Hugh Jarse
Rocky Elsom (76)
Of course laden but with locks not coconuts.
National Rugby Championship 2014
- Thread starter kiap
- Start date
- Status
swingpass
Peter Sullivan (51)
if you make tries worth more it just encourages teams to stop them at all costs. i have often espoused, even on these fora, that a penalty given against the defending team in their own 22 should result in a shot at goal, directly in front and then restart at the point of infringement with the attacking team ball given the options of scrum or kick to touch or tap. almost guaranteed three and possibly 10 points
Omar Comin'
Chilla Wilson (44)
How do you know that?
If teams give away more penalties, especially in their own 22 (because their opposition are going for more tries) then they'll receive more yellow cards. That's good incentive to be disciplined in defence.
I think some people have this perception that most penalties are given away cynically. I don't think that's the case. Most are a result of mistiming. And the rules are so technical that referees all have slightly different interpretations around things like coming in from the side, when a ruck is formed, when a player is supporting their body weight etc.
By reducing the points for penalty goals (or reducing the number of infringements that allow a shot at goal) you reduce the direct influence of the referee on the score, which I think would be a good thing in a technical sport like rugby. The problem with your proposal is that you'd basically be giving the referee the power to award 3 points automatically...on what can often be a 50/50 call.
M
Muttonbird
Guest
Heh, don't have the time to read 49 pages. Could anyone give a team list for this comp? Would have thought the OP could make it easier to find out about it.
Omar Comin'
Chilla Wilson (44)
One thing I'd like to see them trial in the NRC is less strictness around where the mark is for a quick tap on a penalty. I think as long as the tap isn't taken from in front of the mark it should be allowed.
The level of pedantry about which blade of grass constitutes the mark can be frustrating.
The level of pedantry about which blade of grass constitutes the mark can be frustrating.
M
Muttonbird
Guest
No worries, found it on an NZ site. As you were.
Brisbane
Queensland country
Sydney North
Sydney West
Sydney
NSW country
Canberra
Melbourne
Perth
Brisbane
Queensland country
Sydney North
Sydney West
Sydney
NSW country
Canberra
Melbourne
Perth
Quick Hands
David Wilson (68)
if you make tries worth more it just encourages teams to stop them at all costs. i have often espoused, even on these fora, that a penalty given against the defending team in their own 22 should result in a shot at goal, directly in front and then restart at the point of infringement with the attacking team ball given the options of scrum or kick to touch or tap. almost guaranteed three and possibly 10 points
Swingpass, I seem to recall that this was tried one year in SS pre-season competition. I liked it and I think it's one way to reduce the cynical penalties by the defending team.
It's why I'm against increasing the value of a try and/or reducing the value of the penalty goal. It makes it more cost effective in terms of points to concede the cynical penalty.
Swingpass, I seem to recall that this was tried one year in SS pre-season competition. I liked it and I think it's one way to reduce the cynical penalties by the defending team.
It's why I'm against increasing the value of a try and/or reducing the value of the penalty goal. It makes it more cost effective in terms of points to concede the cynical penalty.
M
Muttonbird
Guest
I heard on the radio the other day that the NRC was trialing these new laws (at the behest of the IRB?).
Why would you just want to get your comp of the ground and running? Why would you want to introduce these complicating factors? Doesn't sound any use to anyone.
Why would you just want to get your comp of the ground and running? Why would you want to introduce these complicating factors? Doesn't sound any use to anyone.
Tomikin
David Codey (61)
what crowd canberra expecting? a few thou? alienation for supporters from the get go might not be the best move.
Well if I read correctly with out the Vikings there wouldnt be a team.. so no fans or some fans. I just think some people have to take it on the chin, join the support them partion for an away strip being blue gold and white.. or some games at gunners.. Just get some small bit back.. but dont bite the hand that feeds you.. Get behind the canberra team.. its Canberra Vikings picked by Brumbies Coaches with UC and Vikings helping
Tomikin
David Codey (61)
I really dont have a problem with the laws as they are, there pretty close and most teams play attacking rugby.. But on the other side.. there's nothing wrong with a good old fashioned shit fight.. where the forwards smash each other every scrum the backs dont see the ball and we play a game where you kick goals because both teams are hammering each other...
Leave them as they are and let the coaches decided how they will play..
Leave them as they are and let the coaches decided how they will play..
Brumby Runner
Jason Little (69)
Viking Park has great atmosphere even with only 2 - 3,000 crowd. So close to the playing field - every bone crunching tackle can be heard as can the talk and language on the field. Really looking forward to the NRC.
S
saulih
Guest
Re: rule changes
I really don't like most of the rule change proposals being suggested. The semi-cynical penalty could be arrested if the referee is guided to be more forth-coming with yellow card's. Why give a warning after the fifth or sixth stupid infringement, give the warning after the second time, and then bin the player on the third. If teams know that there is a real possibility of going off the field, they will be more hesitant to lie all over the ruck, stick their hands in when they know they shouldn't be, or go after the HB when they can see quite well that he hasn't picked up the ball. These are the kind of penalties we all watch teams engage in in their own half, and we know they are doing it to stop the game.
The one rule change I do like, that I have not seen proposed on this thread is stopping the clock when a try is awarded and only restarting it when the play is restarted back at halfway. Kickers can take as much time as they need for setup and converting, and there is no gamesmanship with playing the clock. Penalties keep the same rules as before, so playing the clock is still a possibility.
I really don't like most of the rule change proposals being suggested. The semi-cynical penalty could be arrested if the referee is guided to be more forth-coming with yellow card's. Why give a warning after the fifth or sixth stupid infringement, give the warning after the second time, and then bin the player on the third. If teams know that there is a real possibility of going off the field, they will be more hesitant to lie all over the ruck, stick their hands in when they know they shouldn't be, or go after the HB when they can see quite well that he hasn't picked up the ball. These are the kind of penalties we all watch teams engage in in their own half, and we know they are doing it to stop the game.
The one rule change I do like, that I have not seen proposed on this thread is stopping the clock when a try is awarded and only restarting it when the play is restarted back at halfway. Kickers can take as much time as they need for setup and converting, and there is no gamesmanship with playing the clock. Penalties keep the same rules as before, so playing the clock is still a possibility.
I think people are going in the wrong direction in terms of trying to make teams score more tries. Reducing the value of shots at goal will encourage teams to infringe more in my opinion.
If you want to reduce cynical infringements from teams defending, make penalty goals for penalties awarded inside the 22 worth 5 points and all of a sudden there will be next to no infringements.
If you want to reduce cynical infringements from teams defending, make penalty goals for penalties awarded inside the 22 worth 5 points and all of a sudden there will be next to no infringements.
the coach
Bob Davidson (42)
No lack of tries in the Shute Shield on the weekend under the current rules
I'm not sure we should be actively discouraging tackling in order to get more tries though.
I reckon in line with the mark is important (at least to a reasonable degree. Maybe 1m in either direction).
Behind the mark should certainly be fine.
Tom Ando
Fred Wood (13)
Such a petty rule. This I agree with! I think if you start messing around with the points system, its either going to result in more penalties because the punishment for infringement is lessened; slowing the game down, or you are going to have more kicks at goal and/or massive game changers on your hand because someone simply came in from the side.
Just this week we have been complaining about the quality of the Refs so far in Super Rugby, and now you will give them and the team awarded with the penalty, more power to change the game. How many games will be won because of a weird ruling? Leave it as it is. The only way to change the quantity of tries is to allow greater opportunities such as wamberal mentioned, to score tries. How many times has a flying winger been pulled back because he didn't tap the ball on the mark?
Tom Ando
Fred Wood (13)
I still think you have to keep the essence and the art of the scrum. Whilst agree the process has to be quicker, we can't fall victim to the 'instant' nature that everyone thrives for, and remove what is a beautiful way to contest for the ball. It's what makes Rugby special... and league not so much
- Status