The Rugby Union Thread

kjdowd

lloyd said:

Rocker said:

crunchman;1010615" said:

@lloyd - you seem to have too much time on your hands

Time better spent with a guitar in your hand???

If they let me take a guitar to work, I would....

but then you'd be David Brent, so swings and roundabouts 

Gassage

lloyd said:

Gassage;1010903" said:

I am getting very bored with Barnes pedantry and also Nigel's (who is a friend) narcissism.



Poite and Garces are the kiddies at the moment. Glen Jackson, given time, will be great too and I have no issue with CJ and never will.



Clancy- words fail me.

This. By the shovel full, I'm hoping you're right about Jackson, more ex players reffing would improve standards IMO (although Calncy played to a decent level I think? Or is that Rolland?).

I'd love to see some ex props come in, they might sort out the scrum lottery.

Rolly played for Ireland. Scrum half.

digitalscream

lloyd said:

Maybe as a full ref, I'd welcome them running on at scrum time though. Nigel Owens interviewed by Brian Moore this week says that he honestly is concentrating too hard on other things to miss crooked feeds, something that he's said before in 2013. In 3 years surely someone could say, if you have too much on why not have The TV ref watch the feeds and buzz the ref on the pitch when it's crooked? That is an instant, free and wouldn't slow the game down at all fix to something that every rugby fan I've ever spoken to would like fixed.

Refs with some sort of wearable device like Google Glass would be better - they can get an overhead view of the scrum, so they can keep an eye on the feed and whether the props are driving in at an angle (the usual suspects) while also being able to see the binding on whichever side they're stood.

lloyd

digitalscream said:

lloyd said:

Maybe as a full ref, I'd welcome them running on at scrum time though. Nigel Owens interviewed by Brian Moore this week says that he honestly is concentrating too hard on other things to miss crooked feeds, something that he's said before in 2013. In 3 years surely someone could say, if you have too much on why not have The TV ref watch the feeds and buzz the ref on the pitch when it's crooked? That is an instant, free and wouldn't slow the game down at all fix to something that every rugby fan I've ever spoken to would like fixed.

Refs with some sort of wearable device like Google Glass would be better - they can get an overhead view of the scrum, so they can keep an eye on the feed and whether the props are driving in at an angle (the usual suspects) while also being able to see the binding on whichever side they're stood.

Nigel Owens said this week that he has too much going on to notice whether feeds are crooked or not, something he said back in 2013 when World Rugby were 'clamping down on it' which lasted about 30 minutes. Adding that stuff would give him more to think about.

If Nigel Owens says there's too much going on for the referee to notice crooked feeds (he says he gets annoyed with his own performance and others when watching back) then for me you need to take away some part of the ref's responsibility and that is probably the actual feed as it doesn't require any kind of interpretation, it's either straight or it isn't....Let the TV ref keep an eye on it, if the SH's knew the TV ref was watching and they enforced it properly it would take one scrum free kick for the whole of rugby to fall into line and feed the scrum properly. I'd go one step further and give responsibility to the TJ's to just look at binding, again enforce it and penalise wrong binding and the whole of rugby falls into line, Props then bind properly.

That's two ideas which don't affect the game speed in any way and would have a good effect on the scrum, have it played according to the laws and free up the ref to concentrate on angles at what is one of the more difficult aspects of the game to referee.

I'm pretty sure that would improve international scrums while the lower divisions aren't affected as they're refereed properly anyway for the most part.

It's an area of the game that I know most fans are frustrated with, including new fans who perhaps aren't purists. Which World Rugby rightly want to bring into the game.

Instead this season they brought in 6 points for a try and 1 for a conversion in the Welsh Premiership as an experiment...Which will inevitably fail as a shit idea and never be taken on by any other league...

exocet

Gassage;1010891" said:

Taff, because his fingers, as per the pic, were not inverted to the eyes. Also Watson is clearly looking at the 8ball at the time.



Re the punch (which I'd expect a 4 week ban for) they were both prone, but Billy was less prone if that makes sense.

This popped up in my FB feed today. I don't think it's been doctored but it is a little more damming than the other shots that I've seen.

kjdowd

Again a still. Like I said above, it's not pretty, but if you view the footage he's certainly not targeting his eyes. Compare Francis' petulant flick at Coles' eyes. Not the same thing at all.

That said, I think what Watson did was potentially more dangerous, but Francis' actions are more villified in rugby and therefore attract the citing.

cj73

If we sorted out squint feeds at scrum we'd need hookers that could hook and not just be third props. Could this have a knock on effect of making scrums less problematic? Less power/push and more control?

lloyd

cj73 said:

If we sorted out squint feeds at scrum we'd need hookers that could hook and not just be third props. Could this have a knock on effect of making scrums less problematic? Less power/push and more control?

That's one school of thought, the other is that it might be less stable as both Hookers are hooking.

I know nothing about the scrum having never played near it apart from a few games at SH so defer to Brian Moore on the subject, he wants proper hooking and straight feeds, which is good enough for me.

What annoys me is tha World Rugby and the IRB before them clearly want set piece to be a quick way of restarting the game with the team in possession using them as an attacking platform off easy ball to introduce more running exciting madskillz rugby. If that's what they want then fine, change the law book. The law book states set piece is a way of restarting the game with a competition for the ball personally I think you'd see more running rugby off turnover ball but there we go.

crunchman

As someone who played hooker when I was younger (until I grew) it was great hooking one against the head.  It does need to be a contest.  If the feeds were straight and it was a contest for the ball, then you might find that there would be less of the other shenanigans going on.

eSully

Haven't seen it mentioned here already but a worrying report about Dylan Hartley admitting he doesn't remember lifting the trophy or the lap of honour in Paris. http://www.planetrugby.com/news/hartley-doesnt-recall-lifting-trophy/

crunchman

I had a concussion once.  I was awake and talking, and then came around an hour or so later and couldn't remember anything of the previous hour.

Rocker

I am glad to see that people here are acknowledging that there are problems with the game of rugby. Scrims, scoring (encouraging try scoring rather than penalties), etc. I have written about this several times already.

crunchman

I'm not sure the driving maul is helpful.  I know they are changing the rules so that you won't be able to hand it back it to the guy at the back in the future.

I think the main problem at the top level is that there is not enough space on the pitch.  I'd like to see a 12 or 13 a side game with Union rules.  Have 6 forwards and either 6 or 7 backs.  You would have more space, and the forwards would have to be a bit lighter and faster around.

The problem is that this won't work at the lower levels of the game.

lloyd

crunchman said:

I'm not sure the driving maul is helpful.  I know they are changing the rules so that you won't be able to hand it back it to the guy at the back in the future.

I think the main problem at the top level is that there is not enough space on the pitch.  I'd like to see a 12 or 13 a side game with Union rules.  Have 6 forwards and either 6 or 7 backs.  You would have more space, and the forwards would have to be a bit lighter and faster around.

The problem is that this won't work at the lower levels of the game.

So watch league or 7's that's not the answer, watch super 15's that is a fast running rugby competition that has lots of tries. It can be done currently with these laws.

lloyd

crunchman said:

I'm not sure the driving maul is helpful.  I know they are changing the rules so that you won't be able to hand it back it to the guy at the back in the future.

I think the main problem at the top level is that there is not enough space on the pitch.  I'd like to see a 12 or 13 a side game with Union rules.  Have 6 forwards and either 6 or 7 backs.  You would have more space, and the forwards would have to be a bit lighter and faster around.

The problem is that this won't work at the lower levels of the game.

The maul is currently a huge bugbear for me, attacking team is given free reign to do anything while the defending team is not. The amount of split mauls which go offside but not penalised is ridiculous. I'd have no passing of the ball in a maul and penalise those that drive in front of the ball carrier when detached.

koneguitarist

kjdowd said:

Again a still. Like I said above, it's not pretty, but if you view the footage he's certainly not targeting his eyes. Compare Francis' petulant flick at Coles' eyes. Not the same thing at all.

That said, I think what Watson did was potentially more dangerous, but Francis' actions are more villified in rugby and therefore attract the citing.

This is complete crap. This pic and others show this was far worse incident than the Francis or Ashton ones, and yet despite the evidence, its ok? ********* words fail me.

joneve

Yet you seem to be the only person in the world with this opinion? Not even the french give enough fucks about it to report it to the citing commissioner?

koneguitarist

joneve said:

Yet you seem to be the only person in the world with this opinion? Not even the french give enough fucks about it to report it to the citing commissioner?

so tell me, what is the ruling on hands in the eye area?

koneguitarist

I'm waiting?

koneguitarist

 

This shows the hand grabbing face, note fingers digging in.

the next pic which was first shown shows Watsons right hand come across face and Watsons Left hand then grabs face as well, and fingers start to interlock across face.

Now as I have said from beginning, I do not think Watson tried to gouge player, I think its an accident, but intent has nothing to do with this, did player make contact with eyes? Yes, Is it a ban? yes.