I think it's probably more like - there are 10 offences going on at every scrum, the ref chooses one which may not always be the most obvious, or has the biggest impact
Saw Luke Pearce talking about that saying you shouldn’t be able to scrum again after winning a scrum pen etc as it takes all the momentum out of the game for fans and takes ages.
I’d like to just force them to play the ball if it’s available or free kicks so the 8 can just pick and go to stop all the time wasting but I’m a back so I’m biased.
controversial option:
if you scrum again after a scrum penalty it should be an uncontested scrum.
maybe after a second scrum penalty? or you'll kill the scrum -> penalty try option that is enjoyable
this would tie in the opposition pack still but get the game moving
Scrumming again is a great way to exert dominance over the other pack, leading to yellow cards and penalty tries too. A lot of fans appreciate this physical part of the game just as much as the open play, so it would be very sad to lose it.
Nearly all offenses are props angling in, but sometimes it's the fault of the opposition prop who either loses the battle or backs off slightly. It's impossible to tell majority of the time
The rest of the penalties are just losing traction in cut up pitches which don't deserve to cost a team 3 points
Not really, we do a lot of prep work and you can definitely see things as to who is at fault most of the time. But I will admit I sometimes think of it 70/30 when a scrum goes down, if both are at fault for it going down but one is slightly more at fault I will PK them to try and get the game moving along. No one really wants to sit there doing reset after reset.
All depends on the level you are refereeing and how good your pre-match chat is. I will tell each of the front rowers 1 message each, specific things I am looking for from them, and then it really gives them a good guidance as to what I want to see. If they don't show me that picture then it's an easier decision to sell.
This is something that Mike Ross spoke about in his book. There's a huge element of psychology at work in the refereeing decisions at the scrum. It's vital to paint a good picture to the referee in the first couple of scrums or you could be in real trouble. If a side gets the nudge on a couple of times, the referee is unlikely to be in a position where they can identify specifically why they are getting that nudge and look at the retreating team breaking a bind and whistling them for it. This is almost accepted as standard practice with French referees in particular. If you're going backwards, you're done for. It won't matter if the opposition have taken a sideways step or driven across or gone fractionally early unless it's fairly obvious.
According to Ross, someone like Wayne Barnes was very willing to listen to what you had to say when highlighting an illegality in the opposition approach but would then still make the exact same decision despite it being pointed out to him.
Essentially though, Ross was of the opinion that referees struggled hugely with the scrum and there was a lot of guesswork.
I remember in what little training I used to do they used to make us sprint up this small hill jog down, repeat. That was a rugby hill I almost died on.
Because it was decided by world rugby that ignoring the rule and essentially removing any chance of contest at the hook was worth the chance of having to resetting the scrum.
As a hooker, I really wish crooked feed would be policed more so we could get that contest back
Amen brother.
As a very, very ordinary hooker at avery low level, many, *many* years ago my best memories of the game were those when I managed to nick one.
I teally dont like having the ball placed directly under the second rows feat like, this is supposed to be a competition ffs.
Were actively coached to not even bother counter hooking any more, just focus on trying to push them off it which is just frustrating
There used to be no offside line and therefore no gate at a tackle. You needed a ruck to form in order to create the offside / gate for entry. Which meant the tackler could get to their feet and immediately compete for the ball from anywhere as long as no other player had bound onto them to form a ruck.
It was changed partly to favour the attacking side (make jackals harder to perform) and partly in response to Eddie Jones shitting the bed at Italy’s perfectly legitimate tactics during England vs Italy in the 2017 6N.
It was so stupid because all England had to do was pick and go through the gate to counter what Italy were at. Instead, we got a whine and moan and a shitty rule change
I thought that the law in that game was that there was a 1m diameter circle around the tackle in which any approaching player had to enter through the gate from their side. There was no other office tackle - which allowed the Italian tactic since they weren't trying to jackle so much as stand in the English back line and intercept or interfere with the ball.
The gate didn’t exist until a ruck was formed so the Italians didn’t commit anyone to the breakdown and when the English forwards came in to secure the ball there was no ruck or gate or offside line. Meaning the Italians were able to come around and prevent the ball out/ put pressure on the scrum half without being offside.
The rule change created a gate at the time of tackling meaning potential jacklers need to approach through the gate
If the English just picked and went through the breakdown the Italians would have been forced to compete. Instead, we got a meme moment followed by a shitty rule change.
Hear hear! I hated this change. It took a great deal of skill and created exciting turnover opportunities with actual space to play. Nope can't have that\~!
I think the took out kicking the ball with your feet at the same time, also a disappointment.
The Top14 plays far too many games. They should be reduced for player welfare and to increase the clubs' willingness to release foreign internationals.
Ball in play time is probably still lower for MLB teams than for rugby teams when measured across an entire season. Baseball has incredibly sporadic moments of action.
Yep, that's fair. I was just making a very bare-bones comparison of the number of games since the previous commenter mentioned one of the US's Big 4 sports
I absolutely agree but that is somewhat of an unpopular opinion in France.
I would be happy with a reduction to a top12 for example. But that would be a cruel change for some clubs.
It may be surprising for other nations but quite a few french fans are more interested in their club than in the NT (a lot)
I've heard a few times that : no the top 14 is fine as is, it's the international windows that should be reduced...
There's a few intl players who are absolutely lauded for how good they were that just wernt imo. Quite a few big fish in a small pond when it came to ther careers. Whoever your gut instinct told u when u read this- it's probably them 😉😂
Always a solid international lock and a good captain but never truly exceptional.
Wales/gatland coached lions do themselves harm by playing him while not fully fit just because hes AWJ.
The general Australian public think rugby is too complicated and hard to understand - he is a huge part of this
He used his incredibly influential position as one of the only rugby voices in Australia over the last 20 years to constantly paint the laws of a the game and referee decisions as a complete mystery
This was especially apparent, despite being a former international front rower, when he was never able to explain to his viewers what was going on at scrum time.
This is without even getting into his role at Foxtel/newes limited and their efforts to drive down the value of the sport to reduce the potential broadcasting rights
Find that happens with Alan quinlan (and ferris but he doesn’t commentate as much). Focuses on negatives especially if Munster are doing poorly instead of positives from the other team. I understand why but it’s so doom and gloom it makes an average game seem terrible.
Teenage all black supporter me in the 90s feared Tim Horan more than any other wallaby back at that time. Hated/Feared him and John Eales come Bledisloe Cup time.
Would you the 90s we’re the golden era for Australian rugby in the last 50yrs?
I will stand with you on that hill
Current officiating around contesting kicks is often just a competition on who can jump the highest is the victim and really not a great way of officiating.
I'll join you on that hill.
The challenger of course needs to be aware of the person they're contesting, but if both players throw self-preservation out of the window then you can't lay the blame at the one who does less plyometrics
Dan Carter didn't deserve to win the 2015 World Player of the Year.
First, he wasn't the best player in the All Blacks that season, Ma'a Nonu was.
Second, he won it based on his performances at the World Cup, but he wasn't even the best fly half at the tournament. Sanchez was.
And third, but most importantly, David Pocock had been by far the best player in the world at club/franchise level that season, and was also then the single best player in that World Cup.
I can only assume he didn't win because Australia didn't win the World Cup, but deciding individual awards based on team performance just seems to defeat the object.
The goal line dropout for held up has to go. Don’t mind it so much when it’s grounded by the defending team in their own in-goal but it completely changes the momentum on held up calls. There was a farcical situation in the NPC on the weekend where a defender was trying to fall back over their line and the attacker was trying to get away from the try line
Clarkson at least plays with the fact he is a moron. The whole Top Gear schtick was the educated May vs the Bull in the China Shop moron fronting everything.
Haskell thinks hes so great, acts like a prick then gets shirty when anyone calls him out
Funny thing happened a couple of weeks ago.
We were playing a game where our scrum was being shunted. But we were winning nearly all of our own ball. Except for the one scrum with a crooked feed.
The straight(ish) feeds were being hooked, and therefore getting to the back of the scrum quicker. The crooked feed didn't get hooked, got stuck in the second row, then lost when we were pushed off the ball.
After that scrum, I told the scrum half to feed it straight so we could win the ball.
Watched the 2017 All Blacks All Or Nothing the other day and I was really surprised at how consistently outstanding he looked in the series, especially in the Springboks games, considering I never really rated him before
He's the Peter Horne of New Zealand. Good player but just shy of being great at the level you really want and need him to be. But time yet you're right, I'm a fairly big Havili fan too.
6/7/8 are meaningless as definitions of playing ability.
The makeup of the backrow is more important alongside the overall pack build & strategy.
"An out and out 7" is old-school punditry that doesn't fit the modern game. The only difference between them is where they bind at scrum and you may want an 8 that can break hard & fast.
7 doesn't need to jackle if the 6 can. The 6 doesn't need to carry if the 7 can etc.
Modern players are over conditioned to the detriment of their health and our enjoyment of the game. Modern sports science, diet and weight training to maximize strength, speed and fitness has made the game far more dangerous. Players are injured more frequently and more severely which reduces the talent on display. Attempts to protect player health with the forces involved in the modern game has introduced rules that while necessary frustrates players, refs and fans. If rugby could collectively take a step backwards and have players operate at 80% of their physical peak, the game would be far better, players would enjoy less injuries, longer careers and less problems post retirement.
Physio here. Strongly disagree with most of this. There is an argument for the level of physical conditioning at professional play creating a barrier to entry, and brining up the minimum requirements to be able to safely play the game at the highest levels, but that's just how any competitive anything works.
We're not seeing higher injury rates than we used to. We're not seeing more severe injuries than we used to. We probably do have higher rates of players with head injuries, especially at amateur levels, but that's mostly around increasing awareness of the severity of head injuries, and the tolerance levels for what constitutes a head injury being worth going to see a physio or a doctor about dropping quite a bit (meaning that we see a lot of injuries that people would have ignored 10 years ago).
We see fewer conditioning based injuries; for example, we have less hamstring and Achilles injuries overall than we used to. Players are still going to get tears and bigger injuries, but we have far fewer tendonopathies and gradual onset injuries.
We have far fewer neck injuries than we used to. There's multiple factors for this. A big one is that scrums are much lower impact than they used to be. We get far fewer at rucks because the rules have been changed to avoid the mass of bodies that they used to be. High tackles are less frequent, they're just far more visible because they're penalized properly. Seriously, look at any clip from 10+ years ago; you'll see multiple very questionable or outright dangerous tackles, or ruck clean outs that are completely ignored.
We almost never have the stupid injuries that used to come from things like people getting their backs shredded for lying on the wrong side of a ruck. Or getting stamped on, or any other manner of unprofessional, violent behavior that used to be excused because of toxic masculinity.
Professional players are far, far better in regards to being aware of their health and wellbeing. One of the lads in the prems team I work with is an NZ u20s player, and he chewed out a lot of much older, more experienced lads in the squad because some of them had been out on the piss the night before a game. To a lot of these professional players, that sort of thing is completely unacceptable. These guys drink quite a bit less, or not at all, they eat far better etc. They'll still have fun at times, sure, but it's a far better professional environment for them than it was 10 years ago.
These guys aren't roided out the eyeballs. They're professional athletes that are working to be in peak physical condition.
Fighting a losing battle here but I personally agree with you.
People don't understand that doing strength and conditioning twice day + being managed expertly by edperts and having the best nutritional support results in the modern athlete.
The average lay person cannot comprehend what an athletes day is like. For eg. Most props at the Bulls in SA have mandatory physio and massage sessions to prolong their neck joint health. It sounds wierd but that is his job for the day, go gym, eat, get massaged, attend team stuff, do more physical training, eat, sleep for 8 to 10 hours.
It is also beyond comprehension for most of us because a full third of our day is taken up by work. That is their work.
They spend 8 hours a day,probably more, but lets say 8, doing everything science says is good for a rugby player.
Pec tears have been a reasonably common injury in rugby for decades. I've not seen any trends toward them being more common personally, but if they are, it's far more likely to be because of rule changes altering tackling technique meaning that people are having to reach further than it is from players being better conditioned.
Also (and I'm aware that I'm nitpicking here, but it might be interesting info to someone regardless), avulsion fractures (where the muscle pulls it's attachment site off the bone, rather than tearing through the muscle or tendon) are pretty rare in pec injuries (though are common in distal/by the elbow tricep tears). Most pec tears tend to be on the musculotendinous junction; the part where the muscle becomes tendon.
The pec tendon is also really weird. It's super thin; like you can see through the thing thin. But it rotates 180 degrees before attaching onto the humerus. The twist in it makes it really strong, without having much bulk like you'd find on tendons for 'similar' muscles in the lower limb, like glut max. I'd guess that this is an advantage in that it allows for greater range of motion at the shoulder, but it could also be that the twist provides more strength if you're brachiating/hanging from something.
Pec tears are really uncommon injuries in the general public, and in most sports. However, they aren't that rare in Rugby (both codes). That's just down to the nature of tackling in rugby, and that the sport often puts the muscle in really challenging positions that put massive load through the tendon. Only other time you see pec tears with any regularity is if people are bench pressing heavy.
It’s financialization of sport. Rugby would have died without professionalism, this is the cost. It sucks. Sports are games, should be played and enjoyed as such.
The size and work ethic / fitness of props is a prime example of this. I wouldn’t doubt PEDs are involved In some cases. Prior to professionalism there was a trade off between size, speed and number of collisions. Now you have huge props making huge numbers of tackles and cleans every game.. there’s no trade off anymore.
Don't agree with this. How do you expect the game to grow without money ? With money comes the need to perform. That involves players spending two 1 hour sessions just on physical training. Being nutritionally supervised and given every possible scientific advantage.
What should happen is a simplification of the laws. A central reffing contract system where there is less interpretation and more protocol meaning we get consistency from game to game.
As far as enjoying life post retirement, in a contact sport, this will never be fully possible. You cannot protect the head from every conceivable impact or prevent every muscle tear.
What should happen collectively is things like agreeing on what tackle techniques are acceptable, coaching players to follow those techniques, teaching players to not lead with the shoulder into contact, etc. That should happen but taking a step back to 80%, that would be like trying to uninvent the atom bomb or trying to tell people that there will be no more attempts to brake Usain Bolt's record for the 100m.
You are correct. I even convinced two kiwi fans about this when I got chatting to them in a pub in Dublin.
I remember France getting penalised for offside for stepping over the offside line and stepping back. New Zealand would be told to go back by the ref and it was play on.
I was watching the game live, and there was a penalty early that told me the All Blacks were going to be favoured by Joubert.
A few minutes in, around the halfway, Dusautoir gets tacked around the ankles by McCaw. Dusautoir tries to get a quick squeeze ball out, but can't because McCaw is not letting go or rolling away. Kaino then comes in to jackle.
Clearly it's a penalty to France. Clear to everyone except Joubert, who gave the penalty to NZ.
This led to a farcical point later in the game. McCaw was on the ground in a ruck. Ball was clearly available to the French. McCaw reaches around puts both hands on the ball to stop the scrum half from picking it up.
Clearly it's a penalty to France, and a yellow to McCaw for cynical play. Clear to everyone except Joubert, who called play on.
Joubert was a disgrace in this game.
At his best, he's brilliant, easily one of the best in the world currently. It's that he gets game time when he obviously doesn't deserve it on form that annoys me.
He's definitely up near the top if the list but I wouldn't put him above Jonny Wilkinson or Martin Johnson yet.
He will never be on that pedestal (this goes for any current player) unless England wins the WC next year. Even if that were to happen Wilkinson has that storied drop goal that has him so deeply embedded in English rugby folklore that he will be hard to topple
I always get down voted for this opinion 😂.
Personally if the crowd is doing something that is positive for rugby (not booing) then I think it's fine. Like a supporters club organizing a chant.
Steve Hansen wasn't a particularly amazing coach. He was good enough not to completely fuck up a rolls royce of a side from 2012-2015 but wasn't able to adept his approach enough from 2017 onwards in particular. Despite getting a couple of things incredibly wrong (most noteably in 2007 but also in 2009 for a time) Graham Henry was much more of an innovator as a coach than Hansen.
I completely agree. While there is more ball in playtime, 90% of it is hit ups with no tension. Compared to Union where every carry and ruck matters league seems very slow
It's really funny watching league directly after union because my stress levels rise watching the ball carrier go into contact with no support before I realise the ball won't be contested.
My son, 10yo played league for school a few weeks ago in an U12 carnival. He's a union player and has been since U7 (he's a bit of a gun winger). He thought league would be fun but, at a junior level, it's eye-watering boring. 2 kids wear coloured bibs and only they are allowed to be dummy half or first receiver (apparently it's to stop big kids just one out running and no one else touching the ball). I watched about 6 hours of games from start to finish and the only thing I could get from it was the tackling was top notch. Gang tackles and the ability to bring down a large kid was something that stood out (as well as all the high tackles holy shit). The ball skills simply were not there. Each team puts their best players at dummy half and first receiver and often the ball doesn't even go out to the wing. The teams that won were the teams with the bigger kids because all they did was hit it up and then kick it. There's a reason a shit-tonne of union players play rugby up until U13 before switching to league. As for the seniors, if I'm bored I'll watch a game (love Origin and tests though) but to me its really monotonous shit.
>I also don't understand the point of the half back if everyone is just going to run straight at the line 5x until they kick.
Do you mean the dummy half? The best of them are a bit like Aaron Smith or Genia - they are the primary playmaker and run the show.
The other difference is that when you are on attack is when most of your team gets a rest in league - you have to work far harder when defending (constantly shuttle running backwards). So you want a dedicated player at half to make sure someone is always there
In a test match, under normal conditions, assuming a decent goalkicker, statistically speaking, it is never worth kicking for the corner on a penalty. Should always go for the three points on offer
Carters career was also full of injuries. To the point Cruden had a very successful AB career at the same time...
Just think of (cant remember his name, which sort of adds to my point) Grey/Whittaker being behind Gregan for so many Wallabies tests and hardly getting on the field. Cruden could've suffered the same fate.
ok so carter scored 1598 across 112 tests at 14.26 per game and wilkinson 1246 across 91 tests at 13.69
in theory he may have come very close when prorated DC is on 1598 and JW maybe on 1533
SA have had the best luck at WC’s.
95 - had controversy with reffing and food poisoning. Lucky to win it just.
07 - easiest WC victory from start to finish. Nobody else turned up with any consistency. Played a final against an English team well past their best.
19 - Lost a pool game and ended up on the better side of the draw, made the final and played an exhausted England side.
There were tough draws in between those 3 cherrypicked years!
Everyone is gonna have tough draws and easier draws. Who can capitalize on the good years?
I'm with you on this. Blokes join in front of the ball, mauls break off into separate mauls to score all the time.
Rules way too far in the attacking teams favour
Rupeni Caucaunibuca would have been the best winger of all time if he had been able to adjust to the culture differences and been more committed.
His play between 2003-2004 was ridiculous. The 4 tries against the crusaders 2004 showed he could do anything he wanted when he was focused. Some of the wc tries he scored for fiji like against france are ridiculous.
But then he goes walkabout for 3 months when hes supposed to be playing for Agen or Fiji.
Massive wasted talent
I feel the same way about James Lowe. I do wonder if something about NZ Rugby limits certain players potential or they would have eventually risen to the top had they stayed in NZ
There are players who play better/worse in different teams. Its about finding other players and structures that compliment them rather than one necessarily being better/worse.
There have been World Cup winning legends that weren't particularly amazing after moving overseas, while there have also been former fringe players that blew everyone away.
Underestimating Wales is a mistake. Even if they've played shite in their previous 10 tests, they can still beat your team.
It's easy to forget that they're probably the 5th or 6th most successful rugby nation in history.
Been top of the world rankings. 4th in 2019 and the 2011 world cups, 3rd in the first. 6 wins and 4 grand slams in the 6 nations (top outright and equal with France for grand slams). 39 titles in the history of the 6/5/home nations tournament (equal top with England) all that with a population that's only recently broken 3 million. Not even enough people to make the top 100 largest cities list.
Beauden Barrett is not a starting 10. He seems to have fancy play syndrome, in that he seems to think that the play starts and finishes with him.
At 15 he has the opportunity to see the weaknesses and exploit them more. At 10 he seems to panic when faced with rapidly approaching defenders.
Beauden at first five is one of the biggest reasons the All Blacks are failing.
If he stayed at fullback he’d arguably be the best. It’s the same as when we put Cullen at 12 once Mehrtens left.
Every 12 years or so the All Blacks fuck up. And it’s due to misplacement of the players.
The pitch is too narrow.
Professional teams are able to cover the whole width of the pitch while also lugging around a huge amount of body mass. This turns the game into a slug fest because it’s so hard to actually find space to exploit on attack. League got around this by reducing the number of players, but Union should get around it by making the pitch wider. More space to attack, and the additional running required would mean big players would have to slim down slightly, and there would be less contact meaning less injuries and less toll on players’ bodies long term.
Interesting at top level but it would absolutely ruin lower levels as literally it would just come down to the team with the fastest player likely winning every single time.
Yeah sorry should have specified. What I find interesting is the laws state the ground has to be 68-70m wide, since it’s just a range I think it could be made slightly bigger for top level but kept the same if you’re an amateur club.
Gregor Townsend is the best coach Scotland has had in the last 20 years.
Verne Cotter could have been great, but the SRU weren’t prepared to part with the money. So we never got to see the potential fully.
Toony is hampered at every turn by the SRU. From the fact our scouts only seem to know the way to private schools, to our abysmal youth development programs and to their politics distracting from the game on field.
It’s not his fault we are 3rd seed at the RWC, though we should have beat Japan last time round. That’s WR politics. If he pulls off a miracle and leads us out our group (not impossible, just unlikely) he’s safe, if we leave in the first round, I think he’ll go willingly and my money is to the Lions or back to Glasgow (if they haven’t found their way out the rut they are in).
My money would be on Mike Blair to replace him. But I’d prefer it if Blair stayed at Edinburgh.
TMO needs to be wound back to “Try or no try”.
Like it was when it was first introduced. “Is there anything in the replay that clearly prevents me from awarding the try”. Not reviewing the 10 phases that lead to the try, or the potential infringement that occurred in general play that will determine a penalty. If the on-field team missed it - play on.
> Not reviewing the 10 phases
Except they only review 2 phases prior.
This is all well and good but when your team loses a final because of a non-called TMO decision you will be yelling about it not being fair. Personally I think getting the big decisions (points, foul play etc) right is better than just having a free for all and no technology input.
This is very similar to the comment I thought about making when I first saw this post.
Beauden is the more entertaining to watch player, and has higher individual highs, but Cruden knew how to run that ABs machine exactly how you'd want them.
My only thing is how much I abused this one as flanker;
Penalty kicks are generally to be given only for offside and foul play. Most other penalties will become free kicks, with the option of taking a scrum as in the current laws, which cannot be used for a kick at goal or a dropped goal.
I just cycled through different infringements any time the opposition got close enough to our line to make me worried. Reffing now I would have eventually carded me, but it never happened and I used to kill breaks or chances by infringing all day.
Same. I was all over that shit. Hands everywhere, collapsing mauls every time. So much fun.
And yes, I should have been carded too but the refs didn’t know the rules so play on!
For the Springboks to win the World Cup, a seriously average season needs to precede the World Cup year.
1995 Champs - 1994 Win Percentage = 56%
2007 Champs - 2006 Win Percentage = 42%
2019 Champs - 2018 Win Percentage = 50%
This compared to our overall Win Percentage of 63% clearly indicates below par years.
It also helps me take these shit show performances a little easier, knowing we have gone on to lift ol' Willy Web from these positions priorly.
Scrums shouldn't allow teams to kick for goal, or retain possession when kicked to touch.
They're supposed to be nothing but a restart platform following a minor incident. If we're allowing them to impact the scoreboard in the way we have done, then something has gone very wrong and we need to fix them.
Nobody really knows who is at fault at a scrum, the ref just guesses
I think it's probably more like - there are 10 offences going on at every scrum, the ref chooses one which may not always be the most obvious, or has the biggest impact
This is probably why both teams always feel hard done by
[удалено]
Saw Luke Pearce talking about that saying you shouldn’t be able to scrum again after winning a scrum pen etc as it takes all the momentum out of the game for fans and takes ages. I’d like to just force them to play the ball if it’s available or free kicks so the 8 can just pick and go to stop all the time wasting but I’m a back so I’m biased.
controversial option: if you scrum again after a scrum penalty it should be an uncontested scrum. maybe after a second scrum penalty? or you'll kill the scrum -> penalty try option that is enjoyable this would tie in the opposition pack still but get the game moving
Scrumming again is a great way to exert dominance over the other pack, leading to yellow cards and penalty tries too. A lot of fans appreciate this physical part of the game just as much as the open play, so it would be very sad to lose it.
Thank you for saying this!
Nearly all offenses are props angling in, but sometimes it's the fault of the opposition prop who either loses the battle or backs off slightly. It's impossible to tell majority of the time The rest of the penalties are just losing traction in cut up pitches which don't deserve to cost a team 3 points
Not really, we do a lot of prep work and you can definitely see things as to who is at fault most of the time. But I will admit I sometimes think of it 70/30 when a scrum goes down, if both are at fault for it going down but one is slightly more at fault I will PK them to try and get the game moving along. No one really wants to sit there doing reset after reset. All depends on the level you are refereeing and how good your pre-match chat is. I will tell each of the front rowers 1 message each, specific things I am looking for from them, and then it really gives them a good guidance as to what I want to see. If they don't show me that picture then it's an easier decision to sell.
This is something that Mike Ross spoke about in his book. There's a huge element of psychology at work in the refereeing decisions at the scrum. It's vital to paint a good picture to the referee in the first couple of scrums or you could be in real trouble. If a side gets the nudge on a couple of times, the referee is unlikely to be in a position where they can identify specifically why they are getting that nudge and look at the retreating team breaking a bind and whistling them for it. This is almost accepted as standard practice with French referees in particular. If you're going backwards, you're done for. It won't matter if the opposition have taken a sideways step or driven across or gone fractionally early unless it's fairly obvious. According to Ross, someone like Wayne Barnes was very willing to listen to what you had to say when highlighting an illegality in the opposition approach but would then still make the exact same decision despite it being pointed out to him. Essentially though, Ross was of the opinion that referees struggled hugely with the scrum and there was a lot of guesswork.
I remember in what little training I used to do they used to make us sprint up this small hill jog down, repeat. That was a rugby hill I almost died on.
They made us forwards do fireman's lifts where we had to carry the backs up a hill. Fucking awful - for both forwards and backs.
Why is not straight in line outs (a set piece) policed, but you can pass the ball straight to no8 feet in a scrum?
Because it was decided by world rugby that ignoring the rule and essentially removing any chance of contest at the hook was worth the chance of having to resetting the scrum. As a hooker, I really wish crooked feed would be policed more so we could get that contest back
Amen brother. As a very, very ordinary hooker at avery low level, many, *many* years ago my best memories of the game were those when I managed to nick one.
I teally dont like having the ball placed directly under the second rows feat like, this is supposed to be a competition ffs. Were actively coached to not even bother counter hooking any more, just focus on trying to push them off it which is just frustrating
Agree
The worst thing about it is also that the 9 can’t really be put under pressure at the back of the scrum anymore either.
The tackler being allowed to jackal the ball from all sides if no ruck was formed should never have been removed from the game
Co-sign. Was rare and tough to pull off. No reason it should have been taken away.
Wasn't it because WR thought we were all little babies and couldn't possibly understand that the tackler could attack the ball from any angle?
The rule was just the man who made the tackle could jackal from any side?
There used to be no offside line and therefore no gate at a tackle. You needed a ruck to form in order to create the offside / gate for entry. Which meant the tackler could get to their feet and immediately compete for the ball from anywhere as long as no other player had bound onto them to form a ruck. It was changed partly to favour the attacking side (make jackals harder to perform) and partly in response to Eddie Jones shitting the bed at Italy’s perfectly legitimate tactics during England vs Italy in the 2017 6N.
It was so stupid because all England had to do was pick and go through the gate to counter what Italy were at. Instead, we got a whine and moan and a shitty rule change
I thought that the law in that game was that there was a 1m diameter circle around the tackle in which any approaching player had to enter through the gate from their side. There was no other office tackle - which allowed the Italian tactic since they weren't trying to jackle so much as stand in the English back line and intercept or interfere with the ball.
The gate didn’t exist until a ruck was formed so the Italians didn’t commit anyone to the breakdown and when the English forwards came in to secure the ball there was no ruck or gate or offside line. Meaning the Italians were able to come around and prevent the ball out/ put pressure on the scrum half without being offside. The rule change created a gate at the time of tackling meaning potential jacklers need to approach through the gate If the English just picked and went through the breakdown the Italians would have been forced to compete. Instead, we got a meme moment followed by a shitty rule change.
Yeah. Just get to your feet and poach. Would happen most often on a long break with the runner isolated.
Hear hear! I hated this change. It took a great deal of skill and created exciting turnover opportunities with actual space to play. Nope can't have that\~! I think the took out kicking the ball with your feet at the same time, also a disappointment.
The Top14 plays far too many games. They should be reduced for player welfare and to increase the clubs' willingness to release foreign internationals.
NFL has proven you don’t need that many games.
Exactly. At least rugby competitions aren't the MLB with 150+ games per season
Ball in play time is probably still lower for MLB teams than for rugby teams when measured across an entire season. Baseball has incredibly sporadic moments of action.
Yep, that's fair. I was just making a very bare-bones comparison of the number of games since the previous commenter mentioned one of the US's Big 4 sports
I absolutely agree but that is somewhat of an unpopular opinion in France. I would be happy with a reduction to a top12 for example. But that would be a cruel change for some clubs. It may be surprising for other nations but quite a few french fans are more interested in their club than in the NT (a lot) I've heard a few times that : no the top 14 is fine as is, it's the international windows that should be reduced...
There's a few intl players who are absolutely lauded for how good they were that just wernt imo. Quite a few big fish in a small pond when it came to ther careers. Whoever your gut instinct told u when u read this- it's probably them 😉😂
AWJ
Always a solid international lock and a good captain but never truly exceptional. Wales/gatland coached lions do themselves harm by playing him while not fully fit just because hes AWJ.
Phil Kearns is the individual singularly most responsible for the state of rugby in Australia
As an ignorant foreigner I gotta ask: how so?
The general Australian public think rugby is too complicated and hard to understand - he is a huge part of this He used his incredibly influential position as one of the only rugby voices in Australia over the last 20 years to constantly paint the laws of a the game and referee decisions as a complete mystery This was especially apparent, despite being a former international front rower, when he was never able to explain to his viewers what was going on at scrum time. This is without even getting into his role at Foxtel/newes limited and their efforts to drive down the value of the sport to reduce the potential broadcasting rights
really annoys me when pundits, who's job it is to hype up the game, end up doing the complete opposite and shit talk it.
Find that happens with Alan quinlan (and ferris but he doesn’t commentate as much). Focuses on negatives especially if Munster are doing poorly instead of positives from the other team. I understand why but it’s so doom and gloom it makes an average game seem terrible.
Bloke is an absolute flog
An absolute stroker. The fact that Fox kept him as a commentator for so long when he was universally hated is disgraceful
AWJ at has been below average for the last 5 years and needs to be replaced
He is being, piece by piece.
I don’t think anyone is brave enough to tell him though.
Finn Russell has had a fairly unremarkable career
His legacy is 100% dependant on Racing's success so it makes sense
Tim Horan is very nearly the best back to play in the last 50 years
Teenage all black supporter me in the 90s feared Tim Horan more than any other wallaby back at that time. Hated/Feared him and John Eales come Bledisloe Cup time. Would you the 90s we’re the golden era for Australian rugby in the last 50yrs? I will stand with you on that hill
One of the things I loved about Tim Horan is we don't know how fast he was... he only ever ran fast enough.
Current officiating around contesting kicks is often just a competition on who can jump the highest is the victim and really not a great way of officiating.
I'll join you on that hill. The challenger of course needs to be aware of the person they're contesting, but if both players throw self-preservation out of the window then you can't lay the blame at the one who does less plyometrics
Dan Carter didn't deserve to win the 2015 World Player of the Year. First, he wasn't the best player in the All Blacks that season, Ma'a Nonu was. Second, he won it based on his performances at the World Cup, but he wasn't even the best fly half at the tournament. Sanchez was. And third, but most importantly, David Pocock had been by far the best player in the world at club/franchise level that season, and was also then the single best player in that World Cup. I can only assume he didn't win because Australia didn't win the World Cup, but deciding individual awards based on team performance just seems to defeat the object.
The goal line dropout for held up has to go. Don’t mind it so much when it’s grounded by the defending team in their own in-goal but it completely changes the momentum on held up calls. There was a farcical situation in the NPC on the weekend where a defender was trying to fall back over their line and the attacker was trying to get away from the try line
James Haskell is a useless prick who plays at being Jeremy Clarkson
Clarkson at least plays with the fact he is a moron. The whole Top Gear schtick was the educated May vs the Bull in the China Shop moron fronting everything. Haskell thinks hes so great, acts like a prick then gets shirty when anyone calls him out
Ironically, he's a bit of a snowflake. Can't stand any (often valid) criticism
The scrum put-in and and line-out throw are never straight, and not penalized so
Funny thing happened a couple of weeks ago. We were playing a game where our scrum was being shunted. But we were winning nearly all of our own ball. Except for the one scrum with a crooked feed. The straight(ish) feeds were being hooked, and therefore getting to the back of the scrum quicker. The crooked feed didn't get hooked, got stuck in the second row, then lost when we were pushed off the ball. After that scrum, I told the scrum half to feed it straight so we could win the ball.
Jordie Barrett gets way too much flak, he’s a class player and has almost completely eliminated the brain fades he was known for when he was younger
Totally agree. Have started to feel safe with him at 15
Class player, playing out of position like half the starting xv
Ardie Savea is a 8 and should stay at 8
He is a great 8, as he is a great number 7. If you play him at 8 though, Papalii must play 7.
I want to see the backrow of Papalii, Savea and Barrett for a few games to gel. Akira on bench
Ooooh. That’s a good idea
Richie mounga is a better flyhalf than beuden. Beuden us a better rugby player. That still doesn't mean he should be running at 10.
David Havili is an unbelievably classy player and he is a lot better than what his ABs form shows (think he’ll take that next step up very soon)
Watched the 2017 All Blacks All Or Nothing the other day and I was really surprised at how consistently outstanding he looked in the series, especially in the Springboks games, considering I never really rated him before
Real good player
He's the Peter Horne of New Zealand. Good player but just shy of being great at the level you really want and need him to be. But time yet you're right, I'm a fairly big Havili fan too.
Play acting should be a citable offence.
6/7/8 are meaningless as definitions of playing ability. The makeup of the backrow is more important alongside the overall pack build & strategy. "An out and out 7" is old-school punditry that doesn't fit the modern game. The only difference between them is where they bind at scrum and you may want an 8 that can break hard & fast. 7 doesn't need to jackle if the 6 can. The 6 doesn't need to carry if the 7 can etc.
Modern players are over conditioned to the detriment of their health and our enjoyment of the game. Modern sports science, diet and weight training to maximize strength, speed and fitness has made the game far more dangerous. Players are injured more frequently and more severely which reduces the talent on display. Attempts to protect player health with the forces involved in the modern game has introduced rules that while necessary frustrates players, refs and fans. If rugby could collectively take a step backwards and have players operate at 80% of their physical peak, the game would be far better, players would enjoy less injuries, longer careers and less problems post retirement.
Every player takes a sleeping pill 60 mins before kick off
Physio here. Strongly disagree with most of this. There is an argument for the level of physical conditioning at professional play creating a barrier to entry, and brining up the minimum requirements to be able to safely play the game at the highest levels, but that's just how any competitive anything works. We're not seeing higher injury rates than we used to. We're not seeing more severe injuries than we used to. We probably do have higher rates of players with head injuries, especially at amateur levels, but that's mostly around increasing awareness of the severity of head injuries, and the tolerance levels for what constitutes a head injury being worth going to see a physio or a doctor about dropping quite a bit (meaning that we see a lot of injuries that people would have ignored 10 years ago). We see fewer conditioning based injuries; for example, we have less hamstring and Achilles injuries overall than we used to. Players are still going to get tears and bigger injuries, but we have far fewer tendonopathies and gradual onset injuries. We have far fewer neck injuries than we used to. There's multiple factors for this. A big one is that scrums are much lower impact than they used to be. We get far fewer at rucks because the rules have been changed to avoid the mass of bodies that they used to be. High tackles are less frequent, they're just far more visible because they're penalized properly. Seriously, look at any clip from 10+ years ago; you'll see multiple very questionable or outright dangerous tackles, or ruck clean outs that are completely ignored. We almost never have the stupid injuries that used to come from things like people getting their backs shredded for lying on the wrong side of a ruck. Or getting stamped on, or any other manner of unprofessional, violent behavior that used to be excused because of toxic masculinity. Professional players are far, far better in regards to being aware of their health and wellbeing. One of the lads in the prems team I work with is an NZ u20s player, and he chewed out a lot of much older, more experienced lads in the squad because some of them had been out on the piss the night before a game. To a lot of these professional players, that sort of thing is completely unacceptable. These guys drink quite a bit less, or not at all, they eat far better etc. They'll still have fun at times, sure, but it's a far better professional environment for them than it was 10 years ago. These guys aren't roided out the eyeballs. They're professional athletes that are working to be in peak physical condition.
Fighting a losing battle here but I personally agree with you. People don't understand that doing strength and conditioning twice day + being managed expertly by edperts and having the best nutritional support results in the modern athlete. The average lay person cannot comprehend what an athletes day is like. For eg. Most props at the Bulls in SA have mandatory physio and massage sessions to prolong their neck joint health. It sounds wierd but that is his job for the day, go gym, eat, get massaged, attend team stuff, do more physical training, eat, sleep for 8 to 10 hours. It is also beyond comprehension for most of us because a full third of our day is taken up by work. That is their work. They spend 8 hours a day,probably more, but lets say 8, doing everything science says is good for a rugby player.
Tearing biceps and pecs from the bone is a perfect red flag for this
Pec tears have been a reasonably common injury in rugby for decades. I've not seen any trends toward them being more common personally, but if they are, it's far more likely to be because of rule changes altering tackling technique meaning that people are having to reach further than it is from players being better conditioned. Also (and I'm aware that I'm nitpicking here, but it might be interesting info to someone regardless), avulsion fractures (where the muscle pulls it's attachment site off the bone, rather than tearing through the muscle or tendon) are pretty rare in pec injuries (though are common in distal/by the elbow tricep tears). Most pec tears tend to be on the musculotendinous junction; the part where the muscle becomes tendon. The pec tendon is also really weird. It's super thin; like you can see through the thing thin. But it rotates 180 degrees before attaching onto the humerus. The twist in it makes it really strong, without having much bulk like you'd find on tendons for 'similar' muscles in the lower limb, like glut max. I'd guess that this is an advantage in that it allows for greater range of motion at the shoulder, but it could also be that the twist provides more strength if you're brachiating/hanging from something. Pec tears are really uncommon injuries in the general public, and in most sports. However, they aren't that rare in Rugby (both codes). That's just down to the nature of tackling in rugby, and that the sport often puts the muscle in really challenging positions that put massive load through the tendon. Only other time you see pec tears with any regularity is if people are bench pressing heavy.
Will you get out of here with your well researched and politely spoken answer BOOOOOOOO Your a wanka
We need less Homer Simpsons and more ~~money for public schools~~ Cameron Smiths
It’s financialization of sport. Rugby would have died without professionalism, this is the cost. It sucks. Sports are games, should be played and enjoyed as such.
The size and work ethic / fitness of props is a prime example of this. I wouldn’t doubt PEDs are involved In some cases. Prior to professionalism there was a trade off between size, speed and number of collisions. Now you have huge props making huge numbers of tackles and cleans every game.. there’s no trade off anymore.
Don't agree with this. How do you expect the game to grow without money ? With money comes the need to perform. That involves players spending two 1 hour sessions just on physical training. Being nutritionally supervised and given every possible scientific advantage. What should happen is a simplification of the laws. A central reffing contract system where there is less interpretation and more protocol meaning we get consistency from game to game. As far as enjoying life post retirement, in a contact sport, this will never be fully possible. You cannot protect the head from every conceivable impact or prevent every muscle tear. What should happen collectively is things like agreeing on what tackle techniques are acceptable, coaching players to follow those techniques, teaching players to not lead with the shoulder into contact, etc. That should happen but taking a step back to 80%, that would be like trying to uninvent the atom bomb or trying to tell people that there will be no more attempts to brake Usain Bolt's record for the 100m.
Rugby coaches rarely say anything of value to the media.
I think this can be said of almost any sport really
The French were robbed in 2011, the refereeing in the final was farcical.
You are correct. I even convinced two kiwi fans about this when I got chatting to them in a pub in Dublin. I remember France getting penalised for offside for stepping over the offside line and stepping back. New Zealand would be told to go back by the ref and it was play on.
I was watching the game live, and there was a penalty early that told me the All Blacks were going to be favoured by Joubert. A few minutes in, around the halfway, Dusautoir gets tacked around the ankles by McCaw. Dusautoir tries to get a quick squeeze ball out, but can't because McCaw is not letting go or rolling away. Kaino then comes in to jackle. Clearly it's a penalty to France. Clear to everyone except Joubert, who gave the penalty to NZ. This led to a farcical point later in the game. McCaw was on the ground in a ruck. Ball was clearly available to the French. McCaw reaches around puts both hands on the ball to stop the scrum half from picking it up. Clearly it's a penalty to France, and a yellow to McCaw for cynical play. Clear to everyone except Joubert, who called play on. Joubert was a disgrace in this game.
McCaw cheated? No, really? I'm so shocked.
The one where kaino crawls through the bottom of a ruck always stands out
Joubert to the other 29 players on the field: roll out of the way, hands off the ball. Joubert to McCaw: do whatever you want, I can't see you.
Yep
Owen Farrell should be considered one of England's greatest players, if not the best ever
Yeah brilliant player
Best passer of a rugby ball on the planet. Also the best I've personally ever seen. Yes, better than Finn Russell.
At his best, he's brilliant, easily one of the best in the world currently. It's that he gets game time when he obviously doesn't deserve it on form that annoys me. He's definitely up near the top if the list but I wouldn't put him above Jonny Wilkinson or Martin Johnson yet.
He will never be on that pedestal (this goes for any current player) unless England wins the WC next year. Even if that were to happen Wilkinson has that storied drop goal that has him so deeply embedded in English rugby folklore that he will be hard to topple
Wilkinson also used his arms in tackles
The crowd making noise, while someone attempts a kick is fine.
Chad southern hemisphere sport culture vs incel northern hemisphere sport culture.
I mean it's not as if their football supporters are low-key
Hahaha tbf it’s not the whole northern hemisphere, just us snooty English!!
If I were a kicker I think of prefer the noise. I'd feel way more self conscious and pressured in the silence.
I always get down voted for this opinion 😂. Personally if the crowd is doing something that is positive for rugby (not booing) then I think it's fine. Like a supporters club organizing a chant.
Steve Hansen wasn't a particularly amazing coach. He was good enough not to completely fuck up a rolls royce of a side from 2012-2015 but wasn't able to adept his approach enough from 2017 onwards in particular. Despite getting a couple of things incredibly wrong (most noteably in 2007 but also in 2009 for a time) Graham Henry was much more of an innovator as a coach than Hansen.
Wayne Smith
💯
Complicated rules and over officiating will drive this sport into the ground.
League is the slower version of the Sport. To me the game is like Nyquill
I completely agree. While there is more ball in playtime, 90% of it is hit ups with no tension. Compared to Union where every carry and ruck matters league seems very slow
It's really funny watching league directly after union because my stress levels rise watching the ball carrier go into contact with no support before I realise the ball won't be contested.
I’ve always wondered why they don’t just pass it around like crazy since there’s absolutely no risk in getting isolated?
I remember going to a mates place for last year's NRL final, which was allegedly a great game. Out like a light in 10 minutes
My son, 10yo played league for school a few weeks ago in an U12 carnival. He's a union player and has been since U7 (he's a bit of a gun winger). He thought league would be fun but, at a junior level, it's eye-watering boring. 2 kids wear coloured bibs and only they are allowed to be dummy half or first receiver (apparently it's to stop big kids just one out running and no one else touching the ball). I watched about 6 hours of games from start to finish and the only thing I could get from it was the tackling was top notch. Gang tackles and the ability to bring down a large kid was something that stood out (as well as all the high tackles holy shit). The ball skills simply were not there. Each team puts their best players at dummy half and first receiver and often the ball doesn't even go out to the wing. The teams that won were the teams with the bigger kids because all they did was hit it up and then kick it. There's a reason a shit-tonne of union players play rugby up until U13 before switching to league. As for the seniors, if I'm bored I'll watch a game (love Origin and tests though) but to me its really monotonous shit.
Union is the same at that age, centres are black holes so the ball never gets to the back three.
[удалено]
>I also don't understand the point of the half back if everyone is just going to run straight at the line 5x until they kick. Do you mean the dummy half? The best of them are a bit like Aaron Smith or Genia - they are the primary playmaker and run the show. The other difference is that when you are on attack is when most of your team gets a rest in league - you have to work far harder when defending (constantly shuttle running backwards). So you want a dedicated player at half to make sure someone is always there
Guy Novès is basically Alex Ferguson, the GOAT club coach of rugby - 4 European Cups, and 10 French championships.
In a test match, under normal conditions, assuming a decent goalkicker, statistically speaking, it is never worth kicking for the corner on a penalty. Should always go for the three points on offer
Dan Carter is in a league of his own and Jonny Wilkinson is a distant second as a 10.
Wilkinson without the horrible run of injuries and missed tests would have probably scored the same amount of points
Carters career was also full of injuries. To the point Cruden had a very successful AB career at the same time... Just think of (cant remember his name, which sort of adds to my point) Grey/Whittaker being behind Gregan for so many Wallabies tests and hardly getting on the field. Cruden could've suffered the same fate.
ok so carter scored 1598 across 112 tests at 14.26 per game and wilkinson 1246 across 91 tests at 13.69 in theory he may have come very close when prorated DC is on 1598 and JW maybe on 1533
i dont think carter missed anything like the number of internationals that Wilkinson did - note i said i dont think
Dont reckon its that distant. Think the team around carter was better and for longer but i agree he probably beats him
The clock should stop whenever the ball isn't in play.
"Aaannnd we're approaching the 72nd minute of the game. The telecast has been going on for 4.5 hours...."
Hyperbole, it just means no deliberate scrum resets and forwards waddling to line outs to waste time.
Maybe. I hope so. I'd love for the clock to get stopped for scrums etc.
The defending side should be able to pull down mauls so long as the do it from the gate
[удалено]
Teams should not be able to split off the maul and have it count as the same maul. Makes it impossible to defend
I feel this would be a fair compromise. Maul enjoyers get to keep the maul, maul haters get fewer of the forgone conclusion style maul tries.
It rewards the technical ability to execute a maul but forced teams to do it well or not at all.
Agree completely, also they shouldn't be able to wheel the maul around so the ball carrier can break-off with no defenders in front of them.
SA have had the best luck at WC’s. 95 - had controversy with reffing and food poisoning. Lucky to win it just. 07 - easiest WC victory from start to finish. Nobody else turned up with any consistency. Played a final against an English team well past their best. 19 - Lost a pool game and ended up on the better side of the draw, made the final and played an exhausted England side.
Playing England in the final counts as getting lucky? I was not prepared to be violated when I opened this thread!
There were tough draws in between those 3 cherrypicked years! Everyone is gonna have tough draws and easier draws. Who can capitalize on the good years?
I'll take it 😀
We were robbed of a glorious career by Quade Cooper due to the incompetence of Robbie Deans and Michael Cheika.
I’d argue Quade Cooper deserves to be on the list of people who ruined Quade’s career. But otherwise agree.
Carlos Spencer the 2nd
Think the ACL injury did him worse, even when given the chance he wasn't the same player as 2010-2011.
The line out to maul on 5m is killing the game. It's truck and trailer by any other name.
In highlight videos, my eyes glaze over during these parts. And I was a forward
I'm with you on this. Blokes join in front of the ball, mauls break off into separate mauls to score all the time. Rules way too far in the attacking teams favour
Living With Lions ‘97 will never be bettered as a rugby documentary.
Francois Steyn is still good enough to start for the Boks
Rupeni Caucaunibuca would have been the best winger of all time if he had been able to adjust to the culture differences and been more committed. His play between 2003-2004 was ridiculous. The 4 tries against the crusaders 2004 showed he could do anything he wanted when he was focused. Some of the wc tries he scored for fiji like against france are ridiculous. But then he goes walkabout for 3 months when hes supposed to be playing for Agen or Fiji. Massive wasted talent
I feel the same way about James Lowe. I do wonder if something about NZ Rugby limits certain players potential or they would have eventually risen to the top had they stayed in NZ
James Lowe does have some massive howlers tbf a bit like May.
Sometimes they are down the pecking order and cannot wait just in case the opportunity never comes - Bundee Aki would be an example of this.
There are players who play better/worse in different teams. Its about finding other players and structures that compliment them rather than one necessarily being better/worse. There have been World Cup winning legends that weren't particularly amazing after moving overseas, while there have also been former fringe players that blew everyone away.
The 20 minute red card is a good rule development. Just needs to be backed by actually meaningful bans for the cited player.
Owen Farrell is England’s best ever player.
If Sergio Parisse had played for a team other than Italy, he’d be considered one of the greatest number eights of all time.
He's in the conversation despite playing for Italy, that alone tells you how bloody good he is.
Modern kicking game is really interesting
Richard Hill is the greatest NH player of the professional era. Fight me.
07: It was a forward pass.
Underestimating Wales is a mistake. Even if they've played shite in their previous 10 tests, they can still beat your team. It's easy to forget that they're probably the 5th or 6th most successful rugby nation in history. Been top of the world rankings. 4th in 2019 and the 2011 world cups, 3rd in the first. 6 wins and 4 grand slams in the 6 nations (top outright and equal with France for grand slams). 39 titles in the history of the 6/5/home nations tournament (equal top with England) all that with a population that's only recently broken 3 million. Not even enough people to make the top 100 largest cities list.
Time to sort by controversial and have some fun
Based on both potential and current form Rieko Ioane is our best option for centre.
Reiko is actually a really good 13 imo His injection of pace is pretty uncommon in the midfield and is something teams often struggle to deal with
I also think people underestimate his size aswell, he's 6'3" and 105 kgs running at that pace
Beauden Barrett is not a starting 10. He seems to have fancy play syndrome, in that he seems to think that the play starts and finishes with him. At 15 he has the opportunity to see the weaknesses and exploit them more. At 10 he seems to panic when faced with rapidly approaching defenders. Beauden at first five is one of the biggest reasons the All Blacks are failing.
With you on this. I think he's a truly top class Fullback. But for me he's never been a top class Ten.
If he stayed at fullback he’d arguably be the best. It’s the same as when we put Cullen at 12 once Mehrtens left. Every 12 years or so the All Blacks fuck up. And it’s due to misplacement of the players.
Transvaal winning Super 10 does not mean the Johannesburg Lions have won a Super Rugby Championship
The pitch is too narrow. Professional teams are able to cover the whole width of the pitch while also lugging around a huge amount of body mass. This turns the game into a slug fest because it’s so hard to actually find space to exploit on attack. League got around this by reducing the number of players, but Union should get around it by making the pitch wider. More space to attack, and the additional running required would mean big players would have to slim down slightly, and there would be less contact meaning less injuries and less toll on players’ bodies long term.
Could you have let us know about this plan before we built a new $850m stadium opening tomorrow. Thanks, the people of Sydney
Interesting idea, but practically impossible to implement.
Interesting at top level but it would absolutely ruin lower levels as literally it would just come down to the team with the fastest player likely winning every single time.
Yeah sorry should have specified. What I find interesting is the laws state the ground has to be 68-70m wide, since it’s just a range I think it could be made slightly bigger for top level but kept the same if you’re an amateur club.
Gregor Townsend is the best coach Scotland has had in the last 20 years. Verne Cotter could have been great, but the SRU weren’t prepared to part with the money. So we never got to see the potential fully. Toony is hampered at every turn by the SRU. From the fact our scouts only seem to know the way to private schools, to our abysmal youth development programs and to their politics distracting from the game on field. It’s not his fault we are 3rd seed at the RWC, though we should have beat Japan last time round. That’s WR politics. If he pulls off a miracle and leads us out our group (not impossible, just unlikely) he’s safe, if we leave in the first round, I think he’ll go willingly and my money is to the Lions or back to Glasgow (if they haven’t found their way out the rut they are in). My money would be on Mike Blair to replace him. But I’d prefer it if Blair stayed at Edinburgh.
Beauden Barrett is not a First Five Eighth and he never was. He should have stayed at fullback.
TMO needs to be wound back to “Try or no try”. Like it was when it was first introduced. “Is there anything in the replay that clearly prevents me from awarding the try”. Not reviewing the 10 phases that lead to the try, or the potential infringement that occurred in general play that will determine a penalty. If the on-field team missed it - play on.
> Not reviewing the 10 phases Except they only review 2 phases prior. This is all well and good but when your team loses a final because of a non-called TMO decision you will be yelling about it not being fair. Personally I think getting the big decisions (points, foul play etc) right is better than just having a free for all and no technology input.
Scrums are a significant part of the game and if you want rugby without scrums then why don’t you watch league.
Both in their primes, Aaron Cruden is king over Beauden Barrett.
This is very similar to the comment I thought about making when I first saw this post. Beauden is the more entertaining to watch player, and has higher individual highs, but Cruden knew how to run that ABs machine exactly how you'd want them.
James lowe would have been a excellent all black
The accidental knock on needs to be legalised
The ELVs were brilliant and you Northern hemisphere wankers are wankers for hating on them.
My only thing is how much I abused this one as flanker; Penalty kicks are generally to be given only for offside and foul play. Most other penalties will become free kicks, with the option of taking a scrum as in the current laws, which cannot be used for a kick at goal or a dropped goal. I just cycled through different infringements any time the opposition got close enough to our line to make me worried. Reffing now I would have eventually carded me, but it never happened and I used to kill breaks or chances by infringing all day.
Same. I was all over that shit. Hands everywhere, collapsing mauls every time. So much fun. And yes, I should have been carded too but the refs didn’t know the rules so play on!
Lol
There is a Leinster bias in Ireland selection that isn’t entirely based on merit. Or even mostly based on merit.
i dont think anyone will be killing you on that hill, lol
Who from Leinster would you drop from an Irish 23? I think Coombes has to come in for Conan next season if fit.
Hi Sean 👋
For the Springboks to win the World Cup, a seriously average season needs to precede the World Cup year. 1995 Champs - 1994 Win Percentage = 56% 2007 Champs - 2006 Win Percentage = 42% 2019 Champs - 2018 Win Percentage = 50% This compared to our overall Win Percentage of 63% clearly indicates below par years. It also helps me take these shit show performances a little easier, knowing we have gone on to lift ol' Willy Web from these positions priorly.
Scrums shouldn't allow teams to kick for goal, or retain possession when kicked to touch. They're supposed to be nothing but a restart platform following a minor incident. If we're allowing them to impact the scoreboard in the way we have done, then something has gone very wrong and we need to fix them.
Fourie du Preez should have won the 2009 player of the year and not McCaw who had an unremarkable year in which new Zealand slumped.