Rugby laws discussion

[bunburyist]

After some truly dire games so far this Autumn, it seems pretty clear to me that the rugby bods that be need to sort the game rapidly.

As ever, the main focus is the breakdown, and the slowing down of the ball. This article from the Times recently:

---------------------------------

Rugby union as entertainment? Traditionalists hold a deep-seated mistrust of their game crossing the line between sport and entertainment. Though, unfortunately for them, the professionalising of the game, by definition, requires rugby to be a public entertainment. There is no getting away from it.

This has led to the current media debate. The grey, largely unentertaining series of autumn internationals in Europe has us all rushing for the lawbook, which seems to change every week anyway, to see how it can be further tinkered with to produce more entertainment. And those in the southern hemisphere do not know whether to laugh or cry.

They, in the south, have been calling for change for years. Their game has sought to accentuate the product as an entertainment – and they have been criticised for it up here.

So it is, of course, with a big told-you-so that they have been enjoying watching the north come to terms with the idea that we might have got it wrong.

That, at least, was the tone of two conversations last week, with Steve Tew, the chief executive of the New Zealand RFU, and with John O’Neill, his Aussie equivalent.

This is Tew: “We have been telling our colleagues from the north for several years that the game needs improvement, that it is becoming less of an attraction as an entertainment and therefore the whole commercial viability of it is under threat. The popularity of the game at home is under threat. We feel we tend to see those things first. It’s not until it starts to happen up here in the North that we’re taken seriously.

“That’s why we put a lot of energy and time into the ELV exercise and why we were extremely unhappy with our friends from the north who promised to trial them, didn’t and then stood against them. And that will come home to roost.

“We in the south do not believe that a game dominated by kick-and-chase and goalkicking is the way. Everyone is doing it, everyone is so paranoid because they have become so paranoid about making a mistake because the breakdown is such a hit-and-miss area.

“We are frustrated with the process we have to go through to make change. I’m not blaming anyone, but we are going to have to find ways of making the game more entertaining.”

And this is O’Neill, who referred to rugby’s “steady decline in interest and popularity in Australia since 2004” and flashed up one stat, that the Waratahs gate, which averaged 35,000 six years ago is now down to 20,000. O’Neill did acknowledge that crowd sizes and general popularity are a reflection of a number of factors, a significant one being a successful national team, a commodity on which his nation have for some time, come up slightly short.

“But the choice of sitting there and doing nothing is not an option,” he said. “The message we have been trying to get through to coaches, players and refs is to think more about entertainment rather than turn it into a dirge.

"Between now and 2011, I can’t see any changes but I am always conscious of what Syd Millar, [the former chairman of the IRB], said after the 2007 World Cup: the game had become boring, defence was dominating attack, we needed to create more time and space and help the referee. Two years later, nothing’s changed. England-Argentina was one of the worst games of rugby I have ever seen – but it was reminiscent of the 2007 World Cup final and semis."

Should rugby be next to dig deep?

When Wigan started paying back their fans after the 9-1er at Spurs on Sunday, they entered a similar debate. What is professional sport for? Who is accountable to whom?

Wigan refunded their fans because they let them down. The very act of refunding suggests that those who buy a ticket have entered an agreement whereby they have a right to expect something in return – be it three points or a close game. But in football, you would not hear of anyone’s right to be entertained, the relationship between fans and their team goes deeper.

And if rugby is about entertainment, at what stage should Twickenham be looking at refunds?

---------------------------------

Is it the breakdown? Is it the fact that players have now gotten so big and fast it's an inevitable product of the game (most back rowers now would out-gas wingers of 20 yrs ago)? The Lions in South Africa was the exception for me in several years of decidedly average rugby. I love going to the pub to watch England play Australia and France etc., but the quality has to be there.

Thoughts?

[bunburyist]

+ some food for thought re player size:

article

In particular note the 'hours lost to injuries' comparison with other sports. Double the amount seen in US football, itself a pretty brutal game.

Not much you can do about player size though, apart from extending the game from 80 to 90 minutes and limit substitutions maybe? That might force players to lose some bulk.

Still, I think the key is the breakdown law, yet the ELVs did nothing to help.

[ARRV]

+ some food for thought re player size:

article

In particular note the 'hours lost to injuries' comparison with other sports. Double the amount seen in US football, itself a pretty brutal game.

Not much you can do about player size though, apart from extending the game from 80 to 90 minutes and limit substitutions maybe? That might force players to lose some bulk.

Still, I think the key is the breakdown law, yet the ELVs did nothing to help.

From memory the ELVs provided for short arm penalties for everything other than foul play and maybe off side? I cannot see the harm in that. Would generally speed up the game which may make players smaller - but the variety in size for me is one of the positives - otherwise play league where everyone is basically built the same.

The benefit of making all breakdown penalites short arm is that the awarding of penalties in that facet of the game is so arbitrary that is is entirely unfair for teams to achieve points from such subjetive rulings from a ref.

Also perhaps make if more of a free for all at the breakdown so it is easier to ref - ie allow anything except that you have to enter from behind your last man's feet - rather than the side and then let everyone have a crack - ie allow holding/ playing the ball etc - as long as peple aren't coming in from the side or wrong side all together then go for it (and bring back rucking)

Other options include making penalty goals and field goals worth 2 points or less that certainly makes teams go for tries.

[Ken Gargett]

first thought, without even reading it, is yes, changes desparately overdue. need to sit down and give this some thought when have a chance.

out of interest, do you recall who wrote it?

[bunburyist]

arrv what do you mean by short arm penalties, is that a SH term? Only problem with allowing a free for all at the breakdown is defending players tend to hold, and seeing as they're the first one's there it almost always results in slow ball.

The solution was to prevent any sort of holding on, so now the attacking player as well (depending on referee interpretation, but if done by the book) must immediately release. Problem is, as above the first player there is by default usually the tackler, so if the attacking player must immediately release chances are there will be a turnover. Hence why most teams now reduce the amount of 'risky' ball the take up, instead preferring to punt and hope for the knock-on or territory.

The atricle was by Owen Slot, a sport writer for the times or telegraph IIRC.

[Ken Gargett]

arrv what do you mean by short arm penalties, is that a SH term? Only problem with allowing a free for all at the breakdown is defending players tend to hold, and seeing as they're the first one's there it almost always results in slow ball.

The solution was to prevent any sort of holding on, so now the attacking player as well (depending on referee interpretation, but if done by the book) must immediately release. Problem is, as above the first player there is by default usually the tackler, so if the attacking player must immediately release chances are there will be a turnover. Hence why most teams now reduce the amount of 'risky' ball the take up, instead preferring to punt and hope for the knock-on or territory.

The atricle was by Owen Slot, a sport writer for the times or telegraph IIRC.

short arm are the penalties that are not full penalties - so can't kick for goal and if you kick out, other side gets throw in.

have seen a bit of slot - still have not got to the article but will. there are two rugby writers i think are close to clueless. stephen jones is one, spiro zavros from the sydney morning herald the other. though stephen jones actually was more than fair in his reporting of the eng v wallabies recently, and that is something i never thought i would say. will get back to you.

[bunburyist]

ah right, not heard that term before - most often called free kicks in NH.

Stephen Jones....if he didn't spend so much time trying to wind up the saffers and the chokers he'd be ok. My favourite guy for analysis is Stuart Barnes, he has a more technical eye than guys like Jones. Will look up some stuff from Zavros.

[ARRV]

Sorry short arm = free kick.

[Ken Gargett]

ah right, not heard that term before - most often called free kicks in NH.

Stephen Jones....if he didn't spend so much time trying to wind up the saffers and the chokers he'd be ok. My favourite guy for analysis is Stuart Barnes, he has a more technical eye than guys like Jones. Will look up some stuff from Zavros.

like most of what barnes has to say. and always thought he was a bit hard done by, by the english selectors who would opt for the one-trick-pony that was rob andrew. not a bad boot but he'd have struggled to get out of third grade here.

all of this must be getting to me. had a dream the other night that michael lynagh had returned to the wallabies. young players and spectators who had not had the privelege of watching him play were in awe. and the wallabies were winning again.

and then i woke up. it is a cruel world.

you'd want a lot of spare time on your hands if you can waste it on spiro. he is basically one of far too many aussies who think mark ella could walk on water and that if he wanted to, he could solve world hunger, the middle east and the economy before running off to win a world cup - which he never did. unfortunately, one gets the impression that he and his ilk have also convinced ella of that. very talented off the cuff attacking player, brilliant support runner, average boot (not what you want in your 5/8, especially from the old days) and while defensively not bad, his defensive positioning was a squillion levels below that of his attack.

[ARRV]

like most of what barnes has to say. and always thought he was a bit hard done by, by the english selectors who would opt for the one-trick-pony that was rob andrew. not a bad boot but he'd have struggled to get out of third grade here.

all of this must be getting to me. had a dream the other night that michael lynagh had returned to the wallabies. young players and spectators who had not had the privelege of watching him play were in awe. and the wallabies were winning again.

and then i woke up. it is a cruel world.

you'd want a lot of spare time on your hands if you can waste it on spiro. he is basically one of far too many aussies who think mark ella could walk on water and that if he wanted to, he could solve world hunger, the middle east and the economy before running off to win a world cup - which he never did. unfortunately, one gets the impression that he and his ilk have also convinced ella of that. very talented off the cuff attacking player, brilliant support runner, average boot (not what you want in your 5/8, especially from the old days) and while defensively not bad, his defensive positioning was a squillion levels below that of his attack.

Probably a touch hard on Ella.

The issue is that these days defences are so well organised that even someone like Ella surely would have struggled to consistently weave his magic. Forwards don't commit to breakdowns so more players generally in the defensive line.

As for rule changes - hard to say really - I think the free kicks / short arms for everything other than off-side and foul play. 2 points for penalty goal. 1 point for field goal. I would alos bring back the rule that you could pass back into your 22 and kick for touch on the full - at the moment because this is not allowed teams are simply kicking high balls or box kicks aimed just outside the 22 - allow the other side to pass back and boot it then teams might think again about wasting possession. Of course at the moment what happens is that the team who collects the ball outside the 22 usually responds with a return high ball and the same continues ad nauseum until there is a mistake. Boring.

At least if a team kicks for the line there can be a contest at the lineout.

Maybe increase the offside line for backs at scrums - to 15m same as for lineouts? Creates more space.

[bunburyist]

Here's a bit more, this time from Mike Cleary from the Telegraph:

England have not been the only side struggling to score tries. The malaise is widespread. The RFU is to take up the cudgels at the annual gathering of the International Rugby Board in Dublin on Tuesday. Not only does Andrew have misgivings about the type of rugby being generated, he also has grave concerns that the pile-up at the breakdown is causing more injuries.

"The injury rate in the senior England squads has risen from 20-25 per cent to 40 per cent and that's unsustainable for the game,'' said Andrew. "We haven't got the scientific stats yet but anecdotally players and coaches in the Premiership feel that the increased collision at the breakdown as teams try to clear out the defender is contributing to the rising rate of injury.''

The fact that the try count in the autumn series has dropped from an average of seven tries per match in 2007 to 2.86 this season, and in domestic competition from 4.12 last season to 2.63 this season, has alarmed many observers.

"We are going to lobby the IRB very strongly,'' said Andrew. "We want them to review the interpretation of law at the breakdown. This is an issue for the game, not just for England. The pendulum has swung too far back in favour of the defence.''

And if anyone thought things might improve, Andrew had this warning. "Players will get better skills, defensively. Unless something is done, things are going to get worse, not better."

Didn't realsie the try count has fallen so much, that really is bad. Rob Andrew is right though, the laws currently favour the defence too much. I'd say it all centres around the breakdown balance:

- quick ball, and you get as arrv says, too many of the tight five popping up in the backline getting in the way

- slow ball, and you get a dull game

So somewhere in the middle makes sense for me. Allowing the attacking side to hold on to the ball for say two seconds (one thousand, two thousand...), thus giving the attacking side the edge but still needing to arrive in numbers to clear out.

Couple this with a shake up of the pts system. Penalties to be worth only 1 point. Drop goals worth 2.

To then counter the inevitable increase in infringements as defendser commit professional fouls knowing penalties won't really hurt in terms of points, have say a sin-bin rule whereby 3 penalties in a row whilst the opposition maintains possession = yellow card. Start with the no 8, then blindside, then openside.

Rugby isn't like football where sending players off can ruin a game. 11->10 men on a pitch is a big difference, esp considering the goalie is static. 15->14 on a rugby pitch doesn't make the game unwinable, but it does give the other side the edge.

Perhaps also you could have a system....bit complex admitedly....whereby each team has say a 10 penalty allowance in a game. For every subsequent penalty, opposition get 1 pt.

There's nothing worse than seeming a team graft it's way 80yrds up field, only for the opposition to kill the ball and usually just give up 3pts....providing the kick is even made. All sports are generally benefited by giving the attack the benefit of the doubt.

[frenchkiwi]

i was looking this up the other day, wondering what the heck has happened to the Laws of the game for this 2010 season.

As per last year the "cosmetic" ELVs ie not the crucial ones (free kicks instead of penalties in most cases, semi-"freeforall" at breakdown, right to pull down mauls, offside line at tackle not ruck) have been adopted by IRB. So quick throw ins at an angle, no gain if punting it out of your 22 when you've taken the ball back, are now permanent global laws - and that's about it.

Apart from that, it's back to same old rules from a few years back. Funny that English RFU is now asking for changes at ruck when they led the opposition to ELVs they never even trialled.

The new thing for 2010 (so far only for Super 14, if only the IRB could enforce consistency at international level!!!) is not a new set of Laws but a new emphasis for Interpretations - get stricter and enforce existing tackle/ruck laws to the letter, particularly the long-neglected tackler must get to his feet AND Release before contesting ball. (also strict on kick chasers straying offside, not retiring etc)

The hope is that will swing momentum back in favour of attacking teams at ruck time, so they will be happier to run the ball from behind their own advantage line rather than Hoof it aimlessly downfield. Here's hoping.

[note: seemed to work ok in Round 1 S14, lots penalties as teams adapt but games had more flow/running]

[asmith]

I'm sure there were some very vailid points in there, but there was way to much to read.

[Ken Gargett]

i was looking this up the other day, wondering what the heck has happened to the Laws of the game for this 2010 season.

you and everyone watching that gibbering mouthbreathing moron that reffed the interstate game last week.

[ARRV]

you and everyone watching that gibbering mouthbreathing moron that reffed the interstate game last week.

Still too early?

[frenchkiwi]

you and everyone watching that gibbering mouthbreathing moron that reffed the interstate game last week.

you trying to say that Qsland shd have won last week? ;-)

from what i saw (highlights) their forwards seemed to put in a decent effort. Barnes was never stretchered off the field though so maybe a lack of commitment to the jersey there...

[KurtE]

c'mon blokes AFL is far superior, that is what should be being discussed here.

[Ken Gargett]

you trying to say that Qsland shd have won last week? ;-)

from what i saw (highlights) their forwards seemed to put in a decent effort. Barnes was never stretchered off the field though so maybe a lack of commitment to the jersey there...

it will always be too early (re the previous post), as long as there is life on this planet.

forwards played well, as did most of the backs. and yes, we should have won comfortably.

i have a theory that some of the lesser refs will go into a game with the idea that one side or other is favourite to win or can't do something or other and they ref accordingly. if the underdog starts getting on top, they start to panic and wonder if it is them and make decisions so things fall into line. we saw it for several years with the aussie scrum - we were dire for a while but quite a few of the refs couldn't get past that and when the scrum was much improved - one of the better front rows in the world today - they were still being slaughtered by refs when anything went wrong as they assumed it must be us. only when the scrum completely dismantled england a couple of years ago did some of these dills finally work it out.

nsw was hot fave last week and i think that the braindead dimwit with the whistle played accordingly - it is a kinder opinion than that money was involved or that he really is the worst ref in history - though i know some of the players have a view that he is one of the most incompetent around -and that won't help things. i assure you that it is not a national thing as as our alleged top whistleblower is undoubtedly dismal.

[frenchkiwi]

it will always be too early (re the previous post), as long as there is life on this planet.

forwards played well, as did most of the backs. and yes, we should have won comfortably.

i have a theory that some of the lesser refs will go into a game with the idea that one side or other is favourite to win or can't do something or other and they ref accordingly. if the underdog starts getting on top, they start to panic and wonder if it is them and make decisions so things fall into line. we saw it for several years with the aussie scrum - we were dire for a while but quite a few of the refs couldn't get past that and when the scrum was much improved - one of the better front rows in the world today - they were still being slaughtered by refs when anything went wrong as they assumed it must be us. only when the scrum completely dismantled england a couple of years ago did some of these dills finally work it out.

nsw was hot fave last week and i think that the braindead dimwit with the whistle played accordingly - it is a kinder opinion than that money was involved or that he really is the worst ref in history - though i know some of the players have a view that he is one of the most incompetent around -and that won't help things. i assure you that it is not a national thing as as our alleged top whistleblower is undoubtedly dismal.

Ah ha well you've been proven right with the boys in red smashing the (admittedly atrocious on the day) crusaders; and waratahs showing how dismal they are over in the Republic. Genia and Cooper have got to be the most exciting rookie halves pairing in the S14 this year. Genia is so Gregan-like it's not funny. I think Cooper still has a bit of learning to do before he can control games though.

Kudos to New Coach mckenzie for getting them amped for the start of the season. It will be interesting to see how they fare away from home, and against the Brumbies whenever that game is.

As for scrum i agree with refs that slowing the engagement down kills a lot of skullduggery and makes the culprits obvious. Watching Blues vs Highlanders and vs Hurricanes games showed top scrummagers going at each other and the correct penalties being given regardless of reputations - or a weak Ref being shown up for all to see. And the Refs now get interviewed after games etc so nowhere to hide. Long may it continue. In fact the whole new refereeing approach - demanded by the S14 teams coaches - looks like it might really make a difference this season. Early days but encouraging signs...

[Ken Gargett]

Ah ha well you've been proven right with the boys in red smashing the (admittedly atrocious on the day) crusaders; and waratahs showing how dismal they are over in the Republic. Genia and Cooper have got to be the most exciting rookie halves pairing in the S14 this year. Genia is so Gregan-like it's not funny. I think Cooper still has a bit of learning to do before he can control games though.

Kudos to New Coach mckenzie for getting them amped for the start of the season. It will be interesting to see how they fare away from home, and against the Brumbies whenever that game is.

As for scrum i agree with refs that slowing the engagement down kills a lot of skullduggery and makes the culprits obvious. Watching Blues vs Highlanders and vs Hurricanes games showed top scrummagers going at each other and the correct penalties being given regardless of reputations - or a weak Ref being shown up for all to see. And the Refs now get interviewed after games etc so nowhere to hide. Long may it continue. In fact the whole new refereeing approach - demanded by the S14 teams coaches - looks like it might really make a difference this season. Early days but encouraging signs...

one interesting thing - a huge extra number of points scored in the super 14 after two rounds than in comparison with last year - i know that is a small sampling (and that ridiculous 72-65 game doesn't help). but, is it a new attacking attitude from the coaches or a neglect of defence? or is it the refs' interpretations? might even itself out or perhaps we will have attacking rugby.

and re cooper, the closer the trial gets, the more the pressure, i suspect.

[ndtoronto]

Hi guys

I do not want to hijack this thread but I am asking for some help from an Aussie and this is the only rugby post I have seen.

I am trying to become a member of the board acrossthetasman.com. It allows you to watch Super 14 games. To become a member you must be invited by someone who is already.

If anyone is a member and can give me an invite I would appreciate it. I subscribe to Setanta here in Canada but it does not show too many matches and the time difference is a killer for me.

Thanks

[Ken Gargett]

Hi guys

I do not want to hijack this thread but I am asking for some help from an Aussie and this is the only rugby post I have seen.

I am trying to become a member of the board acrossthetasman.com. It allows you to watch Super 14 games. To become a member you must be invited by someone who is already.

If anyone is a member and can give me an invite I would appreciate it. I subscribe to Setanta here in Canada but it does not show too many matches and the time difference is a killer for me.

Thanks

never heard of it but good luck.

[ARRV]

Hi guys

I do not want to hijack this thread but I am asking for some help from an Aussie and this is the only rugby post I have seen.

I am trying to become a member of the board acrossthetasman.com. It allows you to watch Super 14 games. To become a member you must be invited by someone who is already.

If anyone is a member and can give me an invite I would appreciate it. I subscribe to Setanta here in Canada but it does not show too many matches and the time difference is a killer for me.

Thanks

Good luck - and if you are trusting yourself to NZ broadcasting you will need it

[frenchkiwi]

Hi guys

I do not want to hijack this thread but I am asking for some help from an Aussie and this is the only rugby post I have seen.

I am trying to become a member of the board acrossthetasman.com. It allows you to watch Super 14 games. To become a member you must be invited by someone who is already.

If anyone is a member and can give me an invite I would appreciate it. I subscribe to Setanta here in Canada but it does not show too many matches and the time difference is a killer for me.

Thanks

Sorry can't help you, I've never heard of it either, went and had a look and it seems very secretive - they don't even say what the site is for!! How does it work?

[ndtoronto]

Sorry can't help you, I've never heard of it either, went and had a look and it seems very secretive - they don't even say what the site is for!! How does it work?

I don't know much about it either. I learned ofthe site reading some rugby forums

Apparently people stream a lot of rugby games and aussie TV in general on that site

I was hoping somebody could have helped me more.

I only get a game or two here a week on Setanta