The Current State of Rugby
-
@Machpants said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Dan54 said in The Current State of Rugby:
Not sure where to put this, but don't know who else watched Breakdown last night, Really enjoyed it, and was most interested in hearing Mark Robinson, and was discussing the Japan deal going forward , and next year's tests.
Best thing to me was we got Fiji for one test and Poms for two here next year, and are trying to arrange ABs?Fiji test after that! Won't be a moneymaker for NZR as such, but the promo it will do in Fiji will be fantastic I think. Still a bit of work to to (not least FJR board sorting it's shit) but for state of rugby this is bloody brilliant! Also with the Japan thing going forward, again great for the game. Was also interested to hear him talk about the player numbers are going well, and real good in Heartland unions (of course grassroots is where it's at) , East Coast with about 60,000 have got 8 clubs with 8 men's teams and 6 women's teams. Also have read elsewhere that viewer numbers on tv are back to pre covid levels etc, so good to hear a bit of positive stuff.An article in the Herald by Gregor is going on how terrible the Japan deal is 'cos Fiji should get games there first. But, like the 'great for Fiji' point you've made that's sadly bollocks. These are out of windows tests, so they won't get the real stars from Europe. This will be ABs B vs Drua + Japanese Fijians. Great that there is a test there, but out-of-window tests are not that much use to the Pacific nations.
But nice to see positive stuff coming through, I think playing in Japan, and getting them into shape for RC would be great. But they've got to better than Italy is in 6N to be worth the extra travel
Sorry Mach, I can't agree , so you think it's better to not play Fiji in Fiji because it outside the test window? This is unfortunately seems to be what some do, and maybe not on purpose but immediately rubbish anything going forward. The test window is only 3 weeks, so are you suggesting that NZR should scrap tests against Poms? But it being outside test window is one of things that Robinson said was a problem they were working through etc. I will bet you any amount of money you would like to bet that Fijian Rugby will be stoked to have a test held there!
Same as playing Japan, why do they have to be better than Italy for us to play them? Surely it's good the idea of working in with Japan rugby for both commercial opportunities for both unions and as he Robinson says, work on the whole Asian area?
Anyway I reckon it bloody great work by them, and perhaps we will disagree on the worth of expanding game etc. -
Playing a one-off vs Fiji in Fiji outside of the test window is fluff. PR for NZR and nice for Fiji but not real substance. As with Samoa, they'll come out with a huge loss because of the costs, unless it is paid for by NZR. It won't grow the game in Fiji, which doesn't need that. They need regular access to their stars and regular games. And that is the NH job, we tour up there, and they tour down here. Until that changes, and we get the world series thing, with relegation (sorry Italy, Scotland and Wales) most of this is moot.
I didn't say Japan had to be better than Italy, just more competitive than Italy is in the 6N. Cos Italy are poor, outside the occasional blip. And unlike in Europe/6N, it is bloody hard travel for a lot of the teams if you add Japan into the RC. They really have to be a good game-worthy addition for all the extra travel.As I said I think this a good thing, but the real reason it is happening is so NZR and Silverlake can get a bigger cash reward. I hope it expands the game, but I can't see it
-
-
@Kiwiwomble said in The Current State of Rugby:
question, does the half back get too much protection?
kind of occured to me watching the highlanders game over the weekend, rucks with as few as 4 people, 2 on the ground and a couple standing over it, defending team could easily reach the halfback who is just standing there looking at options but are obviously told they cant grab him
if we removed that rule, would it force more players into the ruck to protect him and possibly creating more space?
A million percent agree.
Every facet of the game should be a fair contest, but we have plenty of elements of the game where one side is preferentially treated.
Defending a maul is nigh on impossible.
Caterpillering rucks with a pillar standing ahead of the scrum half while he box kicks to prevent a charge down. Should be offisde.
Not being allowed grab the scrum half. Rolling it back with his foot etc. It should be incumbent on the attacking team to throw the required numbers in to get him clean ball. if he is rolling it back with his hand or foot he should be fair game to be smashed. Its ridiculous.
"Escorting" the kick receiver.....basically legalised blocking.
Going to ground at the end of the game to kill the clock. phases after phase of pick and go and a lad essentially falling on the ground pre contact.
Shoulder charging is illegal......except when defending your own goal line it seems where you just daisy cutter your shoulders into the knees of the attackers.
The game is in a bad place (has been for quite a while) and the advent in the 00's of Sean Edwards style blanket defence, mental skills coaches, video analysis sessions etc has cynically roboticised the game.
We are painting by numbers at this stage.
-
@Machpants said in The Current State of Rugby:
Well this speed it up, or just introduce the ref more.
Really dislike this heaps, will obviously have TMO involved more, and another step to taking the human factor out of game. Game will end up with virtual players etc at rate we going!
-
@Dan54 said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Machpants said in The Current State of Rugby:
Well this speed it up, or just introduce the ref more.
Really dislike this heaps, will obviously have TMO involved more, and another step to taking the human factor out of game. Game will end up with virtual players etc at rate we going!
Does it though?
With clever application it could be a referee aid eg a beep in the earpiece.
The ref still has the decision, this could confirm.
Will be interesting what tolerances are allowed for things like 'not straight'
Other aspect is that if the lineout mark is made by the tracking it may free up the TMO to watch the offside line more rather than anticipating a kick.
Hopefully any trial will highlight what works well and what doesn't.
-
-
@Dan54 yeah, i find myself in the same camp, they dont bother officiating things that should be straight forward like feeds to scrums and lineouts but do penalise all kinds of subjective things or accidents...i find myself just caring about fundamentally different things
-
@Kiwiwomble @Dan54 I think we are talking about the Current State and trials for the overall 'product' rather than for those that understand the game well or have played it.
For Rugby to survive as a pro sport it needs to appeal to a broader audience than ex-players or those that have grown up around the amateur aspects (in all the good ways).
If Rugby is then attempted to be sold as a TV product you either have to stop criticism of decisions or temper comments with "mistakes from the ref are all part of the game" type education.
The more visible errors you can reduce or eliminate the easier the sell to the broader public.@Dan54 , I like that you are a passionate, grassroots, pragmatic supporter of the game and like hearing your perspective BUT you are also a minority and not the target of changes to pay the bills.
The big challenge is keeping the integrity of the game and the ethos while appealing to the masses.
You only have to see how many people will proclaim that they aren't interested in the code anymore as it is too hard to follow and the reffing is random.
If changes like these are applied well and with sensitivity some minor pain points could be softened.
-
@Crucial yep mate, and yet I listened to a couple of old fellas at Golf club yesterday who are so pissed with the TMO involvements they reckon they ready to chuck it . I get same from comments from people who struggle a lot with cricket these days, saying the joy is going out of game!
I understand the need to be right as possible, but since we have got more technology into game, I think people get infuriated with minor mistakes and find no excuse etc.
And there is one thing I would add, I wonder if in pursuit of getting more new eyeballs, we forgetting we also lose some of the ones that have always been there?
I will add that mistakes in sport, or controversial decisions are often good for the game in long run, how many people have kept on getting into sport because they believe their team suffered an injustice? -
To make it a better product we need better commentators. Some that like Rugby would be a start, knowing the laws and listenting to refs would be second, and absolutely under no circumstances insert their own agendas about the "state of the game" into commentary.
Save that sort of analysis for panel shows.
-
@Kirwan said in The Current State of Rugby:
To make it a better product we need better commentators. Some that like Rugby would be a start, knowing the laws and listenting to refs would be second, and absolutely under no circumstances insert their own agendas about the "state of the game" into commentary.
Save that sort of analysis for panel shows.
My bar is a commentator that can tell the players apart.
If I'm being honest I don't mind TJ in games not involving the Crusaders/ Ta$man/Canterbury/Blues.
-
@Steve said in The Current State of Rugby:
Not being allowed grab the scrum half. Rolling it back with his foot etc. It should be incumbent on the attacking team to throw the required numbers in to get him clean ball. if he is rolling it back with his hand or foot he should be fair game to be smashed. Its ridiculous.
Don't mind rolling it back with the foot, but rolling it back with the hand and all that hands on the ball repositioning it is bollocks, if halfback puts two hands on the ball it should basically be 2 seconds and they're fair game.
-
@Kirwan said in The Current State of Rugby:
To make it a better product we need better commentators. Some that like Rugby would be a start, knowing the laws and listenting to refs would be second, and absolutely under no circumstances insert their own agendas about the "state of the game" into commentary.
And stop disagreeing with the referees, that's for forum dwellers. Commentators should be knowledgeable and positive. Explaining why the ref may have made a determination given how the laws are written and applied would be much better.
Also a commentary free feed for Stan viewers.
-
@Bones personally id go as far as "hands on and your fair game", they should have a couple of meters protection to make their pass, worst case we might less box kicks if they dont have all the time and space in the world...but i would be happy enough with your suggestion
-
@Kiwiwomble said in The Current State of Rugby:
hands on and your fair game
that was the way it used to be, have to say the past 3 or 4 years this whole dragging with foot then turned into pulling back with hands and positioning the ball for the pass/kick while blockers line up has become a joke.
-
@taniwharugby said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Kiwiwomble said in The Current State of Rugby:
hands on and your fair game
that was the way it used to be, have to say the past 3 or 4 years this whole dragging with foot then turned into pulling back with hands and positioning the ball for the pass/kick while blockers line up has become a joke.
No need for Law changes either.
Enforce that 'blockers' must stand clearly behind the last feet and not alongside the ruck with a finger bind (which isn't a bind by law). This cuts down the passing channel for the halfback and means they have to step back after lifting the ball.
You could also 'interpret' that players may not join a ruck once the ball is available. Refs already decide availability so this isn't a biggie.
Recent interpretations that have seen more 'ball is out' calls have helped but hinging calls on the half lifting the ball have resulted in this stupid dragging.Law 15.11 Once a ruck has formed, no player may handle the ball unless they were able to get their hands on the ball before the ruck formed and stay on their feet.
Apply this to halfbacks.
-
@Crucial proper binding would probably solve a few issues that plague the game (rucks, mauls)
-
@taniwharugby said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Crucial proper binding would probably solve a few issues that plague the game (rucks, mauls)
yeah it baffles me that a law that is there for such an obvious purpose is just totally ignored even when it is a causing factor in other problems.
Stuff
