The Current State of Rugby
-
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
You'll never get enough buy in
If you go to other parts of rugby social media fans from other jurisdictions want more cards, and are more than happy with the current state of affairs.
I'm certain that will change as soon as they're on the receiving end. And then I hope it doesn't.
@antipodean said in The Current State of Rugby:
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
You'll never get enough buy in
If you go to other parts of rugby social media fans from other jurisdictions want more cards, and are more than happy with the current state of affairs.
I'm certain that will change as soon as they're on the receiving end. And then I hope it doesn't.
@mariner4life well if they want more cards the upside is that I will end up watching svns anyway (fuck that is stupid, are "e"s expensive or something?). The number of cards mean that union games (can't calls them "matches" as it implies an even contest) seem to be down to league numbers on the field, so they might as well keep going.
If @antipodean is correct, then until it happens to these other social media fans, rugby union 15s has fallen completely off my list of pleasurable pastimes.
-
Boks to play Portugal in July. This is good news for the smaller countries - hope the other Tier One nations follow suit.
-
@Tim said in The Current State of Rugby:
Love Gatland, but that is muddled, contradictory thinking.
Too much kicking in the game in one breath, and then 'remove the mark' in the next.
If you remove the mark we'll see more not less kicking.
-
I've not really watched any Rugby since the Rugby World Cup. Maybe I'll get back into it when the 6 Nations and Super Rugby roll around, but at the moment I'm not missing it.
@sparky said in The Current State of Rugby:
I've not really watched any Rugby since the Rugby World Cup. Maybe I'll get back into it when the 6 Nations and Super Rugby roll around, but at the moment I'm not missing it.
Must admit at end of WC I thought I was ready for a break. That lasted about a week-10 days and then started back watching Galagher championship etc etc.
I suspect I have a slight rugby problem. -
Don't mind his proposals generally.
- Expanding 50:22 forces space for attack.
- reducing subs increases fatigue
- admitting the goal line drop-out is a fail allows sides to attack the line
Agree with Mike above about removing the mark. Not sure what that gains.
Another change I'd like to see a change to the free kick. Allow fks to be kicked directly to touch on the full and award the lineout where it crosses to touch. Teams often have little option but to reset a scrum when a fk is awarded with resultant time lost. Allowing them to clear and contest a lineout should cut down some scrum resets. IMO.
-
Don't mind his proposals generally.
- Expanding 50:22 forces space for attack.
- reducing subs increases fatigue
- admitting the goal line drop-out is a fail allows sides to attack the line
Agree with Mike above about removing the mark. Not sure what that gains.
Another change I'd like to see a change to the free kick. Allow fks to be kicked directly to touch on the full and award the lineout where it crosses to touch. Teams often have little option but to reset a scrum when a fk is awarded with resultant time lost. Allowing them to clear and contest a lineout should cut down some scrum resets. IMO.
@booboo said in The Current State of Rugby:
Another change I'd like to see a change to the free kick. Allow fks to be kicked directly to touch on the full and award the lineout where it crosses to touch. Teams often have little option but to reset a scrum when a fk is awarded with resultant time lost. Allowing them to clear and contest a lineout should cut down some scrum resets. IMO.
Unless they get the throw in I don't imagine teams would kick to touch very often from a free kick.
-
@booboo said in The Current State of Rugby:
Another change I'd like to see a change to the free kick. Allow fks to be kicked directly to touch on the full and award the lineout where it crosses to touch. Teams often have little option but to reset a scrum when a fk is awarded with resultant time lost. Allowing them to clear and contest a lineout should cut down some scrum resets. IMO.
Unless they get the throw in I don't imagine teams would kick to touch very often from a free kick.
@Crazy-Horse said in The Current State of Rugby:
@booboo said in The Current State of Rugby:
Another change I'd like to see a change to the free kick. Allow fks to be kicked directly to touch on the full and award the lineout where it crosses to touch. Teams often have little option but to reset a scrum when a fk is awarded with resultant time lost. Allowing them to clear and contest a lineout should cut down some scrum resets. IMO.
Unless they get the throw in I don't imagine teams would kick to touch very often from a free kick.
Yeah, thought about that. I reckon plenty of teams would.
- Teams still look to clear from inside their own half: takes you out of the scoring zone.
- Forcing a defensive lineout would often result in getting the ball back in an attacking position (missed touch, or even kicked to touch in a better position than where fk was but now with your throw).
-
@Tim said in The Current State of Rugby:
Love Gatland, but that is muddled, contradictory thinking.
Too much kicking in the game in one breath, and then 'remove the mark' in the next.
If you remove the mark we'll see more not less kicking.
@MiketheSnow said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Tim said in The Current State of Rugby:
Love Gatland, but that is muddled, contradictory thinking.
Too much kicking in the game in one breath, and then 'remove the mark' in the next.
If you remove the mark we'll see more not less kicking.
I thought about removing the mark etc, not a fan, but I can see what he's getting at, like the 50-22 won't it hold defence back? If someone put's up a kick you will need to know you got at least one player back to help your last man as he can't take a mark, so would actually (like the 50-22) mean less players up in front line defence?
-
Seems the Professional Victims from Jaapland have found a way to be picked on by it.
Suddenly I'm a fan of removing the mark.
-
@MiketheSnow said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Tim said in The Current State of Rugby:
Love Gatland, but that is muddled, contradictory thinking.
Too much kicking in the game in one breath, and then 'remove the mark' in the next.
If you remove the mark we'll see more not less kicking.
I thought about removing the mark etc, not a fan, but I can see what he's getting at, like the 50-22 won't it hold defence back? If someone put's up a kick you will need to know you got at least one player back to help your last man as he can't take a mark, so would actually (like the 50-22) mean less players up in front line defence?
@Dan54 said in The Current State of Rugby:
@MiketheSnow said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Tim said in The Current State of Rugby:
Love Gatland, but that is muddled, contradictory thinking.
Too much kicking in the game in one breath, and then 'remove the mark' in the next.
If you remove the mark we'll see more not less kicking.
I thought about removing the mark etc, not a fan, but I can see what he's getting at, like the 50-22 won't it hold defence back? If someone put's up a kick you will need to know you got at least one player back to help your last man as he can't take a mark, so would actually (like the 50-22) mean less players up in front line defence?
Would just mean more kick & hopes from the 9, 10, possibly the 12 for the wingers to contest rather than beating the man by passing and hip swivels IMHO.
-
@Dan54 said in The Current State of Rugby:
@MiketheSnow said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Tim said in The Current State of Rugby:
Love Gatland, but that is muddled, contradictory thinking.
Too much kicking in the game in one breath, and then 'remove the mark' in the next.
If you remove the mark we'll see more not less kicking.
I thought about removing the mark etc, not a fan, but I can see what he's getting at, like the 50-22 won't it hold defence back? If someone put's up a kick you will need to know you got at least one player back to help your last man as he can't take a mark, so would actually (like the 50-22) mean less players up in front line defence?
Would just mean more kick & hopes from the 9, 10, possibly the 12 for the wingers to contest rather than beating the man by passing and hip swivels IMHO.
@MiketheSnow said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Dan54 said in The Current State of Rugby:
@MiketheSnow said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Tim said in The Current State of Rugby:
Love Gatland, but that is muddled, contradictory thinking.
Too much kicking in the game in one breath, and then 'remove the mark' in the next.
If you remove the mark we'll see more not less kicking.
I thought about removing the mark etc, not a fan, but I can see what he's getting at, like the 50-22 won't it hold defence back? If someone put's up a kick you will need to know you got at least one player back to help your last man as he can't take a mark, so would actually (like the 50-22) mean less players up in front line defence?
Would just mean more kick & hopes from the 9, 10, possibly the 12 for the wingers to contest rather than beating the man by passing and hip swivels IMHO.
Yep I wondering about that too Mike, but I wonder did the 50-22 lead to more kicking (I thought it would), it did lead to more room in attack as I think we are finding wings staying deeper, and this could well be what he thinking. As I say I not convinced or otherwise, just trying to look at both sides really
I one of these grumpy old men who doesn't really like any laws/rules being changed, so perhaps I am trying to open my mind a bit more. :beaming_face_with_smiling_eyes: -
Don't mind his proposals generally.
- Expanding 50:22 forces space for attack.
- reducing subs increases fatigue
- admitting the goal line drop-out is a fail allows sides to attack the line
Agree with Mike above about removing the mark. Not sure what that gains.
Another change I'd like to see a change to the free kick. Allow fks to be kicked directly to touch on the full and award the lineout where it crosses to touch. Teams often have little option but to reset a scrum when a fk is awarded with resultant time lost. Allowing them to clear and contest a lineout should cut down some scrum resets. IMO.
@booboo said in The Current State of Rugby:
Don't mind his proposals generally.
- Expanding 50:22 forces space for attack.
- reducing subs increases fatigue
- admitting the goal line drop-out is a fail allows sides to attack the line
Agree with Mike above about removing the mark. Not sure what that gains.
Another change I'd like to see a change to the free kick. Allow fks to be kicked directly to touch on the full and award the lineout where it crosses to touch. Teams often have little option but to reset a scrum when a fk is awarded with resultant time lost. Allowing them to clear and contest a lineout should cut down some scrum resets. IMO.
Attaboy
-
@booboo said in The Current State of Rugby:
Don't mind his proposals generally.
- Expanding 50:22 forces space for attack.
- reducing subs increases fatigue
- admitting the goal line drop-out is a fail allows sides to attack the line
Agree with Mike above about removing the mark. Not sure what that gains.
Another change I'd like to see a change to the free kick. Allow fks to be kicked directly to touch on the full and award the lineout where it crosses to touch. Teams often have little option but to reset a scrum when a fk is awarded with resultant time lost. Allowing them to clear and contest a lineout should cut down some scrum resets. IMO.
Attaboy
@Bones said in The Current State of Rugby:
@booboo said in The Current State of Rugby:
Don't mind his proposals generally.
- Expanding 50:22 forces space for attack.
- reducing subs increases fatigue
- admitting the goal line drop-out is a fail allows sides to attack the line
Agree with Mike above about removing the mark. Not sure what that gains.
Another change I'd like to see a change to the free kick. Allow fks to be kicked directly to touch on the full and award the lineout where it crosses to touch. Teams often have little option but to reset a scrum when a fk is awarded with resultant time lost. Allowing them to clear and contest a lineout should cut down some scrum resets. IMO.
Attaboy
Yeah, there are some pedantic pricks on here, amongst the deliberately obtuse.
-
@Bones said in The Current State of Rugby:
@booboo said in The Current State of Rugby:
Don't mind his proposals generally.
- Expanding 50:22 forces space for attack.
- reducing subs increases fatigue
- admitting the goal line drop-out is a fail allows sides to attack the line
Agree with Mike above about removing the mark. Not sure what that gains.
Another change I'd like to see a change to the free kick. Allow fks to be kicked directly to touch on the full and award the lineout where it crosses to touch. Teams often have little option but to reset a scrum when a fk is awarded with resultant time lost. Allowing them to clear and contest a lineout should cut down some scrum resets. IMO.
Attaboy
Yeah, there are some pedantic pricks on here, amongst the deliberately obtuse.
-
@MiketheSnow said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Dan54 said in The Current State of Rugby:
@MiketheSnow said in The Current State of Rugby:
@Tim said in The Current State of Rugby:
Love Gatland, but that is muddled, contradictory thinking.
Too much kicking in the game in one breath, and then 'remove the mark' in the next.
If you remove the mark we'll see more not less kicking.
I thought about removing the mark etc, not a fan, but I can see what he's getting at, like the 50-22 won't it hold defence back? If someone put's up a kick you will need to know you got at least one player back to help your last man as he can't take a mark, so would actually (like the 50-22) mean less players up in front line defence?
Would just mean more kick & hopes from the 9, 10, possibly the 12 for the wingers to contest rather than beating the man by passing and hip swivels IMHO.
Yep I wondering about that too Mike, but I wonder did the 50-22 lead to more kicking (I thought it would), it did lead to more room in attack as I think we are finding wings staying deeper, and this could well be what he thinking. As I say I not convinced or otherwise, just trying to look at both sides really
I one of these grumpy old men who doesn't really like any laws/rules being changed, so perhaps I am trying to open my mind a bit more. :beaming_face_with_smiling_eyes:
