The Current State of Rugby
-
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.
-
-
@Smuts said in The Current State of Rugby:
But we’re going to do that with every/any set of rules.
I’d rather they did it with rules that were fun to play under.
I am sort of the last one to talk then
I cheated my ass off, and did a few pretty dirty things
Had fun though
(Do those rules we played under include being able to hit fluffybunnies in the head and smash rucks for minimal penalty?)
-
I never did. Or at least, refs hardly ever penalized me for intentionally breaking the rules. Since I never intentionally followed them and since refs are sole judges of law and fact, I can’t have been cheating. And saying otherwise just shows you don’t respect those stupid, blind fluffybunnies as much as me.
-
Five cards and counting in the one and half games I have watched today. There has got to be a better way. Who wants to watch games like these?
-
@Crazy-Horse said in The Current State of Rugby:
Five cards and counting in the one and half games I have watched today. There has got to be a better way. Who wants to watch games like these?
Fans are baying for them now as well. Sad to see.
-
@Crazy-Horse said in The Current State of Rugby:
Five cards and counting in the one and half games I have watched today. There has got to be a better way. Who wants to watch games like these?
I'm still watching
-
I just don't understand the point of yellow cards. They don't work as a deterrent because every year there are more and more of them. If they are meant as a punishment for cynical play, why? A penalty is already a huge benefit - especially when penalty advantages seem almost endless. If teams receiving countless penalties and advantages aren't good enough to score, I don't think they should have another benefit. Often a yellow card is given to a team when the other team is too shit to score.
-
@Bones said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Crazy-Horse said in The Current State of Rugby:
Five cards and counting in the one and half games I have watched today. There has got to be a better way. Who wants to watch games like these?
I'm still watching
Yeah so am I 😀 but it's pissing me off more each time
-
What about a seven point penalty in what would be a yellow card situation? Teams give away penalties to stop tries being scored so why not punish them the same as a try?
-
@Crazy-Horse I like the idea of more penalty tries without cards.
-
@Bones said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Crazy-Horse said in The Current State of Rugby:
Five cards and counting in the one and half games I have watched today. There has got to be a better way. Who wants to watch games like these?
I'm still watching
I've really cut back my watching and attending games
-
@nzzp said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Bones said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Crazy-Horse said in The Current State of Rugby:
Five cards and counting in the one and half games I have watched today. There has got to be a better way. Who wants to watch games like these?
I'm still watching
I've really cut back my watching and attending games
I've played more this season than any other season in the last half a decade so must be a sucker
Edit: didn't think I was going to have much success adjusting to the new tackle/dip laws but it's been fine.
-
Seventeen dead minutes: Why World Rugby had to act after Cup final
The 2011 Rugby World Cup final was by no means a classic. But comparing it to last year’s showpiece event proves that rule changes have turned rugby into a waiting game.
-
@Tim said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Crazy-Horse I like the idea of more penalty tries without cards.
Yeah I like that idea as well.
-
@Crazy-Horse said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Tim said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Crazy-Horse I like the idea of more penalty tries without cards.
Yeah I like that idea as well.
Been saying that for yonks
Score = no card
Deliberately stop scoring = cardSame with scrums
Penalty first
Penalty and ten yards possession if outside the 22
Penalty try if stops scoring
But no cards -
@Tim said in The Current State of Rugby:
The 2011 Rugby World Cup final was by no means a classic. But comparing it to last year’s showpiece event proves that rule changes have turned rugby into a waiting game.
Can you get past paywall?
-
@Machpants Try archive.ph
