Wallabies v Argentina Take 2, Dec 5th
-
@NTA said in Wallabies v Argentina Take 2, Dec 5th:
@nzzp said in Wallabies v Argentina Take 2, Dec 5th:
That said, it doesn't make a game for the viewer when so many game affecting decisions get made
Ignoring the yellows for a minute: the red card was entirely justified and while AFG has many, MANY faults, it wasn't his decision to try and smack a bloke around the chops.
I agree on the Red, too.
I guess I was generally reflecting on rugby in general, and the AB season in particular. Maybe this needs another thread.
There are a lot of yellow and reds dished out now, and they really do affect games. You just have to look back at 2015 RWC final - we dominated Australia, except where Ben Smith got binned for a tip tackle and we shipped 14 points. Looking at the Reds over the last few seasons, there are a heap where there are a bunch of mitigating factors or clumsiness going on. For clarity, in the current framework they all appear to be reds, and not re-litigating them.
I am just wondering about where the threshold is set I guess, as there are a heap of clumsy/accidental cards these days. I see the Ofa red three weeks ago as more of a passive hit (propped, didn't drop enough) and quite different to the LSL from the weekend (ran through the player leading with the shoulder). Should both be Red? Damned if I know, but the level of risk seemed quite different.
I suppose I'm worrying about how we keep players heads sacrosanct when we're watching a sport that has pileups, cleanouts and bodies in weird angles. Right now, players dropping their heads into these zones raise the risk significantly - but only one side will be pinged for any contact. That, and slow mo replays means plenty of cards.
I'm all over the place in this post, but I suppose I'm seeing a bunch of game altering cards dished out for rugby that doesn't look horribly cynical, and genuinely wondering where we go with that. Do we need to redesign the breakdown laws completely I wonder, to reflect the new focus and keep people on their feet? Hell, I don't know...
-
@NTA said in Wallabies v Argentina Take 2, Dec 5th:
@nzzp said in Wallabies v Argentina Take 2, Dec 5th:
@NTA said in Wallabies v Argentina Take 2, Dec 5th:
P.S. Once again, a match thread about NOT The Fucking ABs has turned into a knitting circle about The Fucking ABs
on an NZ sports forum! Who woulda thunk it
Exactly - a hundred other fucking threads to get frothy about your lot, and here you are, talking about which second-rate wingers should fix "the problem"....
not George Bridge.
-
@nzzp said in Wallabies v Argentina Take 2, Dec 5th:
I'm all over the place in this post, but I suppose I'm seeing a bunch of game altering cards dished out for rugby that doesn't look horribly cynical, and genuinely wondering where we go with that. Do we need to redesign the breakdown laws completely I wonder, to reflect the new focus and keep people on their feet? Hell, I don't know...
I thought Hooper was unlucky. When a player has their head over the ball like that, I'm not quite sure how you can clean them out without either making front-on contact with the head/neck/shoulders, or coming from the side. Hooper made what I would call a copybook cleanout, wrapped his arm and lifted the leg, drove through with the shoulder. It just happened the shoulder hit the Argie player's head a fraction before his arms made contact.
I would wager that type of cleanout would occur at least 10 times each game but with TMO bingo and super slow-mo we pick up the odd one or two when it is a bit more obvious.
I agree the head/neck should be protected but for me the LSL type incident (a clear red) is much easier to understand than looking at ruck cleanouts which previously would be taught in schools as how to do it.
-
@nzzp said in Wallabies v Argentina Take 2, Dec 5th:
I'm all over the place in this post, but I suppose I'm seeing a bunch of game altering cards dished out for rugby that doesn't look horribly cynical, and genuinely wondering where we go with that. Do we need to redesign the breakdown laws completely I wonder, to reflect the new focus and keep people on their feet? Hell, I don't know...
I think we first need a way of rewarding players for quality low tackles - and that might just be refs going easier on them for rolling away. The direction we get in Suburban Rugby is "below the armpits" or you put yourself at the mercy of the ref.
The breakdown Laws aren't written that badly, but like all the Laws are interpretation-based because it is a fluid game.
At pro level we have guys who are big, strong, and fast, and generally putting themselves in positions over the ball that make it very difficult to avoid their head. Crack right down on neck rolls for anything that (like the tackle) isn't below the armpits - and I'm saying first one penalty and warning, second one bin, as a minimum. If the first one is a serious fuckup, then it goes to the bin straight away.
I'm not certain what the actual answer is, but I think if you mitigate it elsewhere then cleanouts fix themselves.
-
@barbarian said in Wallabies v Argentina Take 2, Dec 5th:
I thought Hooper was unlucky. When a player has their head over the ball like that, I'm not quite sure how you can clean them out without either making front-on contact with the head/neck/shoulders, or coming from the side.
I saw a good video from McCaw on a Kiwi Rugby show - he was talking about winning the shoulder battle i.e. if you're first there and low enough, the opponent can't take that space and you either set on defence or go for the ball on attack. If you are second in, then you need to change your height, and roll them off.
Hooper arrived too late (a hallmark of the Wallabies ruck work) and had already lost the battle for shoulder space. The subsequent contact went wrong because there was nothing he could do that was NOT illegal (either head contact or from the side) unless he managed to crocodile roll Sanchez off, and we probably would have conceded the penalty anyway for our player holding on.
Fact is, we'd lost that ruck in purely legal terms, but as per your comment below:
I would wager that type of cleanout would occur at least 10 times each game but with TMO bingo and super slow-mo we pick up the odd one or two when it is a bit more obvious.
-
@barbarian I agree he was a touch unlucky but can see why the YC was given. I think it was more on the harsh side.
On the test itself, this one appeared to go backwards to the first draw.
-
@nzzp said in Wallabies v Argentina Take 2, Dec 5th:
I am just wondering about where the threshold is set I guess, as there are a heap of clumsy/accidental cards these days. I see the Ofa red three weeks ago as more of a passive hit (propped, didn't drop enough) and quite different to the LSL from the weekend (ran through the player leading with the shoulder). Should both be Red? Damned if I know, but the level of risk seemed quite different.
See the thing with the Ofa one is - that would have been one helluva hit if he planted it right at the bottom of his sternum. So, what's the reason for going high? Iirc he looked away before contact too. That's a sign of a style that really needs to change.
-
@NTA said in Wallabies v Argentina Take 2, Dec 5th:
P.S. Once again, a match thread about NOT The Fucking ABs has turned into a knitting circle about The Fucking ABs
Even knitting circles have purls of wisdom.
-
The clean outs are super dangerous. Could be penalized if anyone leave their feet jumping into or rolling over a ruck? Or too draconian?
-
If Gardner had been reffing the Irish vs Welsh test on the weekend, there wouldn't been a player left on the field. Hitting the rucks like missiles at times and on occasions nobody keeping their feet!
-
@NTA said in Wallabies v Argentina Take 2, Dec 5th:
@nzzp said in Wallabies v Argentina Take 2, Dec 5th:
I'm all over the place in this post, but I suppose I'm seeing a bunch of game altering cards dished out for rugby that doesn't look horribly cynical, and genuinely wondering where we go with that. Do we need to redesign the breakdown laws completely I wonder, to reflect the new focus and keep people on their feet? Hell, I don't know...
I think we first need a way of rewarding players for quality low tackles - and that might just be refs going easier on them for rolling away. The direction we get in Suburban Rugby is "below the armpits" or you put yourself at the mercy of the ref.
The breakdown Laws aren't written that badly, but like all the Laws are interpretation-based because it is a fluid game.
At pro level we have guys who are big, strong, and fast, and generally putting themselves in positions over the ball that make it very difficult to avoid their head. Crack right down on neck rolls for anything that (like the tackle) isn't below the armpits - and I'm saying first one penalty and warning, second one bin, as a minimum. If the first one is a serious fuckup, then it goes to the bin straight away.
I'm not certain what the actual answer is, but I think if you mitigate it elsewhere then cleanouts fix themselves.
The Argies showed that tackles below the armpit can have 'plenty' of bite.
-
@Bones said in Wallabies v Argentina Take 2, Dec 5th:
@nzzp said in Wallabies v Argentina Take 2, Dec 5th:
I am just wondering about where the threshold is set I guess, as there are a heap of clumsy/accidental cards these days. I see the Ofa red three weeks ago as more of a passive hit (propped, didn't drop enough) and quite different to the LSL from the weekend (ran through the player leading with the shoulder). Should both be Red? Damned if I know, but the level of risk seemed quite different.
See the thing with the Ofa one is - that would have been one helluva hit if he planted it right at the bottom of his sternum. So, what's the reason for going high? Iirc he looked away before contact too. That's a sign of a style that really needs to change.
Double upvote!
-
Another good analysis, also points to where rugby is ATM
https://www.theroar.com.au/2020/12/09/why-defence-is-trending-ahead-of-attack-in-modern-rugby/
-
@Machpants
Does anyone actually like the current style? Current and former players, journalists, fans? Everything I've read, heard and seen points to no. Even people you might expect would defend it as a traditional, NH, purist style are calling it for what it it, dull. Coaches like Jones get defensive but they should as they are winning using it, but as a neutral viewer I'm sure he would be criticizing it too. -
I see Tony Brown is asking for an offside line referee and a ruck referee. Reckons one ref cannot do the breakdown and ensure players are onside.
Often when watching I wonder how players can be onside and then rush as quick as they do. Something needs to be done as games are coming to be more defence then anything else, fans like attacking rugby and watching tries so something needs to be done. -
@chimoaus said in Wallabies v Argentina Take 2, Dec 5th:
I see Tony Brown is asking for an offside line referee and a ruck referee. Reckons one ref cannot do the breakdown and ensure players are onside.
That should be the AR's responsibility. They just need to enforce it, and the refs listen to them. You'd be surprised how many don't.
-
@Bovidae said in Wallabies v Argentina Take 2, Dec 5th:
@chimoaus said in Wallabies v Argentina Take 2, Dec 5th:
I see Tony Brown is asking for an offside line referee and a ruck referee. Reckons one ref cannot do the breakdown and ensure players are onside.
That should be the AR's responsibility. They just need to enforce it, and the refs listen to them. You'd be surprised how many don't.
agree - change in this area is important. Push the defenders back half a metre, and the game opens up.
-
@chimoaus yep, for as much as we love seeing big hits, its the well worked tries that what make it, and yep, some defenders rushing up you think he had to be off side!
@Bovidae yeah you do wonder what the AR's actually do, as the amount of stuff they can quite obviously see, but do not act on.
Give them more responsibility, players will have more responsibility to be on side, right now, they see the ref and know where he is to push boundaries, give the AR the role of monitoring it too, all the time not just the obvious ones.
-
@taniwharugby The advantage of using Sports Ears at SR games is that you get to listen to the communication between the officials. Often an AR may say to the ref that a player is offside and the ref replies "we'll play on". The ref and ARs should work as a team.
I remember listening to Mark Lawrence (SA), who used a green, orange, red colour system with his ARs to let him know if players were staying onside, borderline offside or offside. I assume he used this system to know whether he needed to look closer, warn the players, or penalise accordingly. It was such a simple system to use I thought.
