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.
-
@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
-
@Tordah said in The Current State of Rugby:
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...
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.
Can you clarify whether the conversion was successful as I have a wager at Bet365 for a 5 point Benneton win?
-
Don't agree with this. 20 minutes only no matter what.
Just accept refs are idiots and make stupid decisions. And not penalize one team too much because of this
But regardless 20 minutes, and losing maybe a key (dumb/careless) player, is more than enough time.
For head clashes only, allow the 20-minute red card advocated by the southern hemisphere (the player is sent off but the team is permitted to replace him). However, the 20-minute version is only to be used in instances where the three refs on the field feel there is some degree of mitigation, instead of a yellow card. This would have been employed in the Siya Kolisi head clash incident many Kiwis felt was just as culpable as Sam Cane’s while others felt it wasn’t as serious
-
This might have already been posted, but here goes. Shag telling it like it is
-
@canefan said in The Current State of Rugby:
This might have already been posted, but here goes. Shag telling it like it is
He's not wrong but his timing sucks. Say this just after you've won because of a favourable ruling people may listen. But say it now it'll be seen as sour grapes.
-
I stopped watching rugby about 2 or 3 years ago. So, I didn't watch this world cup at all (well, except when a family member stayed the weekend and we watch a Sunday morning pool game on his subscription).
It really is terrible.
I think the tipping point for me realising this was with the Silverlake deal. I couldn't even be bothered to to come on here and rant as it dawned on me that whether the ownership and competition structures were to my perfection, or a bastardised son-of-satan (the now status quo) - I wouldn't want to watch it anyway.
-
(moved this from the WC final thread)
Thinking on the final more, it seems to me the refs went into it determined to get every call 100% correct and not miss anything to avoid controversy. That's fine for most sports, but not for rugby. By far the best refs are those that let the game flow, and only call things up that have a material impact. If they do that, then we get a real spectacle. But also if they do that, then they obviously let a lot of stuff go, which leads to fans complaining and then threats etc etc
Rugby is in a tough spot right now as it does not mix with technology well at all. The tech works so well for other sports like cricket and tennis, but rugby is just far too dynamic to be pouring over every ruck/maul looking for stuff - that's also really unfair on the players who are throwing themselves into each other and mostly relying on instincts to make decisions.
If I was WR, first thing I'd do is grow a pair of balls, and then I would limit the TMO involvement as much as possible. At the same time, I'd be clear with the fan-base that the TMO only slows the game down and ruins the spectacle, so we are limiting it's involvement and accepting that the game we love is fast paced, dynamic, and the refs primary job is to ensure the teams are able to sort it out on the pitch as much as possible without constant interventions. And then just keep pushing that message over and over, and making strong statements in defense of referees who happened to miss something on the day. For the game, it's actually far better to miss something than hand out underserved penalties and cards.
Edit - catching up on the thread, a lot of what I say has already been said by many posters. Very sad that the game we love so much has come to this.
-
@No-Quarter said in The Current State of Rugby:
(moved this from the WC final thread)
Thinking on the final more, it seems to me the refs went into it determined to get every call 100% correct and not miss anything to avoid controversy. That's fine for most sports, but not for rugby. By far the best refs are those that let the game flow, and only call things up that have a material impact. If they do that, then we get a real spectacle. But also if they do that, then they obviously let a lot of stuff go, which leads to fans complaining and then threats etc etc
Rugby is in a tough spot right now as it does not mix with technology well at all. The tech works so well for other sports like cricket and tennis, but rugby is just far too dynamic to be pouring over every ruck/maul looking for stuff - that's also really unfair on the players who are throwing themselves into each other and mostly relying on instincts to make decisions.
If I was WR, first thing I'd do is grow a pair of balls, and then I would limit the TMO involvement as much as possible. At the same time, I'd be clear with the fan-base that the TMO only slows the game down and ruins the spectacle, so we are limiting it's involvement and accepting that the game we love is fast paced, dynamic, and the refs primary job is to ensure the teams are able to sort it out on the pitch as much as possible without constant interventions. And then just keep pushing that message over and over, and making strong statements in defense of referees who happened to miss something on the day. For the game, it's actually far better to miss something than hand out underserved penalties and cards.
Edit - catching up on the thread, a lot of what I say has already been said by many posters. Very sad that the game we love so much has come to this.
I don’t disagree with a thing you’ve said and you’ve been a lot more lucid in your thoughts than I have been. I’m bolding that part though just to point out the flies in the ointment.
Liability.
Insurance. -
@Catogrande yeah for sure, when it comes to the head knocks, we have it round the wrong way (as I mentioned in the other thread). Players are often guilty until proven innocent. I'm not advocating for no consequences, I'm advocating for not making the refs make a subjective decision on the seriousness of a head clash at the time, but to rather put it on report and have the player dealt with appropriately once all evidence is clear and presented. Just don't ruin the game please!!
-
Like the Cane and Kolisi cards. There was a degree of recklessness from both of them, but there's a degree of recklessness in everything they do on the field as loose forwards. Forcing the refs to make a decision on cards is just subjective and ruins the game. Put them both on report and deal with them afterwards.
-
Any tackle above the sternum will become illegal. Can’t see how they can hold it off for much longer. The subjectivity of what constitutes a red or not is just too great. If you tackle above the sternum, you get sent off. Players have the choice to go low or have an early bath.
-
For me. It is all about the lawmaking and officiating. I don't want to say "refereeing". In fact I would like there to be 'more refereeing'.
When I started watching the game and fell in love with it. It was 'a controlled mess of a game' interrupted by shedloads of referring decisions and stoppages. But the stoppages were quick and the decisions of less consequence with the chances of them evening up in-game anyway.
Now is refereed / or law-makered on the ‘cool dad’ scale for some things:
- forward passes
- passing off the ground
- releasing ball on the ground
- scrum feeds
- goal kicking time taken
To make things flow, be neat and tidy.
But they are refereed on the Nazi scale on other things:
- scrum ‘legality’
- maul defence
- ‘deliberate’ knock-ons
- head contact
- ‘persistant’ infringements (e.g. 3 in a row …)
Safety changes:
- no rucking
- scrum engagements and from-rower heights
- head contact
- complete front-row on the bench
Some ‘good idea at the time’ changes:
- get lineout throw from penalties
- allow lifting in lineouts
These ‘changes in refereeing’ don’t remain in isolation. Some compound on others making formerly good changes, now bad. Or making stupid changes even stupider.
E.g. around the scrum rules:
- allow crooked feeds: get enormous hookers
- Prescribe having a complete front-row on the bench: get even more enormous (40-minuter) front-rowers.
- complete front-row on the bench: decimate amateur rugby team numbers
- Make rule changes that rewards having aerobically unfit players: get deliberate time-wasting
E.g. The many headed hydra trying to address safety and head contact:
- remove rucking: get cleanouts and head contacts
- Clamp down on cleanouts: get 14 man rugby and TMO interventions
- allow passing off the ground: encourage high tackling that wraps up the ball.
- allow offloads that only pass a ‘cool dad’ forward pass sniff-test: encourage high tackling.
- The combined cool dad non-referring that encourages high tackling: more head contact, TMO interventions, 14 or 13 man rugby.
E.g. The ‘let if flow’ changes:
- already mentioned that being lenient on forward passes (or changing forward pass interpretations based on co-commentators whining during slow motion replays) means the offload is a lethal attacking option. But … encourages high tackling
- already mentioned passing off the ground discourages the classic low tackle that lowers the players but leaves them in control of what they do with the ball.
- ditto allowing them to ‘place it’ after a tackle.
- Allowing them to ‘place it’ after a tackle. Presumable to remove dangerous rucking: Discourages the mobile ruck-chasing loose forwards. Encourages big unit loosies. Bigger players, worse collisions, more time wasting, terrible for grass roots numbers participation.
E.g. The was a good idea at the time:
- Get lineout throw from penalties. Changed in 1992. Only had a 60% chance of winning your own line out pre-lifting. And wasn’t as neat a base from which to set up from either. Good idea at the time,
- in 1996. Go ‘cool dad’ on line out lifting. Removes countless annoying line out penalties. But wind forward 10 years time and teams have perfected the 5m lineout maul try into a 70% play.
- The make scrum engagement perfect changes, combined with the 1992 line out penalty changes, combined with the allow lifting changes: Results in a minor scrum technical infringements 50m from your line being a 70% chance for a try if your line kicker is decent.
- Allow mounds, then sand, then tees. For goal-kicking. Saves the turf. But makes the now 'too few' infringements that referees rule too easy to score points from. Plus the time taken. Make a small divot, place ball, address it and kick it, immediately. This is not me harking back to my youth. I started watching when we were in the 'make a mound' phase.
-
I’m not seriously advocating WR make changes that I am listing above.
I don’t think that is realistic.
Too radical, or too much back-tracking (Heck they haven’t removed the now redundant ‘outside arm’ lineout rule after they allowed lifting, a rule designed to stop jumping off your opponents shoulder, so they aren’t going to role back the number of rule changes I am suggesting).Just a record of how the compounding changes have turned the best sport in the world into something I wouldn’t watch even if it was in my back yard.
I honestly think it is a lame duck going forward. At an amateur level and a professional level. So, I have emotionally dis-engaged. It is a different sport now anyway from the one I got hooked on.
-
@stodders said in The Current State of Rugby:
Any tackle above the sternum will become illegal. Can’t see how they can hold it off for much longer. The subjectivity of what constitutes a red or not is just too great. If you tackle above the sternum, you get sent off. Players have the choice to go low or have an early bath.
K.I.S.S.
Makes everything easier. Case in point is the forward pass rule (and I’m not saying it was better, just easier), if it is adjudged to go forward, end of story. No momentum, no backwards out of the hands. Simple to enforce. Still prone to errors of course.
-
@Catogrande thats the thing, any head contact should be ruled the same way, whether that is a YC or a RC with/without a time restriction.
Shit, they give the TMO crew (whoever it is) <10 mins to make the decision, and given the inconstancies in the judicial process who have days to review it, <10 mins is not long enough to make a decision that will most likely affect the outcome of a match.
Set a black and white standard on head contact.
Was there head contact - Yes, then card
Its from here we have decisions to make.
Does that player get to come back on, can they be replaced?Let the judiciary then argue mitigation, change of angles etc.
-
@Catogrande said in The Current State of Rugby:
@stodders said in The Current State of Rugby:
Any tackle above the sternum will become illegal. Can’t see how they can hold it off for much longer. The subjectivity of what constitutes a red or not is just too great. If you tackle above the sternum, you get sent off. Players have the choice to go low or have an early bath.
K.I.S.S.
Makes everything easier. Case in point is the forward pass rule (and I’m not saying it was better, just easier), if it is adjudged to go forward, end of story. No momentum, no backwards out of the hands. Simple to enforce. Still prone to errors of course.
I'm with this. Except maybe on the momentum part.
I'd like to see tried a must 'pass it behind yourself'. So it must go behind the plane of your own shoulders. This I think should pass the "eye test".
It would seriously limit the Sonny_bill offload. But as I mention above in my veeeeery long post. The offload encourages high tackling response. So, no loss.
It needs to be easy for a referee to judge reasonable accurately in real time with no TMO replays.
-
@mooshld said in The Current State of Rugby:
@canefan said in The Current State of Rugby:
This might have already been posted, but here goes. Shag telling it like it is
He's not wrong but his timing sucks. Say this just after you've won because of a favourable ruling people may listen. But say it now it'll be seen as sour grapes.
The only way this will change is if TMO interventions are clearly in favour of the All Blacks. Right now the rugby world still seems to watch us have our comeuppance.
For me, I'm happy to have the TMO, but it needs to be applied to everything or nothing at all. And RCs need (outside of egregious foul play) need to go to judiciary. Right now cards are defining outcomes and ruining the game.
-
@taniwharugby said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Catogrande thats the thing, any head contact should be ruled the same way, whether that is a YC or a RC with/without a time restriction.
Shit, they give the TMO crew (whoever it is) <10 mins to make the decision, and given the inconstancies in the judicial process who have days to review it, <10 mins is not long enough to make a decision that will most likely affect the outcome of a match.
Set a black and white standard on head contact.
Was there head contact - Yes, then card
Its from here we have decisions to make.
Does that player get to come back on, can they be replaced?Let the judiciary then argue mitigation, change of angles etc.
But what constitutes head contact for a card? That will be the grey area. There are multiple head contacts in every single game. We can't card them all otherwise it'll end up sevens. I have been saying it for years. Cards are ruining the game. We need less not more.
