Rugby World Cup general discussion

[Kirwan]

Very interesting to see those ball in play stats so high, that really didn't help Ireland - who it was notable weren't able to fake injuries to slow everything down this time.

[Nepia]

@taniwharugby said in Rugby World Cup general discussion:

Obviously even high scoring games are not immune from mass stoppages or wasted minutes,

This is unsurprising, every try has at least a minute for the conversion built into and fluffing either side before and after it leading to the kick off.

[frugby]

@Nepia said in Rugby World Cup general discussion:

@taniwharugby said in Rugby World Cup general discussion:

Obviously even high scoring games are not immune from mass stoppages or wasted minutes,

This is unsurprising, every try has at least a minute for the conversion built into and fluffing either side before and after it leading to the kick off.

What constitutes ball in play?

[Machpants]

@Snowy said in Rugby World Cup general discussion:

If anyone is interested:

Nick Bentley

The Evolution of Rugby: A Statistical Analysis

Rugby Union is almost an unrecognisable sport from the one which saw its first Test match played back in 1871. Read on as we use Stats Perform’s detailed rugby data to unearth the major ways the sport has evolved.

That's why I am quite keen on the 'nipple line' tackle everywhere. Arms free, offloads, faster game, and it will have to happen anyway with the head impact legal stuff. Defenders will have to realise that sometimes you can't legally stop a player, if they get themselves to that point, good on them\

[voodoo]

I don’t think we need the ball in play any more than it is already. Players are already rooted after 60-70mins, look at the last 10 of the NZ v Ireland or the France v SA game for the obvious fatigue setting in. And that’s after using the bench.

Time wasting should be clamped down on, but that’s all I’d focus on

[Machpants]

Yup I think more ball in play and smaller benches = less humungous giants so less impact damage.

[voodoo]

@Machpants said in Rugby World Cup general discussion:

Yup I think more ball in play and smaller benches = less humungous giants so less impact damage.

I'm definitely onboard with the "8 reserves but you can only use [4] of them" idea if we could get around the gaming for injuries

[Machpants]

@voodoo said in Rugby World Cup general discussion:

@Machpants said in Rugby World Cup general discussion:

Yup I think more ball in play and smaller benches = less humungous giants so less impact damage.

I'm definitely onboard with the "8 reserves but you can only use [4] of them" idea if qwe could get around the gaming for injuries

Boks already gaming injuries with HIA, to go with their slow down tactics on field. For me if someone has to come off, then you play with one less player after your 4/5 (I say 5, front row, one forward, one back) - it does already happen some times with the benches cleared

[junior]

@voodoo said in Rugby World Cup general discussion:

@Machpants said in Rugby World Cup general discussion:

Yup I think more ball in play and smaller benches = less humungous giants so less impact damage.

I'm definitely onboard with the "8 reserves but you can only use [4] of them" idea if we could get around the gaming for injuries

I would favour something like having an 8 man bench, with:

• unlimited subs for (genuine) injuries
• 2 tactical subs at anytime in the match
• the 2 tactical subs comprise 1 forward tactical sub and 1 back tactical sub

[Machpants]

@junior said in Rugby World Cup general discussion:

unlimited subs for (genuine) injuries

Hard to enforce, cf Boks HIA.

[Damo]

I would be happy with Gardiner getting the final. In fact he would be my best choice.

I know there has been some whinging from the neutrals but I thought he was excellent today.

[canefan]

@Damo said in Rugby World Cup general discussion:

I would be happy with Gardiner getting the final. In fact he would be my best choice.

I know there has been some whinging from the neutrals but I thought he was excellent today.

I don't see him getting the final, he's behind Barnes and Raynal in WRs eyes I think

[Catogrande]

@canefan

I don’t want to see Barnes anywhere near the final as that would suggest England will be there. 😀

In terms of ability only though, I wouldn’t have an issue with any of Barnes, Reynal, BOK or Gardner. They have all proved their worth and they all have their quirks and dodgy moments.

[NTA]

[Bones]

@Catogrande said in Rugby World Cup general discussion:

Reynal

[Victor Meldrew]

@mariner4life said in Rugby World Cup general discussion:

Deserve?
Oh Jonny, I'll give you a pass because you're probably exhausted, and definitely gutted. But that's not the word champ

Confirmed my view he's an entitled fluffybunny. Bet the likes of Rory Best are cringing at seeing that.

[Bovidae]

@NTA said in Rugby World Cup general discussion:

They showed him on screen during the game but Nisbo/Mils/Wilson obviously had no idea who he was.

[Bones]

Unbound players at the ruck shouldn't be allowed to ruck the ball unless they have one foot behind the last foot. Surely they're offside otherwise?

If they can't reach it, too fucking bad - bound players will have to ruck it back.

[MN5]

@Bovidae said in Rugby World Cup general discussion:

@NTA said in Rugby World Cup general discussion:

They showed him on screen during the game but Nisbo/Mils/Wilson obviously had no idea who he was.

Nisbo I can understand given he’s of the generation who’d get excited about a Coronation Street star…..but Jeff and Mils should be ashamed. The guy is a superstar.

That was a cool little interview, what a great fella.

[sparky]

It’s been a helluva tournament.