• 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.

SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) 2023 General Chat

LeCheese

LeCheese

Peter Johnson (47)
Braveheart81 said:
The latter I believe.

If the referee is confident that an act of foul play is at least a yellow card then they just issue the yellow card and the game moves on. The TMO then has 10 minutes to work out whether it should be a red card or not.
Click to expand...
It'll be interesting to see whether this does significantly reduce time spent in review - obviously there will be clearcut cases of 'at least a yellow card' (e.g. obvious high shots) that can be dealt with swiftly, but it's the borderline penalty/yellows that seem to occur more frequently and have quite a lengthy deliberation.

Definitely a good move, regardless.
 
Doritos Day

Doritos Day

Johnnie Wallace (23)
Perhaps one for the team threads but don't want to turn it into a shitfight.

Curious as to who people think will have a better season out of the Rebels and Force? I feel like Twiggy's Team have plugged their holes more effectively with a less raw squad so should be aiming for that 8th spot, whereas Melbourne seem to lack some depth despite their best 3-4 players being better - I think they've gone backwards?
 
Dctarget

Dctarget

John Eales (66)
Doritos Day said:
Perhaps one for the team threads but don't want to turn it into a shitfight.

Curious as to who people think will have a better season out of the Rebels and Force? I feel like Twiggy's Team have plugged their holes more effectively with a less raw squad so should be aiming for that 8th spot, whereas Melbourne seem to lack some depth despite their best 3-4 players being better - I think they've gone backwards?
Click to expand...
I agree with you, Western Force are the safer bet.

Rebels could go quite well depending on their lock depth. With Philip & Leota out our scrum (and line bending) is under powered. If Hosea can get back to form, if Canham's reported off season growth is true and our locks can deliver some engine room power then our forward pack can be a bit of a dark horse.

Adding more 'maybes' is if our halves work. Everyone's sick of hearing about Gordon's potential, time to see it come to fruition. We have some middling 9s in Sorovi, Tuttle, Louwrens. Same goes for midfield. Ripley at 13 is one for the future but probably a year or two too soon. Nu'u who had (some) potential probably has a season ending injury. Only bit of guaranteed quality is outside backs in Kellaway, Hodge and Monty Ioane. I'm naively optimistic that Monty can change an entire team (Italy certainly missed him on the weekend).

So in summation, way too many ifs and maybes and hopefullys for professional sport.

Then again, this team is a little... meh as well. Maybe a bit less shit:
1. Robertson 2. Fainga'a 3. Medrano 4. Pugh 5. Rodda 6. Antsee 7. Callan 8. Wells 9. Fines-Leleiwasa 10. Pasitoa 11. Pulu/Tiatia 12. Stewart 13. Kuenzle 14. Mataele 15. Strachan
 
Doritos Day

Doritos Day

Johnnie Wallace (23)
Derpus

Derpus

George Gregan (70)
Dan54 said:
While I not keen on the 9 at scrum change, do think I like the trial laws in general.
Click to expand...
Why? Anything that could encourage a team to actually use a scrum as an attacking platform rather than a random penalty generator is a good thing.
 
Dan54

Dan54

Tim Horan (67)
Derpus said:
Why? Anything that could encourage a team to actually use a scrum as an attacking platform rather than a random penalty generator is a good thing.
Click to expand...
Yep Derps, just a personal thing, these law changes may make it easier for a 9, but also your 9 doesn't probably need to be as good at clearing a ball under pressure. I like the game making players use their skill, not change them to allow for slow players etc. Also think it will gave 9s time to boxkick from behind scrums, and can see it being used 10m or so in from sideline, will be fun for blindside wingers to chase onto etc, not sure I want more box kicking etc.
As I said , only personal view, we trying to manufacture things to make it easier to attacck at the expense of skills etc. I not up in arms or anything, just a bit of disquiet.
I actually a little perterbed about the TMO having more power than the ref re the YC/RC thing, only because I always believe the ref is meant to be the sole arbitaitor of the laws of game. Like the reason for doing it just a little uncomfortable.
 
waiopehu oldboy

waiopehu oldboy

Stirling Mortlock (74)
This just landed on the super.rugby site:

The key changes are summarised in bullet points below:

• The referee will put a stopwatch shot clock on kickers who will have 90 seconds to kick a conversion from the time a try is awarded, and 60 seconds for penalties, from the time the referee signals a shot at goal.

• Match officials will expect lineouts and scrums to be formed within 30 seconds of the respective marks being set, and the ball to be used within 5 seconds of a ruck being formed.

• TMOs only ‘interrupt’ play to investigate serious, clear and obvious incidents of dangerous play missed by the Match Official team.

• Referees can utilise the TMO to make a Yellow Card decision, but any extended TMO video reviews will take place once the player has left the field, not before the Yellow Card is issued.

• The TMO will have 8 minutes to either uphold a 10-minute Yellow Card decision or upgrade it to a 20-minute Red Card, in which case the player will not return to the field, but can still be replaced.

• Referees will now also have the power to issue a full Red Card for deliberate foul play, in which case the player will not return to the field and cannot be replaced.


super.rugby

Super Rugby Pacific announces law innovations for 2023 season

super.rugby super.rugby
 
qwerty51

qwerty51

Stirling Mortlock (74)
I don't like the shot clock for kicks at all, it shouldn't be a specific limit rather just an onus on the referee to speed it up.

By making it a specific limit, it now allows kickers to use *all* the time rather than kick it when they're ready. I think it'll have the opposite effect really with more time wasted and players strategically using all their allocation near the end of games when otherwise they might not have. 60/90 is A LOT of time gone. Cobra effect if you get me.

The full red card is good, you had people saying players would deliberately take the oppositions best player out early on (absolute bullshit but whatever) so now they're satisfied there.

The other stuff is all good but I still don't understand why a game (or half) is allowed to end on a held up. Please get rid of the drop out for held-ups too, make it 10m tap or something, the attacking side is penalised way too much with a drop out.
 
Last edited:
Wilson

Wilson

Michael Lynagh (62)
qwerty51 said:
Please get rid of the drop out for held-ups too, make it 10m tap or something, the attacking side is penalised way too much with a drop out.
Click to expand...
Nah, drop out is great - it forces the attack to use some creativity attacking the line, a 10m tap would just see hit up after hit up, knowing they could go for the exact same bludgeoning all over again if they got held up.

Also, the set up plays we're starting to see off the drop outs are excellent - see McReight's second try against the springboks:
 
qwerty51

qwerty51

Stirling Mortlock (74)
Wilson said:
Nah, drop out is great - it forces the attack to use some creativity attacking the line, a 10m tap would just see hit up after hit up, knowing they could go for the exact same bludgeoning all over again if they got held up.
Click to expand...
This is now the new trend if you've been watching the 6N rather than taking a lineout or scrum 5m out anyway.

Maybe a 22m tap, not a 10m tap but not a drop out.
 
Wilson

Wilson

Michael Lynagh (62)
qwerty51 said:
This is now the new trend if you've been watching the 6N rather than taking a lineout or scrum 5m out anyway.

Maybe a 22m tap, not a 10m tap but not a drop out.
Click to expand...
Sure, but the get one shot run at it before the drop out forces them right back to earn to position again, not the simple reset a 10m tap would give them.

22m tap would likely slow things down more than the drop out and not really give the attacking team much more advantage. You'd also likely just see teams tap and pass back for a drop goal attempt 30 back and straight in front, the drop out adds a bit more variability to that response with the defence given a chance to choose where the play starts up.
 
Derpus

Derpus

George Gregan (70)
The drop-out rule is pretty terrible. What reward do you get for nearly scoring a try? starting again at halfway...
 
Derpus

Derpus

George Gregan (70)
Wilson said:
Since when do we reward nearly?
Click to expand...
Wasn't it previously a 5 meter scrum feed? So I'm gunna go with since whenever that rule was implemented.

But it's not really about being 'rewarded'. More that you are punished for trying to score which is dumb as hell.
 
Wilson

Wilson

Michael Lynagh (62)
Derpus said:
Wasn't it previously a 5 meter scrum feed? So I'm gunna go with since whenever that rule was implemented.

But it's not really about being 'rewarded'. More that you are punished for trying to score which is dumb as hell.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's a punishment, it's a really strong setup for attacking play and if a team can't get back up to the red zone off of it I'm not sure they deserve to be there. The alternative was a mess of reset scrums on a patch of turf that was often already chewed to shit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top