The Current State of Rugby
-
Just a thought – but wouldn’t it be fair to say that the majority of the "slowing down of the game" has been due to player safety? And the rules introduced there-after??
If we were to look at it…
Scrums - used to form up and into it in less than 5 seconds - yes a certain amount of slowing due to technical accuracy (players taking longer to get "set" to get technique and binds right) but also the introduction safety-wise of the ref calling crouch, touch, engage etc has slowed the game.
Again, was a form up and throw, especially before the advent of legalising lifting - and yes game has been slowed due to technical accuracy, not so much player safety.
Rucks - well they took away rucking for player safety, the melee of penalties and confusion that has followed because of this has been a difficulty in rugby ever since. More penalties = more set pieces = slower game.
Injuries - old school no replacements if you were injured. So layers would stay on (not good for them) or just get off the field if they got hurt. This was removed due to player safety, now it can take an age to get an injured player of the field and we all know a lot of players "fake" an injury to slow the game down.
Substitutes - used to be none, now the game is delayed in most cases to get them onto the field.
HIA assessments and smart mouthguards - need I say more.
High tackles - used to be a penalty or a card, now there's a frame-by-frame review of every high tackle.
Head knocks - used to be just an unfortunate part of the game, now a frame-by-frame review of every incident by the TMO.
Most of the things that slow the game down are due to measures introduced for the sake of player safety - not exactly "the rules" themselves.
Now I'm not saying that the game should be made inherently dangerous for the sake of our entertainment but it does appear that the safer we make the game the slower it gets (inadvertently or otherwise).
Having a safe game and a fast game would appear to be a contradiction (and a considerable one at that) unless we want to turn rugby into 7's or league...
-
I think one way to speed up the game would be for the case of high tackles and head knocks the ref blows the penalty and the infringing palyer gets sent to the sideline immediatly while play continues.
The TMO can do their frame by frame decision making and decide if it's just a penalty (in whch case the player returns to the field) or if it's a card they go to the sin bin as per normal (time served from the moment the penalty is blown).
-
@Windows97 said in The Current State of Rugby:
I think one way to speed up the game would be for the case of high tackles and head knocks the ref blows the penalty and the infringing palyer gets sent to the sideline immediatly while play continues.
It is incredibly stupid to send someone off for a head contact, yet the guy that got hit in the head, doesnt even get checked out.
There was a head contact in the 6N (was the Irish game I think) clearly didnt trigger the smart mouthguards (assume they are using them over there) and a lottery YC not upgraded, and neither player got an HIA check.
If they are serious about it, they need to look at that stupid aspect of it.
-
@taniwharugby Ironicaly the easiest fix would be for both players to be sent off for HIA assesments immediately.
During that time the TMO can check to see if there's any need for a card.
-
@antipodean said in The Current State of Rugby:
@canefan said in The Current State of Rugby:
I'll wait to see if they actually try to eliminate fake stoppages. That is one of my major gripes. If you fix the intentional slowing of the game, the bench/subs problems will probably go too, because loading the bench with forwards carries risk that they can't handle a faster game. But if they want to change that too, great
An easy way to eliminate fake stoppages is to simply not stop the game for someone who needs a breather or to tie up his boot again. Can't form a scrum because a prop has taken a knee? Take a quick tap or free kick to the other side.
I understand and don't disagree with the sentiment, however, you're ignoring how cynical rugby is these days - have a terrible scrum? Then concede a free kick by taking the knee.
I agree with speeding the game up but if scrums take too long to set then free kick once, penalty next IMO.
-
@Duluth said in The Current State of Rugby:
@booboo said in The Current State of Rugby:
Not sure what the following achieves:
and for the ability to mark the ball inside the 22 from a restart
Seems to create a stoppage rather than making a team play out of their red zone. Eliminates the mid length kick off.
The standard kickoff is long with a winger sprinting to put pressure on. I miss the 10-20m kickoffs with locks competing to win the ball. That contest has gone from the game recently. By making long kickoffs easier to deal with, it moves the kickoff back into the competitive area of the field
this was exactly my reaction, it is trying to add an area of contest to the game and i'm all for it.
-
@Bovidae said in The Current State of Rugby:
WR needs to get rid of the caterpillar ruck. Limit it to being able to add only one extra player to the ruck before the halfback kicks. I have liked that the ref have tried to enforce the 5 sec rule more strictly too.
I think it's probably simpler - "halfback" can't roll the ball more than a metre or maybe once ball has moved more than a metre from where the tackled player placed it, it's out.
-
@Dodge said in The Current State of Rugby:
@antipodean said in The Current State of Rugby:
@canefan said in The Current State of Rugby:
I'll wait to see if they actually try to eliminate fake stoppages. That is one of my major gripes. If you fix the intentional slowing of the game, the bench/subs problems will probably go too, because loading the bench with forwards carries risk that they can't handle a faster game. But if they want to change that too, great
An easy way to eliminate fake stoppages is to simply not stop the game for someone who needs a breather or to tie up his boot again. Can't form a scrum because a prop has taken a knee? Take a quick tap or free kick to the other side.
I understand and don't disagree with the sentiment, however, you're ignoring how cynical rugby is these days - have a terrible scrum? Then concede a free kick by taking the knee.
In a game where possession matters, I think the benefits are outweighed by the negatives for the offending team. Especially if we implement this:
I agree with speeding the game up but if scrums take too long to set then free kick once, penalty next IMO.
-
Possession matters? The Current world cup holders would strongly disagree
-
I think of the greatest concern is the outlaw of the "croc roll"
Without this option, and with the current allowance of body height, and with the current interpretation of head contact in clean out, you can fuck the ruck up with one guy and leave 13 to defend, and your high odds to win that.
Attacking teams will do 1 of two things.
Play even less rugby in their own end
Be even more cynical about their front guy sealing off.Neither is good for the aesthetic
-
@Bones said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Bovidae said in The Current State of Rugby:
WR needs to get rid of the caterpillar ruck. Limit it to being able to add only one extra player to the ruck before the halfback kicks. I have liked that the ref have tried to enforce the 5 sec rule more strictly too.
I think it's probably simpler - "halfback" can't roll the ball more than a metre or maybe once ball has moved more than a metre from where the tackled player placed it, it's out.
It’s even simpler than that. Just blow the existing penalty for the halfback being offside when he walks up the side of the ruck and plays the ball with his foot.
-
-
@antipodean said in The Current State of Rugby:
@canefan said in The Current State of Rugby:
I'll wait to see if they actually try to eliminate fake stoppages. That is one of my major gripes. If you fix the intentional slowing of the game, the bench/subs problems will probably go too, because loading the bench with forwards carries risk that they can't handle a faster game. But if they want to change that too, great
An easy way to eliminate fake stoppages is to simply not stop the game for someone who needs a breather or to tie up his boot again. Can't form a scrum because a prop has taken a knee? Take a quick tap or free kick to the other side.
Yep and need treatment, go to sideline, need a drink of water go to sideline. no wtareboys on field at all, except in cases of high heat etc.
-
@Bones said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Smuts at least it's a start
But why apply the existing laws when you can strain their interpretation in a different direction to suit whatever the current controlling junta thinks will attract more marginal eyeballs to TVs?
Especially if it would force the refs to admit they ignore/misinterpret big chunks of the law book.
No, that’s almost as bloody stupid as focusing on how fun it might be to play under any proposed rule (ahem, you mean Law or lord help you, interpretation - Ed.). Only lunatics could focus on attracting/retaining more players. That way leads madness: a game with laws that mean what they say, that can actually be obeyed and create a (reasonably) fair contest for possession at every phase.
Nah, fuck that.
-
@Smuts I never sure of changes etc, but have to admit you have to make them. I been following the game for most of my (69year) life, alsmot never liked law changes, but seems I still follow game with a passion. Geez I can remember when forced into touch rule was played, could take a mark anywhere etc etc. We do tend to adapt.
-
Sure.
Short response, change is part of the game’s fabric - rules have constantly been refined to make it more fun to play. What’s objectionable is WR changing rules to try create a better “product” to sell. Changes that compromise the core attributes of the game - the things that make it unique and rewarding to all players (including tightforwards.) It’s bullshit: self-defeating betrayal of their mandate.
Longer response:
Probably go so far as saying that rule evolution is baked into Rugby’s ethos. If you go to the school the boy’s will show you the little hill and tree where the main okes used to gather before the game and agree on the day’s rules.
Amongst my many unrealized rugby dreams was to be so annoyingly good at something they changed the laws. Like the Windhond who fucked up so many 1st 5s they introduced the 15 meter line at the lineout. Before that he used to line up directly opposite the poor outhalf and melt them as they got the ball. Apparently it didn’t stop him. Just gave his FH more space.
But, Law refinement should be focused on making rugby more fun to PLAY.
That’s a wide ambit, but it fucking doesn’t include changes designed to make it more appealing to Australian League fans, or Lady Mygreatgreatgreatgrandpapamadeaheapofsellingslavesandmarriedthespoiltdaughterofafrenchgangster St John Smythe who likes the social scene in the Twickers members’ lounge.
They can get fucked. And I’ve yet to see any evidence that your more likely to get them turning on TVs by adulterating our game than gaining girls (especially girls) and boys who are born props and locks when they happen to flick by a glorious scrum or great counterruck. And along with those kids their friends and then their children.
And if you give them a game where they can have a fair contest at scrum, lineout and the tightloose there’ll be plenty of space for those pretty tries.
Explicitly allowing lifting is the best example I can think of. Lots of teams were already doing it. And the ref’s allowed it to develop by interpretation initially. Probably because it made their lives easier - keeping props and flanks busy so they didn’t have time to elbow and punch their opposites. It just made sense to sanction this development as it obviously made the lineout a much fairer contest instead of a violent lottery. But the important point is it was basically player innovation led and incrementally sanctioned.
Contrast that with the change to the breakdown/maul laws where if a player gets a knee down it’s a tackle. A rule that I doubt any active player was calling for. Actively reduces the contest for possession and typically is reffed without regard to the maul laws. So it’s confusing.
I missed a few seasons as it was introduced. So its corrosive impact was starkly obvious. Just a casual viewerbait abomination of a change.
Instead of the tightloose being a battle requiring and rewarding forwards committing to the point of contact, you have the absurd situation where 2 or more attackers charge into a defender upright - by definition a maul (seriously, go look at the picture under Law 16) - drive forward a yard or two and then flop over.
Ref then farcically yells Tackle! Release! And ignoring the fact that these two fat fucks are off their feet penalizes the defender on their feet if they try to pick the ball up out of this “ruck.”
Then this is all repeated.
Since there’s no point in committing to the ignored maul or the fairytale ruck the defender’s don’t. Instead they stay on their feet, fan out and smother the attack.
So because some nimrod thought the marginal viewer wants attacking rugby and because another nimrod told him the secret is allowing attackers to get quick ruck ball we compromised the area of the game that actually creates space and time for backs to waste/ignore.
And the Aussie Leagies yawned because their team was still shit and their ground humping was still better than our groundhumping. And Lady don’t ask me where the money came from still isn’t turning on the TV because she couldn’t give a fuck.
So in summary, Carthage must be destroyed.
-
the problem, smuts my dear boy, is that coaches are smarter than administrators, and they don't give a fuck about you. They want/are paid to win. And you win at rugby by bending rules, or flat our breaking them in a way that the ref can't penalise.
If these changes are brought in, some coach has already worked out how to exploit them for their own benefit, and a new set of whinges will come in.
Coaches want control, players and fans want chaos. This mythical game of contests you are describing died in 1992 (probably when we let the bloody saffers back TBH) and now the game is about control. And about milking the system to win. That's pro sport baby.
-
