The Current State of Rugby
-
@Dan54 said in The Current State of Rugby:
@antipodean said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Machpants said in The Current State of Rugby:
Pretty shitty from mailer, and when your mum's in hospital with cancer, I get it.
Jake Heenan: ‘Hey, brother, you’re better than that, hey?’
Joe Marler: ‘I’m not your brother. I’m clearly not your brother am I.’
Heenan: ‘You’re better than that mate’
Marler: ‘There’s no way I’m from the same mother as you. Your mother is a ****ing whore.
[players were audibly taken aback by comments. Heenan says something to the referee Karl Dickson about what Marler which sounds like ‘He said my mum was a whore to my face’]
Marler [again]: ‘Your mother’s a whore’
At this point the scuffle breaks out with some inaudible exchanges.
Referee Karl Dickson: ‘Who stared that?’
Max Lahiff: ‘Marler called his mother a whore’.
Players continue to clash.
Heenan: ‘My mum’s in hospital with cancer’
Referee Dickson: ‘Alex just take him back. Take him back. I know there was an allegation of what was said. I actually didn’t hear what was said. If it was really clear on the comms afterwards, it will be dealt with’.
Dickson's integrity should be questioned here. How could he not have heard it when he's right beside the scrum?
I think thats a bit rough, hell when I was locking a scrum I didn't a;ways hear sledges, and Dickson also got an ear piece in. I doubt he was listening for sledges,
If Heenan and other players can hear it, Dickson would've and it's disingenuous to pretend otherwise.
@antipodean Yep mate, well I knew a couple of refs who told me they heard almost nothing when they reffed, one of them was one who did prem/senior games, and said he had ear piece in so he could hear ARs etc, and just blocked out almost all other stuff, it was in discussion about crowd abuse etc. You could be right, but I don't he had any reason to lie.
-
@antipodean Yep mate, well I knew a couple of refs who told me they heard almost nothing when they reffed, one of them was one who did prem/senior games, and said he had ear piece in so he could hear ARs etc, and just blocked out almost all other stuff, it was in discussion about crowd abuse etc. You could be right, but I don't he had any reason to lie.
@Dan54 said in The Current State of Rugby:
@antipodean Yep mate, well I knew a couple of refs who told me they heard almost nothing when they reffed, one of them was one who did prem/senior games, and said he had ear piece in so he could hear ARs etc, and just blocked out almost all other stuff, it was in discussion about crowd abuse etc. You could be right, but I don't he had any reason to lie.
I can understand that. At the top level you’d have to shut out a lot to be concentrating on what was happening and calculating happenings against laws. Eg running through thought processes.
The main reason refs tell players to shut up isn’t because of what they’re saying but because of the distraction form thinking clearly. -
-
-
@MiketheSnow for what?
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
@MiketheSnow for what?
Dropping the shoulder into his head
-
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
@MiketheSnow for what?
Dropping the shoulder into his head
@MiketheSnow said in The Current State of Rugby:
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
@MiketheSnow for what?
Dropping the shoulder into his head
Lol what?? The guy fell over into tuilagi who was at nearly knee height
I watched this on reddit a few times this morning
That's a rugby incident. No fault anywhere
-
@MiketheSnow said in The Current State of Rugby:
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
@MiketheSnow for what?
Dropping the shoulder into his head
Lol what?? The guy fell over into tuilagi who was at nearly knee height
I watched this on reddit a few times this morning
That's a rugby incident. No fault anywhere
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
@MiketheSnow said in The Current State of Rugby:
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
@MiketheSnow for what?
Dropping the shoulder into his head
Lol what?? The guy fell over into tuilagi who was at nearly knee height
I watched this on reddit a few times this morning
That's a rugby incident. No fault anywhere
Tuilagi wasn't even looking from like 3 miles out and just launching a shoulder to try and maim in some way. If he'd hit Tupaea in the knee we'd all be having a sook.
-
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
@MiketheSnow said in The Current State of Rugby:
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
@MiketheSnow for what?
Dropping the shoulder into his head
Lol what?? The guy fell over into tuilagi who was at nearly knee height
I watched this on reddit a few times this morning
That's a rugby incident. No fault anywhere
Tuilagi wasn't even looking from like 3 miles out and just launching a shoulder to try and maim in some way. If he'd hit Tupaea in the knee we'd all be having a sook.
@Bones said in The Current State of Rugby:
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
@MiketheSnow said in The Current State of Rugby:
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
@MiketheSnow for what?
Dropping the shoulder into his head
Lol what?? The guy fell over into tuilagi who was at nearly knee height
I watched this on reddit a few times this morning
That's a rugby incident. No fault anywhere
Tuilagi wasn't even looking from like 3 miles out and just launching a shoulder to try and maim in some way. If he'd hit Tupaea in the knee we'd all be having a sook.
Yep. It is the lack of control and care flying in with a shoulder that is the bad thing here. Forget body heights and intent. That is plain recklessness.
-
@Bones said in The Current State of Rugby:
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
@MiketheSnow said in The Current State of Rugby:
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
@MiketheSnow for what?
Dropping the shoulder into his head
Lol what?? The guy fell over into tuilagi who was at nearly knee height
I watched this on reddit a few times this morning
That's a rugby incident. No fault anywhere
Tuilagi wasn't even looking from like 3 miles out and just launching a shoulder to try and maim in some way. If he'd hit Tupaea in the knee we'd all be having a sook.
Yep. It is the lack of control and care flying in with a shoulder that is the bad thing here. Forget body heights and intent. That is plain recklessness.
@Crucial said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Bones said in The Current State of Rugby:
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
@MiketheSnow said in The Current State of Rugby:
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
@MiketheSnow for what?
Dropping the shoulder into his head
Lol what?? The guy fell over into tuilagi who was at nearly knee height
I watched this on reddit a few times this morning
That's a rugby incident. No fault anywhere
Tuilagi wasn't even looking from like 3 miles out and just launching a shoulder to try and maim in some way. If he'd hit Tupaea in the knee we'd all be having a sook.
Yep. It is the lack of control and care flying in with a shoulder that is the bad thing here. Forget body heights and intent. That is plain recklessness.
lol what? all tackles use shoulders. Tuilagi was no more reckless than the guy that gets clobbered who runs from depth, jumps in to a cluttered zone, loses the ball and falls over trying to regain it.
I'm starting to think some of you guys think that players at the top level see everything in slow motion and have all the time in the world to make adjustments for every variable that comes to pass.
I saw a lot of incidents over the past week or so. Some carded, some not. I am starting to believe that it is impossible to legislate head contact out of rugby without fundamental changes to laws and interpretations.
The ruck is the most obvious example. I saw two reds for cleanouts in Japan. Cruden's was a red all day, and really dumb. But, if you can find it, have a look at the video, and the guy he goes over. Cruden is deadset 5 feet tall. And he goes over a guy with barely a jump. How is that possible if that player in the ruck is on his feet? The interpretation of what is considered on your feet and supporting your body weight has completely got lost.De Allende got marched for a basic cleanout. Yes arrived at speed, but it was on a line break. Didn't launch uncontrolled, corrected his feet, and even bound as he hit. There is no where for him to clean out when the defending player has his head over that ball. So red. If you want that rugby action taken out, you need to remove the ability to pick the ball up with your hands, otherwise maintaining possession becomes almost impossible, when every single player now has to be good at the breakdown.
Removing hands at the tackle area, and being far harsher on body height are fundamental changes to rugby that would do far more to reduce head contact than just carding as many people as you can find (or not carding them aye Farrell?)
-
@Crucial said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Bones said in The Current State of Rugby:
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
@MiketheSnow said in The Current State of Rugby:
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
@MiketheSnow for what?
Dropping the shoulder into his head
Lol what?? The guy fell over into tuilagi who was at nearly knee height
I watched this on reddit a few times this morning
That's a rugby incident. No fault anywhere
Tuilagi wasn't even looking from like 3 miles out and just launching a shoulder to try and maim in some way. If he'd hit Tupaea in the knee we'd all be having a sook.
Yep. It is the lack of control and care flying in with a shoulder that is the bad thing here. Forget body heights and intent. That is plain recklessness.
lol what? all tackles use shoulders. Tuilagi was no more reckless than the guy that gets clobbered who runs from depth, jumps in to a cluttered zone, loses the ball and falls over trying to regain it.
I'm starting to think some of you guys think that players at the top level see everything in slow motion and have all the time in the world to make adjustments for every variable that comes to pass.
I saw a lot of incidents over the past week or so. Some carded, some not. I am starting to believe that it is impossible to legislate head contact out of rugby without fundamental changes to laws and interpretations.
The ruck is the most obvious example. I saw two reds for cleanouts in Japan. Cruden's was a red all day, and really dumb. But, if you can find it, have a look at the video, and the guy he goes over. Cruden is deadset 5 feet tall. And he goes over a guy with barely a jump. How is that possible if that player in the ruck is on his feet? The interpretation of what is considered on your feet and supporting your body weight has completely got lost.De Allende got marched for a basic cleanout. Yes arrived at speed, but it was on a line break. Didn't launch uncontrolled, corrected his feet, and even bound as he hit. There is no where for him to clean out when the defending player has his head over that ball. So red. If you want that rugby action taken out, you need to remove the ability to pick the ball up with your hands, otherwise maintaining possession becomes almost impossible, when every single player now has to be good at the breakdown.
Removing hands at the tackle area, and being far harsher on body height are fundamental changes to rugby that would do far more to reduce head contact than just carding as many people as you can find (or not carding them aye Farrell?)
@mariner4life I don’t disagree with the latter part of your post. For me the best way to remove impact danger at breakdowns is to enforce the binding law properly. That is, bind in order to participate. Not as you make impact or just after. Turn it into a wrestling contest between players on their feet. I agree about rulings being harsher about what constitutes being on feet.
That also eliminates players flying in from depth to the area without taking a moment to set.
What Tuilagi did in that clip was to have his arm tucked until after impact (this isn’t league) and race into the impact zone with no chance of correction if a player’s head also entered that area. To me, that increases risk to an unacceptable level. -
@mariner4life I don’t disagree with the latter part of your post. For me the best way to remove impact danger at breakdowns is to enforce the binding law properly. That is, bind in order to participate. Not as you make impact or just after. Turn it into a wrestling contest between players on their feet. I agree about rulings being harsher about what constitutes being on feet.
That also eliminates players flying in from depth to the area without taking a moment to set.
What Tuilagi did in that clip was to have his arm tucked until after impact (this isn’t league) and race into the impact zone with no chance of correction if a player’s head also entered that area. To me, that increases risk to an unacceptable level.@Crucial split seconds required to "bind and then push" will mean nearly every line break results in a turnover if the player is still allowed to play the ball with their hands. Players at that level are so fucking quick on the ball, that any delay will result in losing the ball or conceding the penalty. As soon as that becomes apparent, coaches will want the ball out of their hands.
I have no idea what that looks like in practice though.
Rugby is a game played head first, with body height at a premium. Maybe there is no way to completely eradicate head contact without fundamental change (and enormous fan blowback)
-
@Crucial split seconds required to "bind and then push" will mean nearly every line break results in a turnover if the player is still allowed to play the ball with their hands. Players at that level are so fucking quick on the ball, that any delay will result in losing the ball or conceding the penalty. As soon as that becomes apparent, coaches will want the ball out of their hands.
I have no idea what that looks like in practice though.
Rugby is a game played head first, with body height at a premium. Maybe there is no way to completely eradicate head contact without fundamental change (and enormous fan blowback)
@mariner4life I have no issue with getting rid of the jackal situation. Rucks were meant to be like unstructured scrums
As has been previously mentioned, the removal of the use of feet at a ruck has created a far more dangerous situation than a couple of scratches. -
mariner4lifes rugby 2.0
no jackal
allow lazy tacklers to get trampled if they don't roll out
no body height allowances of shoulders below hips. no hands on the ground, or the tackled player.
The definition of offside changes to "clearly onside"
scrum shot clock. If the ball is available, use it. Getting smashed in a scrum is not a penalty offense (scrums are a restart)
lineout shot clock. no lifting allowed.
no kicking from the base of the ruck, there must always be a pass before a kick.
Marks can be taken anywhere on the field.there's probably heaps more.
-
mariner4lifes rugby 2.0
no jackal
allow lazy tacklers to get trampled if they don't roll out
no body height allowances of shoulders below hips. no hands on the ground, or the tackled player.
The definition of offside changes to "clearly onside"
scrum shot clock. If the ball is available, use it. Getting smashed in a scrum is not a penalty offense (scrums are a restart)
lineout shot clock. no lifting allowed.
no kicking from the base of the ruck, there must always be a pass before a kick.
Marks can be taken anywhere on the field.there's probably heaps more.
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
no kicking from the base of the ruck, there must always be a pass before a kick.
I’d prefer just to have a strict use it law. The refs take ages to say the ball is available and the time allowed is too much. Once the ball is playable something should happen quickly.. if your team mates aren’t in position yet, tough shit
When they first added the use it law in the NPC it worked well. It’s been so watered down since then
-
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
no kicking from the base of the ruck, there must always be a pass before a kick.
I’d prefer just to have a strict use it law. The refs take ages to say the ball is available and the time allowed is too much. Once the ball is playable something should happen quickly.. if your team mates aren’t in position yet, tough shit
When they first added the use it law in the NPC it worked well. It’s been so watered down since then
@Duluth don't hate it, my way gives one less thing for the ref to rely on interpretation for.
-
mariner4lifes rugby 2.0
no jackal
allow lazy tacklers to get trampled if they don't roll out
no body height allowances of shoulders below hips. no hands on the ground, or the tackled player.
The definition of offside changes to "clearly onside"
scrum shot clock. If the ball is available, use it. Getting smashed in a scrum is not a penalty offense (scrums are a restart)
lineout shot clock. no lifting allowed.
no kicking from the base of the ruck, there must always be a pass before a kick.
Marks can be taken anywhere on the field.there's probably heaps more.
@mariner4life I'd add 1 stoppage in a maul, only forwards is moving, any other direction is your 1 stoppage after the initial drop and set, and just ref both sides for the same rules (entry, pulling down)
I'd add a strict full arm bind at ruck before any cleanout attempt, will remove alot of the flying in from 10 yards to remove a guy who isnt ever stopping you from getting to the ball, but technically legal right now.
I think if you removed box kicks, it would reduce many of the in-air collisions too, but also agree with @Duluth re the back of the rucks taking an age to set, move the ball into a nice spot to pass/kick while allowing a line of your players to block the opposition.
-
@mariner4life I'd add 1 stoppage in a maul, only forwards is moving, any other direction is your 1 stoppage after the initial drop and set, and just ref both sides for the same rules (entry, pulling down)
I'd add a strict full arm bind at ruck before any cleanout attempt, will remove alot of the flying in from 10 yards to remove a guy who isnt ever stopping you from getting to the ball, but technically legal right now.
I think if you removed box kicks, it would reduce many of the in-air collisions too, but also agree with @Duluth re the back of the rucks taking an age to set, move the ball into a nice spot to pass/kick while allowing a line of your players to block the opposition.
@taniwharugby i reckon the maul becomes way less of a weapon if there is no lineout lifting, and that facet goes back to a 50/50 contest.
-
@taniwharugby i reckon the maul becomes way less of a weapon if there is no lineout lifting, and that facet goes back to a 50/50 contest.
@mariner4life ah didnt see that...that'd be great, but I dont see that happening (in fact, cant see most of that happening, WR seems to hate the game...)
Would also see a return to smaller more mobile athletic locks I reckon.
