The Current State of Rugby
-
@Steve said in The Current State of Rugby:
Not being allowed grab the scrum half. Rolling it back with his foot etc. It should be incumbent on the attacking team to throw the required numbers in to get him clean ball. if he is rolling it back with his hand or foot he should be fair game to be smashed. Its ridiculous.
Don't mind rolling it back with the foot, but rolling it back with the hand and all that hands on the ball repositioning it is bollocks, if halfback puts two hands on the ball it should basically be 2 seconds and they're fair game.
-
@Kirwan said in The Current State of Rugby:
To make it a better product we need better commentators. Some that like Rugby would be a start, knowing the laws and listenting to refs would be second, and absolutely under no circumstances insert their own agendas about the "state of the game" into commentary.
And stop disagreeing with the referees, that's for forum dwellers. Commentators should be knowledgeable and positive. Explaining why the ref may have made a determination given how the laws are written and applied would be much better.
Also a commentary free feed for Stan viewers.
-
@Bones personally id go as far as "hands on and your fair game", they should have a couple of meters protection to make their pass, worst case we might less box kicks if they dont have all the time and space in the world...but i would be happy enough with your suggestion
-
@Kiwiwomble said in The Current State of Rugby:
hands on and your fair game
that was the way it used to be, have to say the past 3 or 4 years this whole dragging with foot then turned into pulling back with hands and positioning the ball for the pass/kick while blockers line up has become a joke.
-
@taniwharugby said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Kiwiwomble said in The Current State of Rugby:
hands on and your fair game
that was the way it used to be, have to say the past 3 or 4 years this whole dragging with foot then turned into pulling back with hands and positioning the ball for the pass/kick while blockers line up has become a joke.
No need for Law changes either.
Enforce that 'blockers' must stand clearly behind the last feet and not alongside the ruck with a finger bind (which isn't a bind by law). This cuts down the passing channel for the halfback and means they have to step back after lifting the ball.
You could also 'interpret' that players may not join a ruck once the ball is available. Refs already decide availability so this isn't a biggie.
Recent interpretations that have seen more 'ball is out' calls have helped but hinging calls on the half lifting the ball have resulted in this stupid dragging.Law 15.11 Once a ruck has formed, no player may handle the ball unless they were able to get their hands on the ball before the ruck formed and stay on their feet.
Apply this to halfbacks.
-
@Crucial proper binding would probably solve a few issues that plague the game (rucks, mauls)
-
@taniwharugby said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Crucial proper binding would probably solve a few issues that plague the game (rucks, mauls)
yeah it baffles me that a law that is there for such an obvious purpose is just totally ignored even when it is a causing factor in other problems.
-
@Machpants said in The Current State of Rugby:
Playing a one-off vs Fiji in Fiji outside of the test window is fluff. PR for NZR and nice for Fiji but not real substance. As with Samoa, they'll come out with a huge loss because of the costs, unless it is paid for by NZR. It won't grow the game in Fiji, which doesn't need that. They need regular access to their stars and regular games. And that is the NH job, we tour up there, and they tour down here. Until that changes, and we get the world series thing, with relegation (sorry Italy, Scotland and Wales) most of this is moot.
I didn't say Japan had to be better than Italy, just more competitive than Italy is in the 6N. Cos Italy are poor, outside the occasional blip. And unlike in Europe/6N, it is bloody hard travel for a lot of the teams if you add Japan into the RC. They really have to be a good game-worthy addition for all the extra travel.As I said I think this a good thing, but the real reason it is happening is so NZR and Silverlake can get a bigger cash reward. I hope it expands the game, but I can't see it
Sorry mate never saw your reply until today, but to say it's fluff to play Fiji outside of test window doesn't really compute anyway, you do realsie that the Nortern hempisphere club season finishes before or as test window opens, so every chance they will get as much chance of getting players as they would in test window as players will be on break. It probably won't grow game in Fiji, but will give them a bloody good chance to fill up coffers with extra money from tickets and tv rights etc! I not sure how competitive Japan is compared to Italy is in 6N should be reason to tour or not tour. Do you suggest the ABs only play tier one teams? And of course in long run playing Japan for a few years is to do with money, are you seriously suggesting that it doesn't also help the game expand in Japan? And you know they probably (along with Fiji) going to be part of SH champs when the proposed league of Nations gets going?
I will add perhaps it's you look for negatives in everything ? -
@Dan54 said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Machpants said in The Current State of Rugby:
Playing a one-off vs Fiji in Fiji outside of the test window is fluff. PR for NZR and nice for Fiji but not real substance. As with Samoa, they'll come out with a huge loss because of the costs, unless it is paid for by NZR. It won't grow the game in Fiji, which doesn't need that. They need regular access to their stars and regular games. And that is the NH job, we tour up there, and they tour down here. Until that changes, and we get the world series thing, with relegation (sorry Italy, Scotland and Wales) most of this is moot.
I didn't say Japan had to be better than Italy, just more competitive than Italy is in the 6N. Cos Italy are poor, outside the occasional blip. And unlike in Europe/6N, it is bloody hard travel for a lot of the teams if you add Japan into the RC. They really have to be a good game-worthy addition for all the extra travel.As I said I think this a good thing, but the real reason it is happening is so NZR and Silverlake can get a bigger cash reward. I hope it expands the game, but I can't see it
Sorry mate never saw your reply until today, but to say it's fluff to play Fiji outside of test window doesn't really compute anyway, you do realsie that the Nortern hempisphere club season finishes before or as test window opens, so every chance they will get as much chance of getting players as they would in test window as players will be on break. It probably won't grow game in Fiji, but will give them a bloody good chance to fill up coffers with extra money from tickets and tv rights etc! I not sure how competitive Japan is compared to Italy is in 6N should be reason to tour or not tour. Do you suggest the ABs only play tier one teams? And of course in long run playing Japan for a few years is to do with money, are you seriously suggesting that it doesn't also help the game expand in Japan? And you know they probably (along with Fiji) going to be part of SH champs when the proposed league of Nations gets going?
I will add perhaps it's you look for negatives in everything ?No problems, to break it down
but to say it's fluff to play Fiji outside of test window doesn't really compute anyway, you do realsie that the Nortern hempisphere club season finishes before or as test window opens, so every chance they will get as much chance of getting players as they would in test window as players will be on break.
That's not how it works, it is a real struggle for players to play even when the comp is not going on. They only have to be released for windows. Even with release players don't make themselves available as they know who pays there money. A game against Fiji before the window would equal zero from NH, after you might get a handful.
It probably won't grow game in Fiji, but will give them a bloody good chance to fill up coffers with extra money from tickets and tv rights etc!
Sadly that's not correct, the Samoa test versus ABs resulted in a big loss to SRU. Unless, as I said, NZR pick up the costs but FRU keep the gate.
I not sure how competitive Japan is compared to Italy is in 6N should be reason to tour or not tour. Do you suggest the ABs only play tier one teams??
I'm talking about Japan joining the RC. They simply have to be better for that to be worthwhile for the massive travel load it will it Arg NZ Oz SA is bad enough, let alone adding Japan. I was comparing to Italy in 6N, pretty much a waste of space, but not so bad in 6N cos they're not circumnavigating there globe too play them
Do you suggest the ABs only play tier one teams??
Nope never mentioned anything of the sort, just Japan is not ready for RC
A game against Fiji before the window would equal zero from NH,,
Fact is we receive NH teams and they receive SH. Until it is some sort of world's side comp, playing Fiji, Tonga, Samoa in the test Windows is NH responsibility. We should be having Georgia here. And I'm a realist
-
So you think we shouldn't play Fiji , because we know they will always struggle to get Europens players, as you say even in test window they only have to be released from a week before. I never mentioned Japan in WC to start with, you rubbished us going there. But I understand your point about the RC now (I thought you were against us playing Japan as they not good enough, so apologies)) but I will point out Argentina were pretty poor when they joined RC, and I firmly believe there is a huge plus to trying to bring them and Fiji in, which will really only happen with League of Nations concept goes ahead. Also the travel to Japan is less than to SA or Argentina, and with 5-6 teams will be only a one round comp so will cut down on travel with halfway decent planning.
As I say, you see the negatives, and perhaps I look for positives. Not a big probelm mate, just our outlooks I guess. -
@Kiwiwomble said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Bones personally id go as far as "hands on and your fair game", they should have a couple of meters protection to make their pass, worst case we might less box kicks if they dont have all the time and space in the world...but i would be happy enough with your suggestion
Yeah we wanna be careful what we wish for though eh....I notice Roigard is a massive practitioner. Probably as bad as White.
-
Where for art thou, Ardie?
PLUS: ABs hit the Metaverse in The Week That Was and the Weekend That Will Be
-
@Tim That's an astonishing stat on Beaudy if correct. What is strange is if he's been under direction to not tackle, he's made a considerable effort to be the first cleaner. Hardly the actions of someone avoiding contact.
-
@antipodean Rugbypass often has dodgy stats, so it may just be BS.
-
@antipodean it's noticeable how many rucks he hits, definitely not avoiding contact
-
@Crucial said in The Current State of Rugby:
@taniwharugby said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Kiwiwomble said in The Current State of Rugby:
hands on and your fair game
that was the way it used to be, have to say the past 3 or 4 years this whole dragging with foot then turned into pulling back with hands and positioning the ball for the pass/kick while blockers line up has become a joke.
No need for Law changes either.
Enforce that 'blockers' must stand clearly behind the last feet and not alongside the ruck with a finger bind (which isn't a bind by law). This cuts down the passing channel for the halfback and means they have to step back after lifting the ball.
You could also 'interpret' that players may not join a ruck once the ball is available. Refs already decide availability so this isn't a biggie.
Recent interpretations that have seen more 'ball is out' calls have helped but hinging calls on the half lifting the ball have resulted in this stupid dragging.Law 15.11 Once a ruck has formed, no player may handle the ball unless they were able to get their hands on the ball before the ruck formed and stay on their feet.
Apply this to halfbacks.
This just riled me up. Is there any law against counter-rucking those players? They're just standing there, so counter rucking them (since they're 'part of the ruck') would basically be tackling them wouldn't it? With the time the half backs take nowadays it feels like a viable strategy, if legal.
Or maybe it's just me getting itchy shoulders.
-
@delicatessen said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Crucial said in The Current State of Rugby:
@taniwharugby said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Kiwiwomble said in The Current State of Rugby:
hands on and your fair game
that was the way it used to be, have to say the past 3 or 4 years this whole dragging with foot then turned into pulling back with hands and positioning the ball for the pass/kick while blockers line up has become a joke.
No need for Law changes either.
Enforce that 'blockers' must stand clearly behind the last feet and not alongside the ruck with a finger bind (which isn't a bind by law). This cuts down the passing channel for the halfback and means they have to step back after lifting the ball.
You could also 'interpret' that players may not join a ruck once the ball is available. Refs already decide availability so this isn't a biggie.
Recent interpretations that have seen more 'ball is out' calls have helped but hinging calls on the half lifting the ball have resulted in this stupid dragging.Law 15.11 Once a ruck has formed, no player may handle the ball unless they were able to get their hands on the ball before the ruck formed and stay on their feet.
Apply this to halfbacks.
This just riled me up. Is there any law against counter-rucking those players? They're just standing there, so counter rucking them (since they're 'part of the ruck') would basically be tackling them wouldn't it? With the time the half backs take nowadays it feels like a viable strategy, if legal.
Or maybe it's just me getting itchy shoulders.
You cant usually get to these 'pillars' without being ruled as not coming through the gate
-
@Tim said in The Current State of Rugby:
@antipodean Rugbypass often has dodgy stats, so it may just be BS.
I don't know how exactly accurate it is but the theme is correct.
We were all saying BB was gunshy early on as he seemed to actively avoid contact (on both attack and defence)
The kicking thing seems coach driven so not really part of this IMO.
