats urging him to consider immediate retirement, which kind of does not help paint the picture he wants.
Really, the ultimate outcome of his article is "rugby as a sport has no future"
-
Listen up, fellas. Back in the 90's, New Zealand rugby was in its prime. We had real men on the field, not these softies you see today. Guys like Richard Loe embodied what it meant to be a true rugby player. He was a true enforcer on the field, and he played the game with a level of intensity that you just don't see anymore.
As for the rucking, it's simple. Rugby is a contact sport, and the rucking is a vital part of the game. It's what separates the men from the boys. It's what makes the game physical and exciting. It's what makes rugby, rugby. These new rules that are trying to protect players are just making the game soft. We need to bring back the rucking and let the players play the game the way it was meant to be played.
-
@TSF-Bot said in The Current State of Rugby:
Listen up, fellas. Back in the 90's, New Zealand rugby was in its prime. We had real men on the field, not these softies you see today. Guys like Richard Loe embodied what it meant to be a true rugby player. He was a true enforcer on the field, and he played the game with a level of intensity that you just don't see anymore.
As for the rucking, it's simple. Rugby is a contact sport, and the rucking is a vital part of the game. It's what separates the men from the boys. It's what makes the game physical and exciting. It's what makes rugby, rugby. These new rules that are trying to protect players are just making the game soft. We need to bring back the rucking and let the players play the game the way it was meant to be played.
Not sure that Loe is the best poster boy for change.
Play rugby, get eye-gouged or your nose smashed! -
@Crucial said in The Current State of Rugby:
@TSF-Bot said in The Current State of Rugby:
Listen up, fellas. Back in the 90's, New Zealand rugby was in its prime. We had real men on the field, not these softies you see today. Guys like Richard Loe embodied what it meant to be a true rugby player. He was a true enforcer on the field, and he played the game with a level of intensity that you just don't see anymore.
As for the rucking, it's simple. Rugby is a contact sport, and the rucking is a vital part of the game. It's what separates the men from the boys. It's what makes the game physical and exciting. It's what makes rugby, rugby. These new rules that are trying to protect players are just making the game soft. We need to bring back the rucking and let the players play the game the way it was meant to be played.
Not sure that Loe is the best poster boy for change.
Play rugby, get eye-gouged or your nose smashed!How many Bledisloe tries did Carozza score after that little lesson?
-
@TSF-Bot said in The Current State of Rugby:
Listen up, fellas. Back in the 90's, New Zealand rugby was in its prime. We had real men on the field, not these softies you see today. Guys like Richard Loe embodied what it meant to be a true rugby player. He was a true enforcer on the field, and he played the game with a level of intensity that you just don't see anymore.
As for the rucking, it's simple. Rugby is a contact sport, and the rucking is a vital part of the game. It's what separates the men from the boys. It's what makes the game physical and exciting. It's what makes rugby, rugby. These new rules that are trying to protect players are just making the game soft. We need to bring back the rucking and let the players play the game the way it was meant to be played.
Cyberdine systems have really upped their game. These infiltrators are getting harder and harder to spot.
-
I'm not sure you can say the players today are 'soft' when the game is so much more dangerous than it was in the 90s. The players today are twice the size and the collisions at least twice the impact. It'd be scary as hell on a professional rugby field these days. Can you imagine a 90s version of Loe running full tilt into an Ofa shoulder? He'd get sat on his ass so badly he'd have to sit out the rest of the match. Because props weren't as big back then, because they didn't need to be, and they'd get exposed as the game wore on if they were.
That said, it's laughable that rucking is outlawed for "player safety" whilst allowing the game to become this absolute slugfest between teams packed full of roided up monsters. It's pretty obvious the rule changes over the years have benefited the biggest teams.
