The Current State of Rugby
-
Agree with so many of the above.
To be clear though, I don't think the problem is with the Boks. Rugby has always been about pushing the limits and what you can get away with, so good on the. The problem is world rugby and the officials doing nothing about it.
When Barnes was informed it was a tactical sub, he should have said. Right, come and listen to me. That was an injury sub, you know it, I know it so cut the bullshit. I'm not going to stand for it.
Instead he accepted it and moved on.
Its the end of the game as we know it, unless big changs are made.
-
I don't have a problem with the Boks style, and they have backs that can and do carve teams up at times. But @junior's post hit's the nail on the head with the inconsistency in the reffing.
How are fans, let alone players, expected to take it on the chin when a ref awards a penalty (which turns out to be a winning one) to a team, realises his mistake, but can't reverse the decision (or could he have)? Meanwhile a TMO can rule out a try from a play a long time before or decide one head shot is less dangerous than another even when it has the same outcome of hitting a player in the head?
Anyway, best take my drunken arse to bed or I'll just be anger typing all night.
-
@Nepia said in The Current State of Rugby:
I don't have a problem with the Boks style, and they have backs that can and do carve teams up at times. But @junior's post hit's the nail on the head with the inconsistency in the reffing.
How are fans, let alone players, expected to take it on the chin when a ref awards a penalty (which turns out to be a winning one) to a team, realises his mistake, but can't reverse the decision (or could he have)? Meanwhile a TMO can rule out a try from a play a long time before or decide one head shot is less dangerous than another even when it has the same outcome of hitting a player in the head?
Anyway, best take my drunken arse to bed or I'll just be anger typing all night.
The only way to resolve the issue around head contact is to treat every head contact the same. Otherwise, you get the farcical situations we had on the weekend - which probably caused Ardie a broken nose for a flying headbutt and De Groot a broken nose from a swinging arm, but Kreel no damage from a shoulder to the jaw - are all treated differently.
-
@His-Bobness said in The Current State of Rugby:
The very fact we’re having this conversation about the increasingly restricted tactics in rugby union at this level and the increasingly high-profile role of the adjudicators tells you there is something rotten in the state of Dublin.
There’s nothing wrong with the Boks, but this style of play is what the rules produces. Constant box kicks, up and unders, scrum infringements, kicks to the corner and rolling mauls, and an emphasis on rolling mauls, are what wins games. Of course, all of those tactics are completely legitimate and well done SA for perfecting them. But there’s a clear imbalance there. And that’s a result of the stultifying rules that elevate defence over attack. As for the yellow and red cards, the rule-makers have lost their way. A completely understandable desire to protect players against head injury has resulted in a lottery in which there is no consistency - not only from one game to the next, but within games. Referees are not sovereign anymore. There is a constant voice in their ear second-guessing their judgement. I don’t think they can go on like this, but I have been saying that for years
The TMO situation is a lottery and the impact of a red or two yellows is more than the gap between top teams at most levels.
It needs a professional, possibly non-rugby, review.
That ought to include:
When and how TMO intervenes;
How ordinary play is monitored (at one extreme do we have have a team of say five each reviewing different feeds or do we have one or two but eg only focus on breakdowns or a limited menu); and
Are only penalties involved, or re knock ons and offsides?
The aim ought to be a workable system where we can be confident that all incidents of the prescribed type are reviewed, in particular dangerous play, but outside that TMO only involved if referee asks for assistance.
Maybe one Captain’s review per half, and no other requests to be considered.
Not sure World Rugby is sufficiently competent to get there, but the games urgently needs it.
I don’t want Tom Foley’s name in the trophy ever again.
-
Have no problms with differing styles and actually admire Rassie's innovation. And I'm not sure the reffing is the issue - it's the constant changes to the mythical guidelines which is the problem. And then there's the rule changes - I just can't keep up with all the year-on year changes.
I mentioned in another thread that this RWC was the flattest I can remember - despite the quarter-final games. Have been with generally sport-mad family this WE, and only one mentioned the rugby. That was my BiL, who has attended every Varsity match for the last 30-40 years at HQ, rightly moaning that it has now been demoted to "some suburban ground in Nth London".
That's telling.
-
@Nepia said in The Current State of Rugby:
I don't have a problem with the Boks style, and they have backs that can and do carve teams up at times. But @junior's post hit's the nail on the head with the inconsistency in the reffing.
How are fans, let alone players, expected to take it on the chin when a ref awards a penalty (which turns out to be a winning one) to a team, realises his mistake, but can't reverse the decision (or could he have)? Meanwhile a TMO can rule out a try from a play a long time before or decide one head shot is less dangerous than another even when it has the same outcome of hitting a player in the head?
Anyway, best take my drunken arse to bed or I'll just be anger typing all night.
We had a few of them yesterday
-
The state of the game is shit.
There have been good games this WC: Wales Fiji was a ripper, or at least would have been with a competent referee in charge - so it is still possible.
On the other hand, the Sth Africa England game is arguably the most boring piece of shit I've seen in years. The number of kicks was absurd. The tactics of both sides were incredibly negative. I just don't want to watch that. And for the fuck-bags out there try to pass off that sort of criticism as coming from bandwagon / casual fans, well just absolutely get fucked you arrogant fluffybunnies, it's coming from lifelong rugby people. That game wasn't a forward battle. Athletic Park '96 in the wet was a magnificent forward-oriented rugby game - there have been plenty of those over the years, and this was not one. This one was high kick after high kick waiting for errors, and was decided by a referee who ruled that the SA prop wasn't boring in, when that could easily have gone the other way. That's just not a decent sport to watch. The inconsistent cards have been done to death, but they decided the result of this game too. Literally the only thing the game had going for it was tension because it was close. If we want to watch people kick it all day and have tension from close games then why not just watch fucking football. -
Thanks to endless whining by losing coaches and fans, this is where we have got ourselves to
A TMO watching the game a phase behind and telling the ref everything he has missed. But not really everything, just some stuff, as some stuff doesn't matter.
The search for perfection in a game that is absolute chaos is a fruitless exercise. And yet here we are. For all that time taken by the officials on the weekend, is anyone happy? Is there less whinging? is there fuck.
Rugby adjudication is subjective, it can never be perfect. Timing matters, intent matters, and therefore decisions are made based on opinion, not fact.
The NRL's bunker system is far from perfect, but it's a shit load better than what rugby is serving up.
-
@mariner4life i kind of feel, yes we'll still complain about the ref missing things but at least point to the fact humans make errors in real time....and eventually move on
if we're going to bring in things like TMO and super slow mo replays, and loads if time to review etc...then it needs to be perfect...and its not
-
@nzzp said in The Current State of Rugby:
@junior said in The Current State of Rugby:
@nzzp said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Victor-Meldrew said in The Current State of Rugby:
@taniwharugby said in The Current State of Rugby:
Right now it feels like they are looking for something wrong in everything, which there is, often given how technical things have become.
You've nailed it for me.
And me.
Looking for reasons to get people off the field
The fact the solution in rugby is so often to remove people from the field simply supports the case for the existence of the 13 man code
We've been conditioned into accepting unintentional acts are evil.
Angus Ta'avao (edit: and the Portman/Retallick tackle of course)
Sam CurryThere's a bunch of people who get into a poor position and wind up smashing heads - it's clearly not a plan, but it's treated the same as someone who tries to take someone's head off with a swinging arm. I think rugby's trying to treat inadvertent contact the same as intentional contact, but only if the TMO looks at it - and only if there's not some random mitigation applied. It's just weird, and it sucks for the fans.
And the natural end point is the appeal to the ref for cards... the system's broken when you start having that as part of your gameplan.
This exactly. Intent has to be considered. If it is not obvious it is foul play then it's not.
-
@reprobate said in The Current State of Rugby:
it's coming from lifelong rugby people
I have just resigned from rugby union in the RWC final thread. Bloody sad, but most, if not all of the reasons were in that match, or have been listed above. It just isn't worth the time and aggravation.
-
-
@broughie said in The Current State of Rugby:
I still think adding 5 yards to 10 yards to the width of the pitch would make a difference. Players are bigger, faster and stronger. Just like some golf courses are made obsolete by a 300 yard drive.
lots of stadiums, modern rectangular ones, wouldn't have that space, we cant drop numbers because then were heading toward league....so think we need to reduce the subs and make space through fatigue
other have said it, 8 sub bench so you have players that cover all positions...but can only make 3-4 subs, coach actually had to make decisions based on how the game is going and keep subs in the back pocket for injuries
-
Inspired by this post from sparky https://www.forum.thesilverfern.com/topic/6373/rwc-final-all-blacks-v-springboks/2176?_=1698681956589 and a 40 minute commute with nothing else to do.
Sorry for the long post.Regarding refereeing in general, I believe that over the course of time, most calls even out. The Springboks might have been lucky this time around, they weren't as lucky in 2011, judging by the vitriol that was spewed. Anger about decisions is natural, but won't ever change that some will feel aggrieved by certain calls, because refs make mistake and rugby is a very difficult, interpretative game. What constitutes "on one's feet" at the ruck? Certainly, many of the caterpillar players are not holding their weight, although that is a story for another day (refs just get it plain wrong)
But this is about a real problem with the current TMO protocols:
Imagine this...
It is the Champion’s Cup final. Glasgow lead Benneton Treviso by 22-20. Time’s in the red. Benneton has the ball near their own 10 m line, but center Menoncello shrugs of a weak tackle by Matt Fagerson and storms into the Scottish team’s half. The Italians in the crowd go wild. He is brought down by the Warriors’ fullback, Ollie Smith, and Benneton barely keep the ball, as their players come flying in (legally) to secure the ruck. The halfback fumbles the ball a bit but no harm done...
As you watch this half awake on your TV at home, sitting in your dirty underwear, looking ugly as always, BOOMFAH! A door to five different parallel universes opens up. Wow, you can see what happens in all of these, isn’t this exciting.
Universe 1: Benneton halfback Garbisi picks up the ball, passes to the left, the ball goes wide to Monty Ioane who skins Kyle Rowe on the outside, sprints for the corner, steps inside the covering fullback and scores close to the corner. Benetton’s players are ecstatic as the referee, Luke Pearce, blows his whistle for the try. Tommaso Allan lines up the kick, but suddenly we hear the unbearable voice of the TMO, Dick Head, “Check, check – Luke, I want to show you a clear knock-on by green nine as he picks up the ball.”. The crowd goes silent as Pearce makes the square gesture and signals for a TMO check. Everyone can see it on the big screen. Garbisi knocked the ball on. It happened. Pearce is quick to overrule the try. The Scots in the crowd and on the ground are ecstatic, as Pearce pulls up the final whistle, Italians are dejected, the players slump to the floor. Glasgow wins 22-20 and are Champion’s Cup winners in 2024.
Universe 2: Benneton halfback Garbisi picks up the ball, passes to the left, the ball goes wide to Monty Ioane who skins Kyle Rowe on the outside, sprints for the corner, steps inside the covering fullback but is brought down by the retreating Ali Price close to the line. Benetton go through four more phases, as suddenly, Benneton’s Henry Stowers just runs through the Scottish defence and reaches the line with the ball. The Benetton players are ecstatic as the referee, Luke Pearce, blows his whistle for the try. Tommaso Allan lines up the kick, but suddenly we hear the unbearable voice of TMO Dick Head, “Check, check – Luke, I want to show you a clear knock-on by green nine as he picks up the ball.”. The crowd goes silent as Pearce makes the square gesture and signals for a TMO check. Everyone can see it on the big screen. Garbisi knocked the ball on. It happened. Pearce is quick to overrule the try. The Benneton players complain “It’s five phase ago!”. Pearce doesn’t listen. The game is over. The Scots in the crowd and on the ground are ecstatic, as Pearce pulls up the final whistle, Italians are dejected, the players slump to the floor. Glasgow wins 22-20 and are Champion’s Cup winners in 2024.
Universe 3: Benneton halfback Garbisi picks up the ball, passes to the left, the ball goes wide to Monty Ioane who skins Kyle Rowe on the outside, sprints for the corner, steps inside the covering fullback but is brought down by the retreating Ali Price close to the line. Benetton go through four more phases, as suddenly, Benneton’s Henry Stowers just runs through the Scottish defence and reaches the line with the ball. The Benetton players are ecstatic as the referee, Luke Pearce, blows his whistle for the try. Tommaso Allan lines up the kick, but suddenly we hear the unbearable voice of TMO Dick Head, “Check, check – Luke, I want to show you a clear knock-on by green nine as he picks up the ball.”. The crowd goes silent as Pearce makes the square gesture and signals for a TMO check. Everyone can see it on the big screen. Garbisi knocked the ball on. It happened. Pearce asks “Wasn’t this more than 2 phases ago?” – TMO “Yuss, but I just wanted to sh-“ – “Shut up and don’t be annoying. Try’s good then”. The Glasgow players complain “Clear knock on, ref!”. Pearce doesn’t listen. The game is over. The Scots in the crowd and on the ground are dejected, as Pearce pulls up the final whistle, the team from Italy wins, 25-22 and are Champion’s Cup winners in 2024.
Universe 4: Benneton halfback Garbisi picks up the ball, passes to the left, the ball goes wide to Monty Ioane who skins Kyle Rowe on the outside, sprints for the corner, steps inside the covering fullback but is brought down by Ali Price agonizingly close. The Scots regroup. They pass to the right and Henry Stowers rumbles it up and is tackled 10m in front of the goal posts. Garbisi arrives at the ruck quickly, passes it back to his Tommaso Allan who quickly drops a goal – and it shaves the posts and the ref is unsure whether it’s over. Italians are confidently but carefully rejoicing, Scots are slumping to their knees. Pearce asks the TMO, Dick Head for advice, who confirms with an annoying voice that it’s between the posts. A replay of how the drop goal transpired showed Garbisi knocked the ball on in the ruck two phases ago! Pearce blows the final whistle, the Scots in the stadium are furious. Benetton Treviso wins 23-22 and are Champion’s Cup winners in 2024.
Universe 5: Benneton halfback Garbisi picks up the ball, passes to the left, the ball goes wide to Monty Ioane who skins Kyle Rowe on the outside, sprints for the corner, steps inside the covering fullback but is brought down by Ali Price agonizingly close. The Scots regroup. They pass to the right and Benneton No. 8 Henry Stowers rumbles it up and is tackled high 10m in front of the goal posts. The Benetton players cry for a penalty and Pearce awards it. Tommaso Allan points at the posts, it’s an easy kick. As the kicking tee is brought onto the field, the replays show that the Garbisi knocked the ball on at the ruck two phases prior. The Scots complain about it, ref says there’s nothing he can do. Tommaso Allan looks at the post, then at the ball, back at the post, starts, kicks. It’s over. Italians are partying hard. Some Glasgow players are sulking, some are furious and berating the referee. Benetton Treviso wins 23-22 and are Champion’s Cup winners in 2024.
TL;DR: TMO protocols don’t make any sense currently. In the exact same situation, going for a try instead of a dropgoal or playing for a penalty is punished, deterring teams from playing more exciting rugby (unless you consider tries less exciting than waiting 55 seconds for a kick to go between or next to some posts).
-
@Tordah in same vein, in quarter Kwagga bends over for the steal with with time up. Has to put hand on ground to steady himself, and gets lift on. BOK spots that and blows penalty Green. Pollard grabs ball and indicates poles. TMO has word to BOK and says that he needs to see something. BOK spots the Kwagga infringement and blows for penalty Blue. Ramos steps up and slots it. Boks battle in last minute or so but can't score a try and game ends.
The greatest team in history of RWC is out in quarters. Rassie bitches on Twitter that BOK had no right to correct himself.
Would the real champions please stand up?
-
I reckon the TMO has not made decisions correct more often, just made the game crappier. The arguments more heated. Get rid of the TMO, ref is sole judge, and citing officer goes over after for gregarious cardable offences that the ref missed. Just let the game flow, the arguments will still be the same without all the is it a try or not shit. What a come down that is, celebrating then 'TMO says no' moments
-
@Machpants said in The Current State of Rugby:
I reckon the TMO has not made decisions correct more often, just made the game crappier.
fair point.
Technology was supposed to help, it hasnt done anything close to what I expect was hoped, as you say, doesnt stop the errors or the endless conversations about what was right or wrong, people always see what angle they want to see, and even in 'neutral' games you still have unconscious bias, so what is the point of the TMO?
IMO, the TMO is there for foul play, and then when the ref asks, and specifically what the ref asks them to look at, not to roll the play back and show something else.
-
@taniwharugby said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Machpants said in The Current State of Rugby:
I reckon the TMO has not made decisions correct more often, just made the game crappier.
fair point.
Technology was supposed to help, it hasnt done anything close to what I expect was hoped, as you say, doesnt stop the errors or the endless conversations about what was right or wrong, people always see what angle they want to see, and even in 'neutral' games you still have unconscious bias, so what is the point of the TMO?
IMO, the TMO is there for foul play, and then when the ref asks, and specifically what the ref asks them to look at, not to roll the play back and show something else.
The technology is not the problem, as always it's the humans that are fucking it up in terms of it's application
