• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Rugby Has Massive Problems !

Status
Not open for further replies.

XVProps

Herbert Moran (7)
Diversity! What is wrong with with having options. I am a Rugby nut and love the sport. However, I don't mind the odd game of AFL, and a good game of League, although at the moment I do find it a little predictable and boring. But there is roo
For all codes, and that is another reason to love Australia, love footy and absolutely love RUGBY!
 

Bowside

Peter Johnson (47)
Rugby is in a great place, and is poised to become a truly global sport in the next decade.. That being said maybe if you miss a penalty shot and it is grounded or dead, the other team could get a scrum option where the penalty was awarded, and not just the 22. It would certainly make Francois' kicks more interesting.

I disagree because it would give teams more of an incentive to infringe at the breakdown. The breakdown is the single biggest problem the game currently faces, followed closley by the scrums and the referees.

In some ways I agree with the bloke who started the thread. The rules have turned certain aspects of the game into a farce and the referees are inconsistent as fuck.

Its a shame that anyone who suggests a rule change that has merit and would improve the spectackle is shot down and told to go watch league. Especially when the rule change is something that in the past was the norm and has foundation in actual 'laws of the game', which seem somewhat meaningless now days. Just because something is good does not mean it can not be made better.
 

Bardon

Peter Fenwicke (45)
Hi lurked for a bit and this is my first post.

I have to say I don't think rugby needs to change that much. I watched almost all the WC games even when some meant getting up at 2am and watching 3-4 games back to back.

I don't want rugby going the way of football (soccer) and trying to make the game more entertaining for TV. Then you end up with the game being run by TV stations and we'll see more of the antics from football creeping in. Already seen diving, players going down like they've been hit by tyson when they've got a little slap at a ruck, kickers purposely running into defenders when they've kicked a garryowen too far etc.

Trying to make a game more popular or entertaining means catering to the people who might watch another sport instead or just not bother watching. It would basically turn rugby into a politician where the views of the marginal viewer are listened to while the rugby 'til I die support is ignored, because "hey they watch/vote no matter what we do".

I want to watch a game close to the way rugby is now with maybe a few tweaks but not many as I think it's a bloody good game as is. I'd rather watch a low scoring one point game where there's real contest in the forwards and everyone giving their all. Lots of action in the 22s with a lot of close calls and huge last ditch defence. I'd watch a game like that anyday over a game with a score that belongs in basketball with 10+ tries scored but the winners always being 15-20 ahead.

I think the main thing to do first, before considering changing the laws, is to actually apply the laws we already have and do that with some sort of consistency. One potential way to do is would be to make the referees a team, I'm not just talking about a match day team of TMO, ref and assistants. I'm talking all the officials at a tournament should be considered a team.

They should all have the same base of operations (city where the final would be held) and travel out to games a few days ahead. They should all stay in the same hotel both at base city and on the road. A Lions style rotation of roommates should be implemented. Remember these guys aren't international refs because the pay is so good, they're there because of a love of the game. I'm sure there would be plenty of late night discussions, and at team breakfast and lunch etc. that would help them to gel better as a team and have a more consistent approach.

Also I think this shouldn't just happen at world cups, it could also happen at Lion tours so that the best referees in the world get together every two years for an extended period of time. This time could also be used for Paddy O'Brien to give presentations on what needs to be worked on and have a clear message on what to look for and how to penalise it.

Also I don't think just the top referees should be there. A few of those earmarked as the future top referees should be there so that they can get experience even before they're officiating at the first major event. Along with these should be some respected explayers, coaches and scrum specialists, all thrown into the mix of the room sharing rotation.

Refs are just like us, people who love rugby and would love to have a talk with these famous players. Some people accuse refs as being arrogant and while it might be true for some, for others it's just maintaining a professional distance and not being seen as getting too close to players. I'm sure if after Friday's Aus V Wales game the players were to all go out together for a few pints, the ref etc. would love to get a knock on his door from roberts or horwill inviting them to come along. But in this professional era something like that could never happen as it would be deemed inappropriate, whereas I think it would be right in the spirit of rugby, just as long as he didn't go if it was just one team out together.

I know I've waffled on but my main point is improve the standard and consistency of the officiating along with the interaction between refs and respected experts and then we could look at making an already brilliant game even better.
 
B

Blob

Guest
People are whinging because their team or teams lost not because the there is any actual problem with the laws. In fact the only real problem(s) rugby faces are financial. The laws are fine. Teams just have to get better. Different laws aren't going to make teams better.
 

Scotty

David Codey (61)
People are whinging because their team or teams lost not because the there is any actual problem with the laws. In fact the only real problem(s) rugby faces are financial. The laws are fine. Teams just have to get better. Different laws aren't going to make teams better.

So how do you solve the financial problems?

Cut expenses or increase revenue?
 

Cardiffblue

Jim Lenehan (48)
And the discussion completes a perfect circle ... create a better spectacle, more interest, greater revenue ... QED.

Cash register hints at 'massive problems'

That's the problem. Revenues have increased but it is just getting absorbed in higher costs for top tiers. Creating better spectacle doesn't work. In Australia one thing generates support- success on field. For this to happen going forward you need pipeline of new players. For that you need to increase the no of kiddies who have a future in the game and here is the rub because AFL and RL have the kids. Even more so soccer
 

Scotty

David Codey (61)
I think revenues in oz are dependent both on success and the spectacle. See the difference between the tahs and reds. Yes the reds have now gone one step further but the tahs have had success over a longer period, however haven't been getting anywhere near the crowd support the reds are. The difference? Playing style.

I guarantee if the wallabies had played amazing attacking rugby, scoring a few more tries in the big games they would have had more people talking about them even if they still got knocked out in the semi.
 
F

Finland Fella

Guest
That's the problem. Revenues have increased but it is just getting absorbed in higher costs for top tiers. Creating better spectacle doesn't work. In Australia one thing generates support- success on field. For this to happen going forward you need pipeline of new players. For that you need to increase the no of kiddies who have a future in the game and here is the rub because AFL and RL have the kids. Even more so soccer

Yeah but Cardiff I reckon if the game is sexier and not such a closed society - ie ya gotta love rule 167a sub section 14 re' the tight head bind ... then more kiddies will be begging mum to sign em up at the local rugby club.

And creating a better spectacle never hurts
 

Eyes and Ears

Bob Davidson (42)
I think revenues in oz are dependent both on success and the spectacle. See the difference between the tahs and reds. Yes the reds have now gone one step further but the tahs have had success over a longer period, however haven't been getting anywhere near the crowd support the reds are. The difference? Playing style.

I guarantee if the wallabies had played amazing attacking rugby, scoring a few more tries in the big games they would have had more people talking about them even if they still got knocked out in the semi.

Style can't all be about tries as the Waratahs scored more tries than the Reds this year during the regular season games.
 
S

Squeak

Guest
Yeah but Cardiff I reckon if the game is sexier and not such a closed society - ie ya gotta love rule 167a sub section 14 re' the tight head bind ... then more kiddies will be begging mum to sign em up at the local rugby club.

And creating a better spectacle never hurts

I kinda missed this dicussion, but i think a couple of salient points are missing.

For a start, the kiddies don't bind at tight head. The rules build in complexity over the years to enhance enjoyment, skill and attention span. Because when kiddies play, it's about kiddies, not revenue.

The society isn't closed, but it requires a certain level of involvement. Not everyone at top level is a brain surgeon, but they must be able to distinguish between a toilet and a hotel corridor (or police station), between appropriate sexual behavior and assault (animals included), between humour and racism, between a flutter and game fixing and between a hobby and an elaborate drug distribution network. Kiddies are supposed to stop being kiddies and grow up.

Is it any coincidence that that vacuous, dulled down version of the game has a culture so sick the it probably deserves a federal intervention of it's own? There are some great men playing rugby league, but the sport harbours criminals and thugs as a matter of course, and they seem to feel right at home with the rule set. They probably think it's a spectacle. Like a bearded lady.

I thats what you want FF (Folau Fainga'a), go get it, but I will never let my boys play league, and I'll do whatever it takes to prevent union from becoming anything like it. There's more to this than revenue.
 
V

voodoo

Guest
I think they need to reduce the number of points for penalty kicks and drop kicks. Many games are being decided on goal kicks and often from a ref's decision around a scrum or ruck where things are often not clear.

2 points for penalties andf drop goals may encourage team to keep the ball and go for tries when they get penalties.
 

Dam0

Dave Cowper (27)
2 points for penalties and drop goals may encourage team to keep the ball and go for tries when they get penalties.

It might also encourage teams to infringe too much.

Some here will say that yellow cards are the answer, but I sometimes think that too many YC's spoil the game also. Maybe there needs to be a green card - 5 mins for professional foul, back on if the other team scores (other than from the immediate penalty).
 
W

wolverine

Guest
(Reduction of the PG value to 2 points) might also encourage teams to infringe too much.

A number of posters have expressed this fear, but IMO there is neither any documented evidence, nor any intuitive reason, to suggest that that teams would infringe more. Would teams like to give up possession, 40m field position from a kick to touch, a scrum or the goal itself? Would they still like to risk conceding 7 points from a converted try? IMO no.
 

Dam0

Dave Cowper (27)
Would teams like to give up possession, 40m field position from a kick to touch, a scrum or the goal itself? .

If you are hard on defence 5 metres from your line and you can slow the ball down "accidentally on purpose" illegally, are you more likely to do it if you know the result will be 2 points or 3 points?
 

grievous

Charlie Fox (21)
Well that final highlighted again that referees interpretation can ruin a spectacle, yeah well done NZ but you did it in the most cynical way possible but why not when you can get away with it. No other sport is affected with so much judicial contriversy than Olympic judged sports....it might be the one thing that stops me watching this great game one day. I come away from so many matches in WCs, especially minnows against established feeling had. Maybe when/if the IRB gets a fairer world structure this might change
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top