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.
@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.
-
@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.
@taniwharugby said in The Current State of Rugby:
@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.
or really tall ones!
oh dude absolutely none of that would ever happen. It's just the shit i like
real rugby heads, you know, the "game they play in heaven" fuckheads, love to crap on about rugby being a constant contest. It becomes less of contest every year IMO. scrums and lineouts are rarely turned over. rucks are less of a contest than ever. mauls are not a contest. Remove a heap of modern rugby's contrivances and just maybe the game opens up again
-
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 jackal
Kind of feel that this is inevitable to reduce risk at the ruck. With no jacklers, there's much less need to smash or grapple players off the ball.
-
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:
mariner4lifes rugby 2.0
no jackal
allow lazy tacklers to get trampled if they don't roll outno kicking from the base of the ruck, there must always be a pass before a kick.
Agree with no jackalling, if the ball on ground it can't be played by hand, and you don't need to trample anyone, just blow over top (as way back when I played), and move players back with soles of boots in backwards motion.
Got to allow kicking from base of ruck, otherwise everyone up in defensive line, just allow to tackle halfback as soon as he touches ball, with hand (or feet), he won't have time to kick, have quick passing halves again.
-
@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 said in The Current State of Rugby:
@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.
I would be happy with it being back to lifting etc, but f*** me there would be some moaning about it being scrappy and everyone doing the shit in lineouts that we all did!
-
@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 said in The Current State of Rugby:
@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.
Lineouts with lifting looks impressive compared to without. I doubt this change will be made
-
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
@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.
Lineouts with lifting looks impressive compared to without. I doubt this change will be made
@Winger said in The Current State of Rugby:
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
@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.
Lineouts with lifting looks impressive compared to without. I doubt this change will be made
oh, well, if it looks better, no worries then.
-
@mariner4life 100% agree with your musings. Carding players is pretty clearly just trying to fix a symptom with no real analysis of the root cause, and it's just fucking up the spectacle for paying fans. I'd really like to see the game sped up so the huge blokes get exposed pretty quickly and become a liability to their teams, that alone would massively reduce the impact of the collisions we are seeing. I know that won't happen though, because it'd favour teams like the ABs and Wallabies, and that's the last thing WR would want to do.
-
@taniwharugby said in The Current State of Rugby:
@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.
or really tall ones!
oh dude absolutely none of that would ever happen. It's just the shit i like
real rugby heads, you know, the "game they play in heaven" fuckheads, love to crap on about rugby being a constant contest. It becomes less of contest every year IMO. scrums and lineouts are rarely turned over. rucks are less of a contest than ever. mauls are not a contest. Remove a heap of modern rugby's contrivances and just maybe the game opens up again
@mariner4life said in The Current State of Rugby:
@taniwharugby said in The Current State of Rugby:
@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.
or really tall ones!
oh dude absolutely none of that would ever happen. It's just the shit i like
real rugby heads, you know, the "game they play in heaven" fuckheads, love to crap on about rugby being a constant contest. It becomes less of contest every year IMO. scrums and lineouts are rarely turned over. rucks are less of a contest than ever. mauls are not a contest. Remove a heap of modern rugby's contrivances and just maybe the game opens up again
The only way any of this ever happens if we suddenly became the best in the world at all the things we hate about rugby (and won) and the NH teams all became the guardians of running rugby (and lost). None of this is happening ever. Ever.
