Rugby or NFL
-
For me it’s getting too much like the NRL, where they’re checking every little detail in the lead up to a try to find a reason not to award it.
TMO should not be allowed to intervene in something unless asked, or if it’s “actual” foul play.
The game is not played in super slow motion, if it looks wrong in real time, it’s wrong.
If it looks good in real time, it’s good, move on.
If the ref misses someone offside by the length of a toenail, tough shit, move on.
If they miss an obstruction that you need a 10 slide power point presentation to get to an answer, tough shit, move on.I’m a fan of the captains challenge, which will hopefully pick up any real howlers.
If you’re injured (need a rest) go to the sideline to get checked.
Scrums need to be sped up too.
Let’s just get on with the fucking game.
-
Here's my rule change. The level of TMO involvement should depend entirely on the quality of the try.
If you pull off an end-to-end try that goes through 12 pairs of hands then the threshold for TMO intervention is basically homicide. We're certainly not calling it back for a pass that might be one degree forward.
A backline move, or something generally well executed would take some obvious foul play or a blatant knock-on.
But a lineout maul? Sure, have a look. Same with repeated pick-and-go. TMO can basically act like they do now. If you don't like it then play better, more exciting rugby.
Nothing worse than having the emotional high of an amazing try killed by a ticky-tacky TMO intervention. Under this change, you can celebrate with the comfort that the try was so cool that we're basically letting it all slide.
Very easy to enforce and there would be no criticisms or grey areas from anyone. 100% accuracy and satisfaction guaranteed.
-
@barbarian ive said similar before too, im on board
-
Once upon a time I would either celebrate a try or go "OOOOoooo that's a close one.. we'll have to wait and see" but now I find myself not celebrating what appears to clearly be a try until I've held my breath and the TMO has not intervened.
It takes the fun out of it!!! -
@Kirwan said in Rugby or NFL:
Watching the games last right, with all the interruptions from the 100 or so refs they have now, it felt more like NFL than Rugby.
The search for 100% accuracy and safety in all decisions has completely removed fluidity and flow from the game.
No space, just brutes running into each other.
Certainly not the game for all shapes and sizes anymore.
I have a friend who hasn't really watched rugby since the days of Zinzan. He saw a bit of the French game.
He said now it just a competition of who's the last one to make a mistake. Boring, clinical and predictable.
-
Not sure if this has been mentioned but one thing I like about NFL (and basketball) is the value they place on time.
When that try to Fiji was over ruled because the Wallabies winger had stepped out there was no reset of the game clock from the time the winger had stepped out as is the case when a ball is kicked out and the ref blows time off until the lineout is played. So time went on from the time said winger threw the pass infield and the turnover and attack for the try.
Now if they are going to use the TMO for intervention like this, then use it to reset the game clock to the time the player stepped out.
-
I think everybody is just bored of the TMO as you can't really celebrate a try now until the TMO has cleared it. It used to be woohoo, now it's just woo and then wait 30 seconds to see if he clears it ... he does, but the moment has passed. And thats why we watch sport, for the moments.
Foul play is fine, but the TMO must be 100% sure. Having Williams over rule him saying it was fine in the Tahs/Lions match on the weekend was good, but it means the TMO should never have been involved in the first place. And surely the TMO was only involved due to ambiguity in their role.
The calls on the lineout mauls really got under my skin. They are the sort of thing that the referee is for. Not the TMO. No different to a scrum penalty in my view, and having TMO involved there is a can of worms that will literally destroy the game.
Clear & obvious mistake from the ref, foul play, and two phase maximum to rule on.
The TMO should be actively trying to NOT get involved.
-
@MajorRage what's next, TMO ruling on incorrect ruck entry, not behind the last feet, I mean why not, these are in the same league as many other things they seem to be able rule on.
-
@canefan said in Rugby or NFL:
@mohikamo said in Rugby or NFL:
very wierd
i think it may have something to do with having been the most rabidly amateur (i.e. conservative) sport on the planet for over a century
and now, seemingly incable of making the "market/commenrcial/product" adjustments
see how even a sport like cricket has changed!
Rugby has always been arrogant. They think their game is the best and that the fans should be grateful
Lol canefan,I personally think the game is best (which is why I follow it so avidly) and I am grateful that I have got it to watch. If I didn't think it was best I would wander off and watch something else, as I am sure some people do.
-
@MajorRage said in Rugby or NFL:
The calls on the lineout mauls really got under my skin. They are the sort of thing that the referee is for. Not the TMO.
The player in front at the initial setup of the maul isn't hard to see in real time. At least by the TJ.
But the rule is almost only enforced when a try is scored now.
A bit of a tangent but the balance of rugby would be better if the refs were stricter on the attacking teams in mauls
-
I think a good game of rugby is better than a good game of almost any other sport.
BUT....
Scrums drive me stupid, watch a game from the 70' or 80's and a scrum was set, feed, and the ball was out in literally seconds. Why does the ref have to give the pack a quick re-cap of how to scrummag before every scrum, as if neither pack have seen a scrum before.
Also, scrum penalties, I'd get rid of them unless someone shoots someone.
Getting a dominant scrum and your forwards walking over the opposing forwards is reward enough. You have the ball with a dominant platform to play it.And also knock on advantage, if one team knocks on and the other team gets the ball and can cleanly play it from the resulting ruck, then that's it, you have the ball, advantage over. Why wait 20 seconds just to go back and have a scrum in the same place you got the ball 20 seconds ago.
-
@WestieFella said in Rugby or NFL:
I think a good game of rugby is better than a good game of almost any other sport.
BUT....
Scrums drive me stupid, watch a game from the 70' or 80's and a scrum was set, feed, and the ball was out in literally seconds. Why does the ref have to give the pack a quick re-cap of how to scrummag before every scrum, as if neither pack have seen a scrum before.
Also, scrum penalties, I'd get rid of them unless someone shoots someone.
Getting a dominant scrum and your forwards walking over the opposing forwards is reward enough. You have the ball with a dominant platform to play it.And also knock on advantage, if one team knocks on and the other team gets the ball and can cleanly play it from the resulting ruck, then that's it, you have the ball, advantage over. Why wait 20 seconds just to go back and have a scrum in the same place you got the ball 20 seconds ago.
Firstly: injuries. There were far too many when it was a free for all and players are bigger and likely to injure opposition caught awkwardly.
Secondly, am pretty sure the rule of thumb is a couple of phases or couple of passes not under pressure. And perhaps a kick not under pressure (re two examples of kicks going out on the full under advantage on the weekend - France judged to have gained advantage, Fiji not got advantage: both correct IMO). Could be wrong about all of that though.
-
I think, though, the TMO is better than it was 3-5 years ago. I remember the repeated stoppages, endless replays on the big screen of behind-the-play things, taking 5-10 minutes each time.
And now we are getting better at fixing bad calls in real time. Paul Williams blew a knock-on against the Tahs on Saturday night that clearly came off the Lions (but an understandable error nonetheless). By the time the scrum was set, the TMO had reviewed and seen there was no knock-on and the scrum feed rightfully changed.
I'm happy with that intervention.
-
@barbarian said in Rugby or NFL:
I think, though, the TMO is better than it was 3-5 years ago. I remember the repeated stoppages, endless replays on the big screen of behind-the-play things, taking 5-10 minutes each time.
And now we are getting better at fixing bad calls in real time. Paul Williams blew a knock-on against the Tahs on Saturday night that clearly came off the Lions (but an understandable error nonetheless). By the time the scrum was set, the TMO had reviewed and seen there was no knock-on and the scrum feed rightfully changed.
I'm happy with that intervention.
The 2023 RWC was definitely a low point. I don't want to hear the TMO constantly chattering to the ref over minutiae
-
@WestieFella said in Rugby or NFL:
I think a good game of rugby is better than a good game of almost any other sport.
BUT....
Scrums drive me stupid, watch a game from the 70' or 80's and a scrum was set, feed, and the ball was out in literally seconds. Why does the ref have to give the pack a quick re-cap of how to scrummag before every scrum, as if neither pack have seen a scrum before.
Also, scrum penalties, I'd get rid of them unless someone shoots someone.
Getting a dominant scrum and your forwards walking over the opposing forwards is reward enough. You have the ball with a dominant platform to play it.And also knock on advantage, if one team knocks on and the other team gets the ball and can cleanly play it from the resulting ruck, then that's it, you have the ball, advantage over. Why wait 20 seconds just to go back and have a scrum in the same place you got the ball 20 seconds ago.
while seeing your points re scrums mate, but the reason scrums got changed from how they were is unfortunately the same reason we have seen tackling being moved lower etc, player safety. We had a series of broken necks in 80s , a lot from scrums going down , so unfortunately they had to make changes.
I was at a game in Levin when a young fella broke his neck, and ended up in a wheel chair. For some reason there was a series of them about same time that was killing the game.
Sorry @booboo , I see you had already replied the same. Also pretty sure you got it right for the advantage too. -
@barbarian said in Rugby or NFL:
I think, though, the TMO is better than it was 3-5 years ago. I remember the repeated stoppages, endless replays on the big screen of behind-the-play things, taking 5-10 minutes each time.
And now we are getting better at fixing bad calls in real time. Paul Williams blew a knock-on against the Tahs on Saturday night that clearly came off the Lions (but an understandable error nonetheless). By the time the scrum was set, the TMO had reviewed and seen there was no knock-on and the scrum feed rightfully changed.
I'm happy with that intervention.
I’m a bit 50/50 on interventions like that even though a mistake was made by the ref.
If I was a captain today at every stoppage my strategy would be to get in the ref’s ear with, “check for the knock on”, “make sure you get this right”, “you’ve got the TMO, you might as well use him to get it right”
And yes I played halfback so this will come all naturally!
-
@Crazy-Horse said in Rugby or NFL:
@taniwharugby said in Rugby or NFL:
@Crazy-Horse
I feel the same as the poster who said they have fallen out of love with rugby and only watch on muscle memory. I watch because it's NZ rugby, because I always have, but I am watching a little less each year. Cards have ruined it for me. But I think that horse has bolted along with the TMO.Dunno if that was me but I’m certainly in the same club. I don’t even flinch when we score, let alone get excited, because it doesn’t count until Murphy has said so. That on Saturday was a 57% chance if we crossed the line, not exactly compelling odds.
Murphy certainly lived up to his law, if slightly altered “if something could possibly be wrong, I’ll find it”.
-
100%!
when the shoulder of the ball carrier at the back of the maul detaches - that is the end of the maul
the referees should be absolutely red hot on it!
if the shoulder bumps off the maul even the minutest amount and reconnects - that's obstruction - penalty
i dont mind players joining behind the ball carrier, but i think it should be obstruction as soon as the ball is passed back thru the maul . . . but that's another story . . .
-
One thing that the review system in cricket has really helped with is taking the heat off the umpires. There is so much less scrutiny on them these days. If an umpire gets a call wrong, then the expectation immediately falls on the players to review. If they don't review, then it's much harder to just blame the umpire when the professional players didn't notice either. Then in the scenario where the umpire gets a call wrong and the players don't have any reviews left, the first comment is they shouldn't have wasted their reviews on calls they got wrong and the umpire got right. I think that's been a really good thing overall.
Rugby is a very different sport to cricket though, but some form of onus on the players also making the right call would help, at the moment the assumption is all the players on the field except the ref knew what happened in the moment, and that won't be true at all.
