Ideas for NRC 2015

[Scoey]

So the tally so far is you, Robert Kitson, a former prop (unnamed) and a distinguished former Lion flanker (also unnamed) that agree that scrums are annoying and/or players are getting to big to fit on the pitch?

Here's my take on it:
Robert Kitson writes sports blogs, blogs are judged on clicks, the more controversial or 'out there' the topic, the more clicks the blog is likely to get. Also, I have no idea, but I'll also hazard a guess that Kitson (if he even played Rugby) was probably a back. Backs are not allowed opinions on scrums. Nonetheless.....
Kitson used two sources to lend credibility to his piece; a former prop and a distinguished former Lion.

The thing about former props is that they ALL believe that the game is a shadow of the game they played back in the day, scrums aren't what they used to be when they played, and the kids playing these days have no fucking idea. ALL former props also will talk the ear off anyone who will sit still for a minute about all of the above. Weird that Kitson's guy was unnamed but still, wouldn't have been hard to find that source.
The former Lion is a good one though. Not just any former Lion, but a distinguished one! Kitson won't tell us his name but you can be sure that he is distinguished.

And just in case anyone like me were reading his piece, he reassures me that neither of the two unnamed but entirely authoritative voices of reason he relies on for his blog could ever be described as an ill informed old fart. Glad that's settled then. Kitson is a genius! We should remove a couple of players from each Rugby team and make scrums uncontested: voila! The comments section goes bat shit crazy and Kitson gets a big pat on the back from his editor.

 

[Omar Comin']

Yep the opinion that the modern scrum has become a blight on the game is definitely just some fringe view propagated for click bait.

And those of us that think this are definitely just secretly hoping rugby moves to uncontested scrums. It's all part of this big conspiracy to turn the game into rugby league.

For the record, I don't think we're yet at a point where we need to seriously think about reducing the number of players on the pitch. I just think it will get to that point if current trends continue. As players get bigger and faster the game becomes more power based, the space essentially decreases and the fabric of the game shifts.

 

[qwerty51]

I don't get your point about decreased space because of increased player size/power. The decrease in space is surely because of improved defensive team tactics and pre-analysis on teams attack through video and the like.

 

[Brendan Hume]

The players have obviously changed over the past 20 years. I think that can be entirely attributed to professionalism (with a couple of cm of generational change thrown in). We're not on an exponential curve where people will be regularly 7 feet tall across the paddock - I don't reckon we'll see less people on the field in a game of rugby for these reasons.
Back to the topic, the FFA Cup seemed to be a success with a couple of amateur teams doing well. It would be great to see some inter-club stuff across competitions to support the NRC concept. Not sure how this could work though - obviously there are big differences in country/amateurs and premier comp aspiration all professionals. A revision of university rugby would also be good - unis are an untapped resource in Australia for sport (some notable exceptions excluded).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Omar Comin']

I don't get your point about decreased space because of increased player size/power. The decrease in space is surely because of improved defensive team tactics and pre-analysis on teams attack through video and the like.

That's definitely a factor too. Along with increased size and better general conditioning it means more ground is covered per player. There's less of a fatigue factor and it becomes more difficult to break down defences and find space. Unless of course you power through them.

But if the game is sped up a little (as it is under the NRC rules) it becomes more difficult for the defences. This is a positive thing as it maintains, in my opinion, a better balance between power and skill.

 

[Braveheart81]

But if the game is sped up a little (as it is under the NRC rules) it becomes more difficult for the defences. This is a positive thing as it maintains, in my opinion, a better balance between power and skill.

Or is the biggest differentiator just a lack of cohesion because teams haven't spent any time training together?

Defences at the start of the NRC were truly shocking and by the end of it they were better but still not particularly good.

If all you're after is lots of try scoring, maybe teams shouldn't train together and just do schoolyard picks to form teams just before a match starts. You'll get a tonne of tries that way.

 

[Omar Comin']

You're tackling straw Braveheart.

 

[Scoey]

Speeding up games also doesn't require any change to the game. The Tahs showed that last season and to a lesser extent the Wallabies on the spring tour.
Quicker ball means less time for defences to realign etc. This I agree with. But, I would much prefer for teams to have to develop game plans and skills to achieve that as opposed to changes to the game that thrust a particular playing style on all teams and produce the same outcome synthetically.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Omar Comin']

It's got little to do with game plans or styles (other than limiting the effectiveness of very boring, very negative tactics) and certainly nothing to do with trying to force the same style across the board. And more tries is not the motivation. But just keep arguing against things I haven't said. You guys are good at that.

My opinion is simply that reducing stoppages increases the element of fatigue and leads to greater opportunity for creating space in a game where players are getting bigger, fitter and faster. This creation of space can be achieved through any number of tactics.

 

[TOCC]

I thought your opinion was that the bigger players are taking up more space on the field?


You can't possibly think that the teams tactics and style have little to do with impacting on the speed of the game?

 

[Brendan Hume]

My opinion is simply that reducing stoppages increases the element of fatigue and leads to greater opportunity for creating space in a game where players are getting bigger, fitter and faster. This creation of space can be achieved through any number of tactics.

This is a referee management issue (as were almost all of the NRC law "changes"), and I agree entirely. At the highest level, there needs to be more scrutiny of stoppages, and more yellow cards for cynical play that invokes slowing the game.

League adapted well to this element of increased professionalism (fitter, faster players) particularly well, increasing the offside at the tackle to 10m and limiting interchanges (although introducing interchanges had the opposite effect). In rugby, I think the law can account for much of the slowness of play, but referees need to manage it better. I'd also like to see less TMO in professional rugby, but this is unlikely as all sports seem to be heading in the opposite direction.

 

[G_Beard]

An extended bench, but still the same number of on field substitutions.
Say 2-3 players covering differing aspects of the same positions.
Small, more mobile props or massive immobile props.
Harder working but slower wings or out and out pace wings.
Grunter, mongrel, ruck loving Locks or Line out specialists.

Yes the game day squad gets a little bigger, but it does offer up some interesting possibilities in selections and tactics.

 

[Delphy]

The players have obviously changed over the past 20 years. I think that can be entirely attributed to professionalism (with a couple of cm of generational change thrown in). We're not on an exponential curve where people will be regularly 7 feet tall across the paddock - I don't reckon we'll see less people on the field in a game of rugby for these reasons.

In terms of "generational change" we may have reached a tipping point.

"This may be a unique moment in human history, when we have seen the tallest and heaviest people who will ever live," Henneberg says. We may even be starting to shrink a little. Australian Bureau of Statistics data shows that in 1995 the average height of males aged 18 to 24 was 178.4 centimetres, which dropped to 177.8 centimetres in 2011. Similar trends have been observed in young German adults.

http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/diet-and-fitness/my-how-theyve-grown-20130510-2jc45.html

The focus in elite programs of picking and developing bigger athletes has a way to run yet I suspect.

 

[Omar Comin']

I thought your opinion was that the bigger players are taking up more space on the field?

You can't possibly think that the teams tactics and style have little to do with impacting on the speed of the game?

As I said, bigger fitter faster. An analogy would be the world getting smaller due to technology etc. Physically or literally the space is the same, but we can cover it so much quicker and more effectively. Same with the space on an elite level rugby field. 3 players can cover the same space that used to take 4. As this trend continues, and if the game stays roughly the same, then it just becomes increasingly congested.

And which tactics are specifically impacted by reducing gaps or length of stoppages in the game? Teams are still able to play narrow or with width, structured or unstructured, with a focus on playing the game in good territory or with a focus on maintaining possession. They're still able to play it through the forwards, or through the backs, or through the boot. The only tactics that are made more difficult are those designed to slow the game down significantly. To me that is a good thing for many different reasons. If you disagree, that's fine.

 

[TOCC]

The analogy of players been able to cover the space quicker and more effectively is also replicated in the form of attacking players been able to capitalise on gaps and mistakes by defensive players. Its not just the defensive players who are getting bigger, stronger and faster.. Its also the attacking players.


Im not quite sure if i understand what you are trying to say about tactics since your comments are jumping around a bit, your initial comment was that the speed of the game has "little to do with game plans or style", is that not what you said?

If that is what you said, then yes i do disagree 100%.. There are plenty of examples of teams playing faster game plans one week and slower ones the next week depending on the strength or weakness of the opposition.

 

[Omar Comin']

I don't think it works the same way in attack. Bigger players don't often get through smaller gaps with guile. They power through. My initial point in this discussion was that I wouldn't want to see rugby become more and more of a power game at the expense of skill.

When I'm talking about the speed of the game I'm referring to stoppages. i.e. games with lots of long stoppages being slow, a fluid game being fast. A game with less time spent forming set pieces and kicking at goal, for example, doesn't create a game where all teams are forced to use the exact same style or tactics.

 

[TOCC]

back to the topic of ideas.....

Here's an idea for 2015, teams aren't allowed to have conflicting coloured jerseys.

SO here it is, the colour listed is the predominant colour of the jersey..

Greater Sydney: Orange
Canberra Vikings: Red
Brisbane City: Green
Melbourne Rebels: Purple
QLD Country: Blue
North Harbour Rays: Harlequin style jersey
Perth Spirt: Black
Sydney Stars: Aqua
NSW Country: Yellow


Given how young this competition is and the lack of exposure thus far i think its important that you make it easier for the casual fan to identify the teams, in a similar mould to how the BBL was established using vibrant colours, some of those colours had little or no cultural or historical links to the city they were representing..

 

[Wilson]

Wouldn't green make more sense for NSW Country, given their Randwick association?

 

[Quick Hands]

back to the topic of ideas...

Here's an idea for 2015, teams aren't allowed to have conflicting coloured jerseys.

SO here it is, the colour listed is the predominant colour of the jersey..

Greater Sydney: Orange
Canberra Vikings: Red
Brisbane City: Green
Melbourne Rebels: Purple
QLD Country: Blue
North Harbour Rays: Harlequin style jersey
Perth Spirt: Black
Sydney Stars: Aqua
NSW Country: Yellow


Given how young this competition is and the lack of exposure thus far i think its important that you make it easier for the casual fan to identify the teams, in a similar mould to how the BBL was established using vibrant colours, some of those colours had little or no cultural or historical links to the city they were representing..

Agree with all that except for NH Rays. I detest the harlequin design anywhere and everywhere it appears.

 

[Quick Hands]

Wouldn't green make more sense for NSW Country, given their Randwick association?

Well, let's hope that Country move their home games to Cambelltown, which is once again affiliated with the CRU through the Illawarra RU.