State of the Game
-
Feels like there are two mini threads going here - one is how to fix the game right now and one is how we could reform rugby. For the second, widening the field isn't really an option, so reducing the number of players would be the easiest way of getting more space. I'd say you could drop one loosie and one three-quarter and the game would still be basically the same, but with less muscle and turnover capacity and fewer ppl covering the backfield. That could make a massive difference.
Knowing that would never happen, I think anything to speed up play and bring the balance back towards the attacking side is needed.
IMO, th easiest would be to allow ARs to call penalties for offside, so that the ref will be primarily on the breakdown and general play, but the distance between the teams is enforced by those on the side (and the ref). The ARs don't need to be in the field of play, and it would be that there needs to clearly be space between the back of the ruck (not last feet) and the defending team. That should get back 30-50cm, perhaps even nearly a metre,which should make a big difference.
I'd also bring in something about the defending player having the right to the space for box kicks, which might discourage them a little and reduce some of the more dangerous clashes we've had.
-
God this thread clearly shows internet forums are populated by middle age men, I'm just waiting to shout bingo when somebody starts a post with "in my day..."
Anyway, don't think rugby is in bad place right now, but then again I'm South African, we don't care for this attacking rugby you speak of. For me it is more about preserving the integrity of the sport than forcing everyone to play a certain way.
A couple tweaks that I think might help.
Keep the bench at 8 players but only 4 substitutions (including injuries, but excluding HIA and blood.)
Allow the ball to be kicked out on the full from anywhere on the pitch. This is more philosophical gripe of mine, the team with ball should have as many options as possible. At the moment nobody wants the ball 5 meter outside their 22 cause there are so few good options other than banging it up in the air.
A shot clock on all restarts. 40 seconds for all scrums, line outs and kicks at goal. At pro level I'd be fine with the clock running 40 seconds off the clock and then stopping at scrum resets as long as the ref is happy everyone is trying their best to get on with the game.
Apply the fucking rules. Refs are letting so much go in the name of the flow of the game that any decision they do make is arbitrary. At the pro levels the players know what they are doing and will push the ref as far he'll let them.
Furthermore, clamp down hard on the bullshit. Scrum half runs off with ball to make sure there is no quick tap - March his team ten. Offend under advantage - default should be yellow. Holding players (why would you ever need to grab someone's leg at a ruck)- penalize every fucking time.
Stop penalizing props for get shoved back, be stricter on loose forwards being bound and back lines remaining 5 meters back.
-
I tend to vacillate between despairing about the state of the game and being more philosophical that current trends are just a part of the inevitable ebb and flow of modern rugby where you have periods of attack predominating followed by period of defence predominating.
One thinks back to the 2007-2009 period, including that world cup, where defence and kicking really was the order of the day and the ABs were found out really badly under the high ball. But, by 2010, we had turned that weakness into a strength whereby we became the best in the world under the high-ball, completely nullifying its effectiveness and forcing other teams to develop new ways of beating us that a lot of the time involved running the ball - see how many high-scoring, but pretty tight test matches we played out in that 2010-2016 period.
These days, although the box kick is still widely used (overused to be fair), it's actually not that effective as a disruptive tactic like it was between 2007-2009. That's because teams got better at dealing with it - they became better at catching bombs, better at shepherding the catcher, developed better support lines to get back into position to prevent a turnover and also better at pressuring the halfback. The result is largely shithouse, pointless box kicks that achieve very little other than to advance your team up the field marginally but put the opposition in a difficult part of the field to attack from. It's rare these days that you get to see two guys going up and actually competing for a high ball and even rarer that it gets spilled and presents a counter-attacking opportunity. I think (hope) teams will start to use it less and less as they come to the conclusion that all they're doing is giving the ball away within goal-kicking range.
Bringing this back full circle, yes, the game is probably just nearing midway through a cycle where defence prevails. 2018-2019 still saw a lot of really good attacking play, but I think England and RSA making the RWC final last year has set the tone for at least a couple of more years. You can already see England have become even more defence oriented, a bit more Bok-like, as I'm sure Eddie will have taken to heart the manner in which his team were outmuscled in that match.
My only concern is how this affects the ABs - I'm a bit selfish like that. Using 2007-2009 as a lesson, my view is that we have to be pragmatic and turn the current trends to our advantage. Good coaching (sorely lacking currently) is obviously the best antidote to this
-
I expect if refs were harder on 9s using it quicker, making thier blockers be bound properly and not allowing them to roll the ball out with thier foot to the back of his line of blockers, and then put thier hands on it for 3 or 4 seconds as they ready for the box kick,will see less box kicking.
9s are protected, you can attack a forward or any player other than a 9 at the back of a ruck, even if they are to clear or pick and go,but if he wears 9 you aren't allowed to touch him...why?
A more consistent application of laws is all we want.
I think while the game is defence oriented, it is upto attack coaches to find a way to break it, usually its us doing this but we have stagnated the past few years, keeping our powder dry for 2023.
-
@taniwharugby said in State of the Game:
I expect if refs were harder on 9s using it quicker, making thier blockers be bound properly and not allowing them to roll the ball out with thier foot to the back of his line of blockers, and then put thier hands on it for 3 or 4 seconds as they ready for the box kick,will see less box kicking.
I'd like to see a 'hands on = out' rule in the instances where the ball is clearly at the back of the ruck and in possession of the attacking team.
It's unfair for that rule to apply to a regular ruck where the HB needs a bit of leeway to fish the ball out from under a tackler or something, but I think it's pretty clear when that is the case and when teams are shaping for the box kick.
I don't hate the box kick as a general rule, what I do hate is that 20 second period where teams go 'we're going to box kick here, lets get a few more forwards in the ruck... OK now lets roll the ball back... Hmmm OK I think we're good here, let me get into position... now we kick'.
-
@barbarian yeah thats the thing, the preparation of lining up your blockers, rolling the ball, moving it into prime angle for you to pick up and kick, re-directing your forwards...make them use it faster, means they will be less prepared, so accuracy of box kick is reduced, meaning they are likely less inclined to use it unless the situation works.
the hands-on thing winds me up, you see these guys putting hands on for 3, 4, 5 seconds, then they remove them to push a forward into place and then do something.
-
@barbarian said in State of the Game:
@taniwharugby said in State of the Game:
I expect if refs were harder on 9s using it quicker, making thier blockers be bound properly and not allowing them to roll the ball out with thier foot to the back of his line of blockers, and then put thier hands on it for 3 or 4 seconds as they ready for the box kick,will see less box kicking.
I'd like to see a 'hands on = out' rule in the instances where the ball is clearly at the back of the ruck and in possession of the attacking team.
It's unfair for that rule to apply to a regular ruck where the HB needs a bit of leeway to fish the ball out from under a tackler or something, but I think it's pretty clear when that is the case and when teams are shaping for the box kick.
I don't hate the box kick as a general rule, what I do hate is that 20 second period where teams go 'we're going to box kick here, lets get a few more forwards in the ruck... OK now lets roll the ball back... Hmmm OK I think we're good here, let me get into position... now we kick'.
Once again, apply the laws. Those blockers are usually offside in that they are not bound to the ruck. Binding is clearly defined and it ain't a finger. Also if the attacking teams players join as blockers they are doing so from the side.
Enforcing that may result in more 'snake' rucks but again, if the ball was available and players join after and slow the play down that should be free-kicked. -
Had a few drinks on Wednesday with a group of friends and we talked about this for about 2 hours. Some pretty varied opinions on things, but two things were entrenched across the group (2 x English, Irish, Scot, Sith Ifrican and me).
The game is at a turning point in both style and size. The Irish is on the coaching team at Cobham rugby club so is pretty close to the game. He has a massive massive problem with Taniela Tupou. Not the player, but the way he's used. IT's simply not right, and dangerous, to bring him on fresh against others at say the 55 minutes mark. The man is destructive at the best of times, but in this situation he's downright dangerous. He wants to can all starters / finishers crap and go back to 15 players. When pointed out this will obviously be gamed, he agreed but isn't sure what the best way forwards is. A bit part of rugby is supposed to be seeing how players deal in that last 20 minutes when tiring. Thats when gaps should open up, tackles should be missed and you separate the cream. But that isn't happening anymore. Again to reiterate, this is nothing on Tupou (who we all agreed is likely to be a superstar by the time he finishes up), but his sheer bulk, size and speed are the pointy end of the current issues.
Secondly, game structure. The Nations cup was shit watching. Proper terrible watching. Perhaps there was something in there for the purists, but nothing to attract new players. Nothing. We disagreed on changes, but we all agreed that watching games from 20 years ago was far far superior to where we are now.
-
So just read through the thread - I don't have as many issues with the game as you guys, it's still rugby, there's still good games and shit games the same as there ever was.
Still need some tweaks though like the stupid maul use it x amount of times and restart B/S. And the ruck can always be improved, and probably always will be as long as the game exists. Scrums could be sped up. I'd like to see an in between card for non deliberate foul play so that stomping someone and slipping up on a reactionary tackle aren't considered the same offence.
