The Current State of Rugby
-
@MiketheSnow said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Crucial said in The Current State of Rugby:
While avoiding some direct comment on last night it is patently obvious that test rugby at the moment is a power game.
'Ball beats the man' is no longer a thing, given the training and speed of defences.
All close play is done with head below hips.
High impact collision into players at breakdowns is the norm.At lower levels all of this is tolerable and can lead to some very good rugby but at the high end of professionalism the game is so far away from the intent it is crazy and there's no wonder WR are scrambling to find scapegoats for head injuries (other than themselves and the application of law), along with a lack of law adjustment for pro athletes.
Game needs a big shake up IMO. .Needs to come back to being a game for all sizes based on skill and strength not power and collisions.Ireland showed a combination is possible against modern defences
Hardnosed when needed to be
Letting the ball do the work when it's on
Like ABs used to do.
One observation I do have is that there are too many breaks in play. Too much recovery time for the bigger, more powerful teams during the match. We already have tactical subs in the first half for god's sake! It penalises teams who are more aerobic and encourages everyone to bulk up more and we get more attrition.
@stodders This drives me absolutely nuts.
The players werenât injured when the ball was in play but the ball goes out and suddenly theyâre hurt.
World Rugby need to address it. The ABs were guilty of it last year at the end of a close game when Aumua went down. Everyone does it.
Something like in football when if you receive treatment you go to the sideline and play restarts without you. If itâs a scrum and itâs a front rower then give the opposition a FK. Probably a far better solution than that but it is infuriating to watch. Other leagues wouldnât tolerate it but Rugby seems to revel in this kind of junk.
-
@stodders This drives me absolutely nuts.
The players werenât injured when the ball was in play but the ball goes out and suddenly theyâre hurt.
World Rugby need to address it. The ABs were guilty of it last year at the end of a close game when Aumua went down. Everyone does it.
Something like in football when if you receive treatment you go to the sideline and play restarts without you. If itâs a scrum and itâs a front rower then give the opposition a FK. Probably a far better solution than that but it is infuriating to watch. Other leagues wouldnât tolerate it but Rugby seems to revel in this kind of junk.
@game_film said in The Current State of Rugby:
@stodders This drives me absolutely nuts.
The players werenât injured when the ball was in play but the ball goes out and suddenly theyâre hurt.
World Rugby need to address it. The ABs were guilty of it last year at the end of a close game when Aumua went down. Everyone does it.
Something like in football when if you receive treatment you go to the sideline and play restarts without you. If itâs a scrum and itâs a front rower then give the opposition a FK. Probably a far better solution than that but it is infuriating to watch. Other leagues wouldnât tolerate it but Rugby seems to revel in this kind of junk.
Yeah, and water bottles available at the hair way line each side. If you need water that badly, go to the side whilst play carries on
-
@stodders in NZ the Crusaders play a style that would seem more suited to test rugby, yet the helter skelter style of other teams is preferred at the top.
That said I think early-mid season blues were playing some fantastic, more structured rugby too, they just got out thought, out played and out coached in the final...
The key to both those teams, coaching teams, game plans and adaptability (except the final for the blues)
@taniwharugby said in The Current State of Rugby:
@stodders in NZ the Crusaders play a style that would seem more suited to test rugby, yet the helter skelter style of other teams is preferred at the top.
That said I think early-mid season blues were playing some fantastic, more structured rugby too, they just got out thought, out played and out coached in the final...
The key to both those teams, coaching teams, game plans and adaptability (except the final for the blues)
I think the Chiefs, Blues & Crusaders all play a similar style. Highlanders and Hurricanes play more ball in hand.
Way too much is being said about the final without mentioning the lineout. 10 lost lineouts. 10 possessions taken away from one side and given to the other side. Ryan, Whitelock etc deserve credit for that (..and it probably ended Eklund's slim AB chances this year).
However it makes reading much into the general play a bit meaningless when one side is gifted a massive glut of possession.Earlier in the year the Chiefs and Blues went down to Christchurch and won playing structured rugby and strangling the Crusaders attack with very strong defence.. on those occasions the Crusaders lost because the Chiefs/Blues played better Test match style rugby.
Execution on particular days is the difference in results. The Chiefs only had that intensity and accuracy in their defence in 1 of 3 games games against the Crusaders. The Blues ended 1-1 but weren't in the fight in the second match without a functioning lineout
That first Chiefs game was actually similar to the recent AB losses. Attack that couldn't create space vs a committed defence
-
@taniwharugby said in The Current State of Rugby:
@stodders in NZ the Crusaders play a style that would seem more suited to test rugby, yet the helter skelter style of other teams is preferred at the top.
That said I think early-mid season blues were playing some fantastic, more structured rugby too, they just got out thought, out played and out coached in the final...
The key to both those teams, coaching teams, game plans and adaptability (except the final for the blues)
I think the Chiefs, Blues & Crusaders all play a similar style. Highlanders and Hurricanes play more ball in hand.
Way too much is being said about the final without mentioning the lineout. 10 lost lineouts. 10 possessions taken away from one side and given to the other side. Ryan, Whitelock etc deserve credit for that (..and it probably ended Eklund's slim AB chances this year).
However it makes reading much into the general play a bit meaningless when one side is gifted a massive glut of possession.Earlier in the year the Chiefs and Blues went down to Christchurch and won playing structured rugby and strangling the Crusaders attack with very strong defence.. on those occasions the Crusaders lost because the Chiefs/Blues played better Test match style rugby.
Execution on particular days is the difference in results. The Chiefs only had that intensity and accuracy in their defence in 1 of 3 games games against the Crusaders. The Blues ended 1-1 but weren't in the fight in the second match without a functioning lineout
That first Chiefs game was actually similar to the recent AB losses. Attack that couldn't create space vs a committed defence
@Duluth with regard to the final, that proves the Crusaders went in with a specific plan, executed it and shut the Blues lineout options down, and the Blues failed to adapt.
I'd say consistently over the past 4 or 5 years the Crusaders play a style more resembling test rugby, not just this year, whereas the Blues it was more this year, the Chiefs can quite often look the goods, but sometimes look alot like the current ABs...
-
@taniwharugby said in The Current State of Rugby:
@stodders in NZ the Crusaders play a style that would seem more suited to test rugby, yet the helter skelter style of other teams is preferred at the top.
That said I think early-mid season blues were playing some fantastic, more structured rugby too, they just got out thought, out played and out coached in the final...
The key to both those teams, coaching teams, game plans and adaptability (except the final for the blues)
I think the Chiefs, Blues & Crusaders all play a similar style. Highlanders and Hurricanes play more ball in hand.
Way too much is being said about the final without mentioning the lineout. 10 lost lineouts. 10 possessions taken away from one side and given to the other side. Ryan, Whitelock etc deserve credit for that (..and it probably ended Eklund's slim AB chances this year).
However it makes reading much into the general play a bit meaningless when one side is gifted a massive glut of possession.Earlier in the year the Chiefs and Blues went down to Christchurch and won playing structured rugby and strangling the Crusaders attack with very strong defence.. on those occasions the Crusaders lost because the Chiefs/Blues played better Test match style rugby.
Execution on particular days is the difference in results. The Chiefs only had that intensity and accuracy in their defence in 1 of 3 games games against the Crusaders. The Blues ended 1-1 but weren't in the fight in the second match without a functioning lineout
That first Chiefs game was actually similar to the recent AB losses. Attack that couldn't create space vs a committed defence
@Duluth said in The Current State of Rugby:
@taniwharugby said in The Current State of Rugby:
@stodders in NZ the Crusaders play a style that would seem more suited to test rugby, yet the helter skelter style of other teams is preferred at the top.
That said I think early-mid season blues were playing some fantastic, more structured rugby too, they just got out thought, out played and out coached in the final...
The key to both those teams, coaching teams, game plans and adaptability (except the final for the blues)
I think the Chiefs, Blues & Crusaders all play a similar style. Highlanders and Hurricanes play more ball in hand.
Way too much is being said about the final without mentioning the lineout. 10 lost lineouts. 10 possessions taken away from one side and given to the other side. Ryan, Whitelock etc deserve credit for that (..and it probably ended Eklund's slim AB chances this year).
However it makes reading much into the general play a bit meaningless when one side is gifted a massive glut of possession.Earlier in the year the Chiefs and Blues went down to Christchurch and won playing structured rugby and strangling the Crusaders attack with very strong defence.. on those occasions the Crusaders lost because the Chiefs/Blues played better Test match style rugby.
Execution on particular days is the difference in results. The Chiefs only had that intensity and accuracy in their defence in 1 of 3 games games against the Crusaders. The Blues ended 1-1 but weren't in the fight in the second match without a functioning lineout
That first Chiefs game was actually similar to the recent AB losses. Attack that couldn't create space vs a committed defence
Agree the Chiefs sufficated the Crusaders (twice) but don't forget the Blues snuck home in Christchurch against a team down 1 or 2 players for a good proportion of the game. The Saders nearly stole that game.
-
@Duluth said in The Current State of Rugby:
@taniwharugby said in The Current State of Rugby:
@stodders in NZ the Crusaders play a style that would seem more suited to test rugby, yet the helter skelter style of other teams is preferred at the top.
That said I think early-mid season blues were playing some fantastic, more structured rugby too, they just got out thought, out played and out coached in the final...
The key to both those teams, coaching teams, game plans and adaptability (except the final for the blues)
I think the Chiefs, Blues & Crusaders all play a similar style. Highlanders and Hurricanes play more ball in hand.
Way too much is being said about the final without mentioning the lineout. 10 lost lineouts. 10 possessions taken away from one side and given to the other side. Ryan, Whitelock etc deserve credit for that (..and it probably ended Eklund's slim AB chances this year).
However it makes reading much into the general play a bit meaningless when one side is gifted a massive glut of possession.Earlier in the year the Chiefs and Blues went down to Christchurch and won playing structured rugby and strangling the Crusaders attack with very strong defence.. on those occasions the Crusaders lost because the Chiefs/Blues played better Test match style rugby.
Execution on particular days is the difference in results. The Chiefs only had that intensity and accuracy in their defence in 1 of 3 games games against the Crusaders. The Blues ended 1-1 but weren't in the fight in the second match without a functioning lineout
That first Chiefs game was actually similar to the recent AB losses. Attack that couldn't create space vs a committed defence
Agree the Chiefs sufficated the Crusaders (twice) but don't forget the Blues snuck home in Christchurch against a team down 1 or 2 players for a good proportion of the game. The Saders nearly stole that game.
@Crazy-Horse couldnât break down the defence despite a lot of ball at the end of the game. The Blues won the the Test match style arm wrestle.
My point was that those 3 sides play similar tactics and the result comes down to execution. Pointing out a ânearlyâ result doesnât refute what I was saying
-
@Crazy-Horse couldnât break down the defence despite a lot of ball at the end of the game. The Blues won the the Test match style arm wrestle.
My point was that those 3 sides play similar tactics and the result comes down to execution. Pointing out a ânearlyâ result doesnât refute what I was saying
@Duluth said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Crazy-Horse couldnât break down the defence despite a lot of ball at the end of the game. The Blues won the the Test match style arm wrestle.
My point was that those 3 sides play similar tactics and the result comes down to execution. Pointing out a ânearlyâ result doesnât refute what I was saying
Yeah I agree they all play a similar style, but there is something about the Chiefs in particular that causes the Saders trouble. As a Saders supporter, watching us struggle to make ground against them reminds me of the feeling I get when I watch ABs. I don't get the same feeling against other NZ teams.
-
@game_film said in The Current State of Rugby:
@stodders This drives me absolutely nuts.
The players werenât injured when the ball was in play but the ball goes out and suddenly theyâre hurt.
World Rugby need to address it. The ABs were guilty of it last year at the end of a close game when Aumua went down. Everyone does it.
Something like in football when if you receive treatment you go to the sideline and play restarts without you. If itâs a scrum and itâs a front rower then give the opposition a FK. Probably a far better solution than that but it is infuriating to watch. Other leagues wouldnât tolerate it but Rugby seems to revel in this kind of junk.
Yeah, and water bottles available at the hair way line each side. If you need water that badly, go to the side whilst play carries on
@Machpants said in The Current State of Rugby:
@game_film said in The Current State of Rugby:
@stodders This drives me absolutely nuts.
The players werenât injured when the ball was in play but the ball goes out and suddenly theyâre hurt.
World Rugby need to address it. The ABs were guilty of it last year at the end of a close game when Aumua went down. Everyone does it.
Something like in football when if you receive treatment you go to the sideline and play restarts without you. If itâs a scrum and itâs a front rower then give the opposition a FK. Probably a far better solution than that but it is infuriating to watch. Other leagues wouldnât tolerate it but Rugby seems to revel in this kind of junk.
Yeah, and water bottles available at the hair way line each side. If you need water that badly, go to the side whilst play carries on
Easiest solution is to allow runners as before but with strict judgement from ref that if they interfere with start of play by being on the field then their team is penalised. If they want to risk running to the middle of the field or not getting out of the way then that's their call. Refs are so slack on time wasting.
-
What do we suggest for refs deciding between fake and genuine injury? One option is that any player being treated for injury or âinjuryâ must go off until next break in play (unless replaced).
-
What do we suggest for refs deciding between fake and genuine injury? One option is that any player being treated for injury or âinjuryâ must go off until next break in play (unless replaced).
@Billy-Tell said in The Current State of Rugby:
What do we suggest for refs deciding between fake and genuine injury? One option is that any playing being treated for injury or âinjuryâ must go off until next break in play (unless treplaced).
Like football. Everyone has to go off and can't return until the next stoppage. These big units couldn't handle playing 80 like the old days when you only got subbed if you were too hurt to continue
-
@Billy-Tell said in The Current State of Rugby:
What do we suggest for refs deciding between fake and genuine injury? One option is that any playing being treated for injury or âinjuryâ must go off until next break in play (unless treplaced).
Like football. Everyone has to go off and can't return until the next stoppage. These big units couldn't handle playing 80 like the old days when you only got subbed if you were too hurt to continue
@canefan which would see players start being a bit smaller again if they had less stoppages (water, scrums, fake injuries)
Refs should not be required to determine an injury being legit or not.
So stoppage, player goes off and unless blood/hia can't come back, will stop these time wasting stoppages we are getting now.
-
@Machpants said in The Current State of Rugby:
@game_film said in The Current State of Rugby:
@stodders This drives me absolutely nuts.
The players werenât injured when the ball was in play but the ball goes out and suddenly theyâre hurt.
World Rugby need to address it. The ABs were guilty of it last year at the end of a close game when Aumua went down. Everyone does it.
Something like in football when if you receive treatment you go to the sideline and play restarts without you. If itâs a scrum and itâs a front rower then give the opposition a FK. Probably a far better solution than that but it is infuriating to watch. Other leagues wouldnât tolerate it but Rugby seems to revel in this kind of junk.
Yeah, and water bottles available at the hair way line each side. If you need water that badly, go to the side whilst play carries on
Easiest solution is to allow runners as before but with strict judgement from ref that if they interfere with start of play by being on the field then their team is penalised. If they want to risk running to the middle of the field or not getting out of the way then that's their call. Refs are so slack on time wasting.
@Crucial said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Machpants said in The Current State of Rugby:
@game_film said in The Current State of Rugby:
@stodders This drives me absolutely nuts.
The players werenât injured when the ball was in play but the ball goes out and suddenly theyâre hurt.
World Rugby need to address it. The ABs were guilty of it last year at the end of a close game when Aumua went down. Everyone does it.
Something like in football when if you receive treatment you go to the sideline and play restarts without you. If itâs a scrum and itâs a front rower then give the opposition a FK. Probably a far better solution than that but it is infuriating to watch. Other leagues wouldnât tolerate it but Rugby seems to revel in this kind of junk.
Yeah, and water bottles available at the hair way line each side. If you need water that badly, go to the side whilst play carries on
Easiest solution is to allow runners as before but with strict judgement from ref that if they interfere with start of play by being on the field then their team is penalised. If they want to risk running to the middle of the field or not getting out of the way then that's their call. Refs are so slack on time wasting.
It was even more farcical on Saturday. Play was held up after the water break because a towel had been left on the pitch. A few more seconds gained there
-
@Crucial said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Machpants said in The Current State of Rugby:
@game_film said in The Current State of Rugby:
@stodders This drives me absolutely nuts.
The players werenât injured when the ball was in play but the ball goes out and suddenly theyâre hurt.
World Rugby need to address it. The ABs were guilty of it last year at the end of a close game when Aumua went down. Everyone does it.
Something like in football when if you receive treatment you go to the sideline and play restarts without you. If itâs a scrum and itâs a front rower then give the opposition a FK. Probably a far better solution than that but it is infuriating to watch. Other leagues wouldnât tolerate it but Rugby seems to revel in this kind of junk.
Yeah, and water bottles available at the hair way line each side. If you need water that badly, go to the side whilst play carries on
Easiest solution is to allow runners as before but with strict judgement from ref that if they interfere with start of play by being on the field then their team is penalised. If they want to risk running to the middle of the field or not getting out of the way then that's their call. Refs are so slack on time wasting.
It was even more farcical on Saturday. Play was held up after the water break because a towel had been left on the pitch. A few more seconds gained there
@stodders said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Crucial said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Machpants said in The Current State of Rugby:
@game_film said in The Current State of Rugby:
@stodders This drives me absolutely nuts.
The players werenât injured when the ball was in play but the ball goes out and suddenly theyâre hurt.
World Rugby need to address it. The ABs were guilty of it last year at the end of a close game when Aumua went down. Everyone does it.
Something like in football when if you receive treatment you go to the sideline and play restarts without you. If itâs a scrum and itâs a front rower then give the opposition a FK. Probably a far better solution than that but it is infuriating to watch. Other leagues wouldnât tolerate it but Rugby seems to revel in this kind of junk.
Yeah, and water bottles available at the hair way line each side. If you need water that badly, go to the side whilst play carries on
Easiest solution is to allow runners as before but with strict judgement from ref that if they interfere with start of play by being on the field then their team is penalised. If they want to risk running to the middle of the field or not getting out of the way then that's their call. Refs are so slack on time wasting.
It was even more farcical on Saturday. Play was held up after the water break because a towel had been left on the pitch. A few more seconds gained there
That was over three minutes to set a scrum from a simple knock on. Strangely none of the players required medical attention while the ball was in play. The game is getting worse in this respect and WR think the solution to power athletes trying to win collisions is to card them.
We're on the path to NFL style stoppages.
-
@stodders said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Crucial said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Machpants said in The Current State of Rugby:
@game_film said in The Current State of Rugby:
@stodders This drives me absolutely nuts.
The players werenât injured when the ball was in play but the ball goes out and suddenly theyâre hurt.
World Rugby need to address it. The ABs were guilty of it last year at the end of a close game when Aumua went down. Everyone does it.
Something like in football when if you receive treatment you go to the sideline and play restarts without you. If itâs a scrum and itâs a front rower then give the opposition a FK. Probably a far better solution than that but it is infuriating to watch. Other leagues wouldnât tolerate it but Rugby seems to revel in this kind of junk.
Yeah, and water bottles available at the hair way line each side. If you need water that badly, go to the side whilst play carries on
Easiest solution is to allow runners as before but with strict judgement from ref that if they interfere with start of play by being on the field then their team is penalised. If they want to risk running to the middle of the field or not getting out of the way then that's their call. Refs are so slack on time wasting.
It was even more farcical on Saturday. Play was held up after the water break because a towel had been left on the pitch. A few more seconds gained there
That was over three minutes to set a scrum from a simple knock on. Strangely none of the players required medical attention while the ball was in play. The game is getting worse in this respect and WR think the solution to power athletes trying to win collisions is to card them.
We're on the path to NFL style stoppages.
@antipodean said in The Current State of Rugby:
@stodders said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Crucial said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Machpants said in The Current State of Rugby:
@game_film said in The Current State of Rugby:
@stodders This drives me absolutely nuts.
The players werenât injured when the ball was in play but the ball goes out and suddenly theyâre hurt.
World Rugby need to address it. The ABs were guilty of it last year at the end of a close game when Aumua went down. Everyone does it.
Something like in football when if you receive treatment you go to the sideline and play restarts without you. If itâs a scrum and itâs a front rower then give the opposition a FK. Probably a far better solution than that but it is infuriating to watch. Other leagues wouldnât tolerate it but Rugby seems to revel in this kind of junk.
Yeah, and water bottles available at the hair way line each side. If you need water that badly, go to the side whilst play carries on
Easiest solution is to allow runners as before but with strict judgement from ref that if they interfere with start of play by being on the field then their team is penalised. If they want to risk running to the middle of the field or not getting out of the way then that's their call. Refs are so slack on time wasting.
It was even more farcical on Saturday. Play was held up after the water break because a towel had been left on the pitch. A few more seconds gained there
That was over three minutes to set a scrum from a simple knock on. Strangely none of the players required medical attention while the ball was in play. The game is getting worse in this respect and WR think the solution to power athletes trying to win collisions is to card them.
We're on the path to NFL style stoppages.
I'm surprised that Harlequins fake blood stunt a few years ago didn't catch on
-
@canefan which would see players start being a bit smaller again if they had less stoppages (water, scrums, fake injuries)
Refs should not be required to determine an injury being legit or not.
So stoppage, player goes off and unless blood/hia can't come back, will stop these time wasting stoppages we are getting now.
@taniwharugby said in The Current State of Rugby:
@canefan which would see players start being a bit smaller again if they had less stoppages (water, scrums, fake injuries)
Refs should not be required to determine an injury being legit or not.
So stoppage, player goes off and unless blood/hia can't come back, will stop these time wasting stoppages we are getting now.
100%, if you're so injured play had to stop, you go off immediately and can't come back on. That'd sort the fake injuries out immediately. And to hell with drinks breaks - if they think it's a H&S issue then schedule a short one like they do in cricket, but TBH 40 mins of rugby shouldn't have you dying of thirst.
-
@taniwharugby said in The Current State of Rugby:
@canefan which would see players start being a bit smaller again if they had less stoppages (water, scrums, fake injuries)
Refs should not be required to determine an injury being legit or not.
So stoppage, player goes off and unless blood/hia can't come back, will stop these time wasting stoppages we are getting now.
100%, if you're so injured play had to stop, you go off immediately and can't come back on. That'd sort the fake injuries out immediately. And to hell with drinks breaks - if they think it's a H&S issue then schedule a short one like they do in cricket, but TBH 40 mins of rugby shouldn't have you dying of thirst.
@No-Quarter said in The Current State of Rugby:
@taniwharugby said in The Current State of Rugby:
@canefan which would see players start being a bit smaller again if they had less stoppages (water, scrums, fake injuries)
Refs should not be required to determine an injury being legit or not.
So stoppage, player goes off and unless blood/hia can't come back, will stop these time wasting stoppages we are getting now.
100%, if you're so injured play had to stop, you go off immediately and can't come back on. That'd sort the fake injuries out immediately. And to hell with drinks breaks - if they think it's a H&S issue then schedule a short one like they do in cricket, but TBH 40 mins of rugby shouldn't have you dying of thirst.
Not unless you are playing in a hot environment
-
@No-Quarter said in The Current State of Rugby:
@taniwharugby said in The Current State of Rugby:
@canefan which would see players start being a bit smaller again if they had less stoppages (water, scrums, fake injuries)
Refs should not be required to determine an injury being legit or not.
So stoppage, player goes off and unless blood/hia can't come back, will stop these time wasting stoppages we are getting now.
100%, if you're so injured play had to stop, you go off immediately and can't come back on. That'd sort the fake injuries out immediately. And to hell with drinks breaks - if they think it's a H&S issue then schedule a short one like they do in cricket, but TBH 40 mins of rugby shouldn't have you dying of thirst.
Not unless you are playing in a hot environment
@canefan said in The Current State of Rugby:
@No-Quarter said in The Current State of Rugby:
@taniwharugby said in The Current State of Rugby:
@canefan which would see players start being a bit smaller again if they had less stoppages (water, scrums, fake injuries)
Refs should not be required to determine an injury being legit or not.
So stoppage, player goes off and unless blood/hia can't come back, will stop these time wasting stoppages we are getting now.
100%, if you're so injured play had to stop, you go off immediately and can't come back on. That'd sort the fake injuries out immediately. And to hell with drinks breaks - if they think it's a H&S issue then schedule a short one like they do in cricket, but TBH 40 mins of rugby shouldn't have you dying of thirst.
Not unless you are playing in a hot environment
Define hot. It was high 20s at the weekend.
-
@canefan said in The Current State of Rugby:
@No-Quarter said in The Current State of Rugby:
@taniwharugby said in The Current State of Rugby:
@canefan which would see players start being a bit smaller again if they had less stoppages (water, scrums, fake injuries)
Refs should not be required to determine an injury being legit or not.
So stoppage, player goes off and unless blood/hia can't come back, will stop these time wasting stoppages we are getting now.
100%, if you're so injured play had to stop, you go off immediately and can't come back on. That'd sort the fake injuries out immediately. And to hell with drinks breaks - if they think it's a H&S issue then schedule a short one like they do in cricket, but TBH 40 mins of rugby shouldn't have you dying of thirst.
Not unless you are playing in a hot environment
Define hot. It was high 20s at the weekend.
@stodders said in The Current State of Rugby:
@canefan said in The Current State of Rugby:
@No-Quarter said in The Current State of Rugby:
@taniwharugby said in The Current State of Rugby:
@canefan which would see players start being a bit smaller again if they had less stoppages (water, scrums, fake injuries)
Refs should not be required to determine an injury being legit or not.
So stoppage, player goes off and unless blood/hia can't come back, will stop these time wasting stoppages we are getting now.
100%, if you're so injured play had to stop, you go off immediately and can't come back on. That'd sort the fake injuries out immediately. And to hell with drinks breaks - if they think it's a H&S issue then schedule a short one like they do in cricket, but TBH 40 mins of rugby shouldn't have you dying of thirst.
Not unless you are playing in a hot environment
Define hot. It was high 20s at the weekend.
Shit I dunno, I talk in wide brush strokes when I'm Ferning! Like say over 30?
-
@taniwharugby said in The Current State of Rugby:
@canefan which would see players start being a bit smaller again if they had less stoppages (water, scrums, fake injuries)
Refs should not be required to determine an injury being legit or not.
So stoppage, player goes off and unless blood/hia can't come back, will stop these time wasting stoppages we are getting now.
100%, if you're so injured play had to stop, you go off immediately and can't come back on. That'd sort the fake injuries out immediately. And to hell with drinks breaks - if they think it's a H&S issue then schedule a short one like they do in cricket, but TBH 40 mins of rugby shouldn't have you dying of thirst.
@No-Quarter these are elite athletes, they should be able to deal with it 40 mins that has.more than enough stoppages anyway (granted some of those high summer games are different)
Otherwise you wait until you or the opposition score for a drink break, or half/full time.
