Rugby rules (or lack there of) that grind your gears?
-
@Rapido said in Rugby rules (or lack there of) that grind your gears?:
My thread! My precious thread! What have you guys done to my thread! Flats and aeroplanes?!
Really sorry about all this Rapido. My fault.
If it's any consolation the next time DMac smiles before he kicks, you can be safe in the knowledge that the opposition are allowed to charge. -
my biggest gripe with rugby rulings lately:
"Taking out the scrumhalf".
I am pretty sure this rule was created to prevent players grabbing or interfering with ACTING scrumhalves who are behind a ruck trying to clear the ball.
Nowadays it is interpreted as anytime a player with a "9" or "21" on his jersey is sacrosanct and can't be cleaned out, as long as the ball is on his side of the ruck. This is utter bullshit, if the team in possession can't protect the ball at the ruck and the scrumhalf is cleaned out, that's their problem.Fuck this fucking fuckshit.
Otherwise, great game, yeah. -
the ruck at 1m0s here:
it's pretty clear BOK would have penalised any Wallaby going for either Reinach or the ball here, even though the ruck is collapsed and there is no security provided by any Springbok.
I wouldn't even know which law is applicable here:I hate these kinds of ruck. Contesting should always be allowed, as long as you come from the hindmost foot. If you don't protect your halfback, bad luck.
-
Mauls.
The way they’re reffed, the attacking team has so many advantages.
They can join from where ever they like, they can bind however they like, and worst of all the maul can stop moving and is allowed to then re-start.
The defending team will get pinged for anything and everything.
-
I'm not looking at the video but is this just prior to a try where no one is on their feet and you just know there is no way the ref will let Aus contest so there is this weird pause?
I remember thinking "how do they legally contest that?" Which is ridiculous.
Fuck halfbacks. Fuck their ridiculous protection
And ban the box kick
-
I reckon they should utilise the free-kick as a restart mechanism for way more scenarios (e.g. accidental offsides, knock-ons, forward passes, throw not straight, kick-off not 10m) BUT prohibit kicking to touch or choosing a scrum option.
That way a team's only options are to tap and play quickly, setup a tap move like "the wall" or kick possession away (but not into touch obvs).
I think it would increase the ball in play time, decrease the common set-piece to set-piece snooze-fest (e.g. throw not straight -> lets have a scrum) and drive some new innovation.
-
@maxwell said in Rugby rules (or lack there of) that grind your gears?:
I reckon they should utilise the free-kick as a restart mechanism for way more scenarios (e.g. accidental offsides, knock-ons, forward passes, throw not straight, kick-off not 10m) BUT prohibit kicking to touch or choosing a scrum option.
That way a team's only options are to tap and play quickly, setup a tap move like "the wall" or kick possession away (but not into touch obvs).
Didn't we try something similar years ago?
-
@maxwell i think A LOT of scrum penalties could and should just be free kicks, its just supposed to be a competition for possession anyway....so the rewards for having a dominant scrum?...possession
-
@Crazy-Horse Not sure - but eliminating the option to just go to another set-piece from a free-kick would promote a different mindset imo.
-
@Kiwiwomble i mean you would still get rewarded possession with a free-kick (given specific infringements) but your options on what to do with it would change.
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Rugby rules (or lack there of) that grind your gears?:
@maxwell i think A LOT of scrum penalties could and should just be free kicks, its just supposed to be a competition for possession anyway....so the rewards for having a dominant scrum?...possession
Yeah scrums can be frustrating with endless free kicks, penalties and then cards.
-
@maxwell ...i was agreeing with you, use the free kick rather than penalties for lots of scum stuff
@Crazy-Horse at least with the free kick a team cant turn a accident knock on into points through a dominant scrum, would most often just tap and go so should be faster than a ick for goal
-
@Kiwiwomble sorry misread
-
You can’t penalise a team for having skilled practitioners at scrum and line out time
If you don’t like it / can’t train & select the correct personnel, then there’s another code out there for you
It’s called League
-
@MiketheSnow nah. I'm picking Portugal and/or Chile could well end up getting their arses handed to them at scrum time in the RWC, through no fault of their own apart from just not being good enough at rugby. They'll get penalised for it.
I hope they don't go to league.
-
@MiketheSnow said in Rugby rules (or lack there of) that grind your gears?:
You can’t penalise a team for having skilled practitioners at scrum and line out time
If you don’t like it / can’t train & select the correct personnel, then there’s another code out there for you
It’s called League
how would it be penalising them, the only thing up for grabs with a scrum is possession...thats it point, one team gets the advantage of the feed but thats it....so you're giving them that
what we have with often is penilising team for not being strong enough or even not being good enough...neither of which are actually against the rules, if a team is weaker or not as good...theyre going to get beat anyway, we dont need to help them buy penilising them too
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Rugby rules (or lack there of) that grind your gears?:
@MiketheSnow said in Rugby rules (or lack there of) that grind your gears?:
You can’t penalise a team for having skilled practitioners at scrum and line out time
If you don’t like it / can’t train & select the correct personnel, then there’s another code out there for you
It’s called League
how would it be penalising them, the only thing up for grabs with a scrum is possession...thats it point, one team gets the advantage of the feed but thats it....so you're giving them that
what we have with often is penilising team for not being strong enough or even not being good enough...neither of which are actually against the rules, if a team is weaker or not as good...theyre going to get beat anyway, we dont need to help them buy penilising them too
If you depower the scrums and lines out then coaches will select more athletic, fitter, and faster players from 1-8
This will clog up the field even more, making tries an endangered species
-
@maxwell said in Rugby rules (or lack there of) that grind your gears?:
I reckon they should utilise the free-kick as a restart mechanism for way more scenarios (e.g. accidental offsides, knock-ons, forward passes, throw not straight, kick-off not 10m) BUT prohibit kicking to touch or choosing a scrum option.
That way a team's only options are to tap and play quickly, setup a tap move like "the wall" or kick possession away (but not into touch obvs).
I think it would increase the ball in play time, decrease the common set-piece to set-piece snooze-fest (e.g. throw not straight -> lets have a scrum) and drive some new innovation.
I would allow a kick out on the full from a free kick (being out where the ball crossed the touch line - just to be clear @Bones ), to avoid setting a scrum, as I think teams woukd go for easy territory, even it is is the opposition's throw.
-
@Kiwiwomble I'd like to see a compromise, less penalties for being pushed backwards, but referees being lot tougher on loosies breaking early or the backline not retreating with a reversing scrum.
A prop that just collapses has to be punished though, it is too easy to kill the contest by bailing out and it is too dangerous for the frontrows
