The state of rugby today

[rugbywhisperer]

Great comments lee.

For me, the game is declining in two areas and these can be remedied.
1: The cheapness of infringing at the T/R/M and the associated ease at getting away with it. The attackers are not being favoured at all here and
2: The 22 kicking fiasco where there is no respect for posession and an up and under is seen as the more expedient solution. This can easily be remedied with a free kick/mark option to the receiving team with gain in ground for touch on the full following said mark.
No self respecting back would risk the ire of his forwrds for taking the cheap option when the chances of the opposition having a lineout behind the original kicking position.

Anyway, the IRB have shown they don't listen and are so far off reality of the game I fear there will be no significant changes at all following 2011RWC.

I fear a Super League style split is definitely not to be dismissed if the powers that be do not start to listen - and learn.

 

[chief]

Changes will not occur before RWC 2011. Unfortunately two years but I know it will have a significant impact. But when there are changes post RWC expect changes. Rest assured Paddy O'Brien is one of the sole people to blame for the shit that rugby is in right now. It's up to him and his IRB misfits to fix it.

 

[Bruce Ross]

The excellent Dusautoir had tackled the estimable Blair, bounced off his own hip, never released him and proceeded to try to fish the ball out. Moreover his legs were apart like a rent boy and he must have had some weight on his hands and would have required powerful stomach muscles to rock back and rip the ball out. Amateur players never had the physical conditioning to do this.

We can't let aerial ping-pong become the basis of our game.

It is not often that one gets the chance to correct the erudite Lee Grant, so I'm not about to waste an opportunity.

"Powerful stomach muscles" would not have materially assisted Dusatoir to "rip the ball out". The function of the stomach or abdominal muscles is to close or flex the hip joint, as in the sit-up exercise which involves primarily the contraction of the rectus abdominis muscles. Ripping the ball involves the defender pulling the ball upward, moving toward a standing position, which requires opening or extending the hip joint as in the deadlift exercise. Here the primary activators are the gluteus maximus muscles located in the buttocks and the biceps femoris or hamstrings. In addition, powerful back muscles, such as those of the erector spinae, are necessary to stabilise the spine.

Paradoxically the objective of not "letting aerial ping-pong become the basis of our game" would be aided by a law change which at first glance would seem to move rugby further in that direction. If the laws were amended to allow defenders to claim a mark anywhere in their own half there would be a much reduced incentive to use the bomb as the primary weapon of attack.

 

[Lee Grant]

Good one BR - I'll have to copy your answer so that it looks, incorrectly, that I know what I'm talking about. I will mention the gluteus maximus activator next time, as I am fond of repeating myself, though others, strangely, do not enjoy that experience as much as I do.

Agree about marking being allowed in one's own half - as an experiment - but most of all I would like to change the attitude of the players to the game, as mentioned above. What our game needs is for players and their coaches to be positive, and towards that end they need a legal framework that encourages them with rewards for doing so.

I am on the wrong side of 70 and I have never experienced such a positive attitude in players as I have seen in the Sydney club comp of 2007 (after the first month). It had the perfect combination - the Free Kick sanctions and referees who were willing to invoke the Foul Play law pertaining to cynical play, and to give cards; the one not working without the other. The other ELVs were insignificant by comparison.

Good to see you posting on non-Uni matters. Keep up the good work.

 

[Bruce Ross]

I am on the wrong side of 70

Something we have in common. Getting beyond 70 has its disadvantages but it certainly beats the alternative.

Another thing I think we share is a tendency to adopt an analytical perspective on the game. The fascination lies in its complexity.

With respect to the Sydney club comp and the ELVs, I watched much of the 2008 finals series in both Grade and Colts, with the former played under the ELVs and the latter under old laws. Both sets of games were enthralling and played in an overwhelmingly positive manner, demonstrating to me that laws are not as important as attitude.

One of the strengths of club rugby which is insufficiently appreciated is that it is still played primarily as sport, allowing for much greater player initiative and flair.

 

[Thomond78]

The core problem is, POB and the IRB think - if they think at all - through the gin haze that if they say, "This will mean adventurous, fast, open rugby", that everyone else on the planet will go, "Oh, okay, then". Like fuck they will.

If I can use a law change to stop other guys attacking me where I'm weak, I will. If I can use it to kill their ball, I will. If I can use it to fuck up their attacks, I will. If I can use it to kill the game, dead, as soon as I'm leading, I will. And until the IRB and POB get that through their thick heads, nothing will work. Because I, and every other blindside/second row/evil forward bastard on the planet play the game to win and I do not give a fuck if the backs freeze to death in that process.

The real key is, use an economic analysis. If the risk of losing the ball in contact increases over about 45%, I won't do it, because it's too risky. Hence, since the combination of the 22 ELV (which, btw, I was initially in favour of trying, until I saw the results) and POB's "ruling", the prevalence of aimless kicking; I've a better return on territory on that, and I can keep pressing the oppo away from where they can score while pressing for a penalty at the breakdowns that I force them into.

It's the same with calls to increase the value of a try; it just gives me more of an incentive to give away a penalty, because the risk of being carded and three points is less than that of giving up seven.

So, you need to increase the return on: committing forwards to the breakdown; taking it up, not kicking; and increase the risk of being carded for killing it.

We know how to do the first. We saw it up here in the NH last season. Everyone on their feet, hands off from tackler and tacklee straight away, no hands in. Ref it viciously, and you get counter-rucking, faster ball and classic rucking over the player. A general tolerance developing up here for a few legitimate old-school tickles could be usefully copied there.

Getting rid of the 22 ELV would mean you don't gain territory from aimless kicks up the middle. Getting rid of POB's ruling means the cost/benefit swings back in favour of taking it up more often.

And the cards are self-explanatory.

However, with POB there, I'd not hold my breath.

 

[Lee Grant]

We may not be on the same page of the hymn book T78 or even sitting in the same pew, but arguably we are in the same church.


I mentioned above that we needed a legal framework that rewarded players for playing with a good attitude. This supposed that the lawmakers would think this was a worthy outcome. I would be appalled if the attitude of the law gurus to positive play was as negative as you say. Coaches and defenders, yes; they will do anything they can get away with to win and will get sacked if they don't; but law makers?


As for the protocols last season: they were refreshing but they seemed to disappear for the current season – and even in 2008/09 the ping pong didn't seem to stop much, especially later in crunch games. As I indicated above: there needs to be a quantum step made. I don't think that it will happen before the 2011 RWC. They have run out of time.


The step I mentioned is mixing the use of cards with the Free Kick sanctions. I was the first to mention that it didn't work in the Super14 because the pro refs were too conservative with the cards. I point the finger here at POB for not giving them a kick up the backside. I think he should go; not that I think that a replacement would be any better, but that, like Lincoln swapping his generals to find Grant, a good one may be found in the end.


I would like Chris White or Peter Marshall to get the gig.


I am familiar with the objections to the suggestion of using the FK sanctions, particularly the one that says that one of the rationales of the ELVs was to simplify things for the ref and that the use of yellow cards to control cynical play did not conform with that rationale, but I don't care. The amateur refs had no problem with the use of yellow cards after a few rounds in Sydney club rugby in 2007, and neither did the players, once they realised that there was a new paradigm.


As for your comments on the ping-pong created by the 22 ELV: you ignore the increasing incidence of it outside the 22 – the 2007 RWC Final syndrome. We have both mentioned the reasons for it at length.


I am neutral on the 22 ELV.


On the one hand: people are familiar with decades of automatic lineouts folowing kicks going directly into touch out if the ball had been passed back over the 22. They don't mind the measured jogging, or walking, of the lineout guys over to the spot, then the ritual calls and line dancing for position, all of which some other people think is a waste of time. And when those other people see a not straight throw or some other lineout infraction that stops play, they deplore the increase in time wasting.


This is not a theoretical debating point: it was a common remark of the general sporting public in this neck of the woods in the days when ELVs were mentioned only in Harry Potter books and the like. Those other people may not be thrilled with the ping-pong caused by the 22 ELV (by itself, as opposed to general ping pong), but don't think it's any worse than the different kind of time wasting by the lineouts and the various infractions incurred from them.


There seemed to be enough lineouts with the FK sanction ELVs. Teams with a good lineout, or who wanted a breather, would kick the ball to touch from their 22 with a FK and have a go on the other team's throw; so wasn't the death of the lineout stuff.


And teams having a fullback of the Lee Byrne or Rob Kearney type (but not the doppelgänger Kearney who dropped 3 of his 1st 4 bombs for Leinster v. Scarlets before Xmas) saw the receiving of the 22 ELV bomb as an attacking chance.

 

[chief]

Lance I would love for Peter Marshall to get the gig too. But he won't. ARU got rid of him to save money. I can't see Chris White getting it either, his days as a high class International referee are over. He literally gets 0 big games these days, only just scraping on the IRB panels. Chris White, Stu Dickinson, Kaplan are all going after 2012 I would say. This is what I would expect, Watson takes over IRB Referees Manager, while Kaplan will take over from being SA Referees Manager. Or maybe we will see Tappe Henning or Michael Lamoullie, or even Keith Lawrence get it even Ed Morrisson who has a lot of cockiness after having an appearance in Invictus.

I know your all sick of my man love for Goddard, but commentators were singing high praises for Goddard in the first few weeks. People who very much dislike Goddard as a referee thought he was doing a great job in that season. I liked seeing the cards which Goddard would frequently dish out. He wanted fast paced rugby which the ELV's were meant to promote, however what he was getting was bullshit slow rugby, which was becoming closer to league. Goddard put a fucking stand on that, and decided to go heavier on the cards than any other referee. His ruck calls were correct, his refereeing was consistent, and teams became afraid to infringe. The last 30 minutes of the Hurricanes, Bulls match was a great promotion for the ELV's. And then Lyndon Bray decided to come around the corner and criticize his handling of the game, and it was becoming a thing of the past. The NZRU referees manager deciding to take it into his own hands and decide that freed up rugby was not the best idea.

I too can see the positives and negatives of the '22' law. It is annoying, and can be awfully confusion, and 50/50 does not have the result on which the IRB were hoping to get from that.

 

[Lee Grant]

Dear brave,

I can't see the connection between Peter Marshall not getting the gig and the fact that the ARU got rid of him to save money. The present CEO of the Rats had a pretty good record as boss of the Oz refs as far as I know, and his refereeing indicated a certain sympathy for positive rugby. Whether they would understand his accent over there is another matter.

Likewise I can't see a connection between White's days as a referee being numbered and his not getting the gig. I think that it may work the other way around: that he would find such a post suiting him very well. Again, his style of refereeing indicates a sympathy for the positive attitudes of players - and the opposite.

Andre Watson would be a good choice too though I get the impression that he is a company man.

Well done in your spray about Squeaky Goddard and speaking up for him again. I thought he was neither as bad as other people said or as good as you said. He had a lot of good games but, his remarks about a team ruining "my game" last year indicated a measure of immaturity. I thought his handling of players was a weak part of his game but that he came good later in the 2009 S14.

To be a good ref you have to know the laws and to be accurate in applying them etc etc - but give me a fellow like White or Marshall who could manage players every time.

I knew early about Squeaky's painful injury and was disappointed that he had to retire. If he had continued his improvement he would have been an excellent referee this year.

 

[chief]

I was hoping that his injury would have had at least a year left in him. I thought Goddard was a great asset to the ELV's, sure he was no Fitzgerald or anything but a lot of the time he did stick to his guns, unlike the rest of the referees who are like "next time is a yellow card" never happens. Yes it was a little too far saying, "Do not slow my ball down," ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOGXQni-da8 ) but it wasn't exactly like he was trying to fuck things up. He just wanted a good game of rugby to be played, and he wanted to ensure that player's weren't questioning his decisions so frequently which was what Matfield was doing in the Tri-Nations in 2008, which was pretty concerning. What was his injury, pretty concerning at the young age of 35 I believe?

White's days are past him, I liked how he treated rugby with respect as well as the players. You are right, just because his refereeing days are outnumbered doesn't mean administration wise they aren't.

I don't see how O'Brien got the gig in the first place as well. He probably refereed the singularly worst game of rugby I have ever seen in 1999 between Fiji and France. I have never seen such pathetic refereeing ever. I might just download it, to remind myself not to take O'Brien seriously when he says remarks that are completely stupid.

I did think of Peter Marshall, and indeed Gus Erickson's as the referees who had a true feel for the game. They were the referees who knew what players were talking about, Erickson being the referee who knew more then the players did about the laws. It was disappointing to say the least that Marshall left as the ARU manager because he had more brains then Bray. Pretty concerning that he is SANZAR's referees manager.

You are right as well about Watson being a company man. But he was a significant figure behind the ELV's in the first place. Surely that counts for something.

 

[Lee Grant]

Agree on that display by POB in the 1999 RWC. It was a shocker and to be fair to the man, he said so afterwards. This helped the Fijians about the same as Bryce Lawrence helped the Lions recently when he subsequently apologised to their THP Vickery for pinging him without cause in the first test.

Gus Erickson is a brainy guy and could be a candidate but I didn't think he was ever in the top 5.

One thing in his favour: he was only international referee that I know of who played prop.

 

[Jethro Tah]

My two cents, for what its worth (and from someone will little knowledge of the rugby rule book):

- more yellow cards means fewer players on the field thus more gaps and more running rugby, bring it on! Surely that would be an incentive for a team reliant on its forwards to abide by the rules.
- ambiguous intepretations of the laws will not help recruiting mungo players to rugby and likewise fans from the other codes will struggle to maintain interest.
- I love the game and will continue following it regardless but do find the ping pong and inconsistent refereeing frustrating at times so what hope do we have of converting players and fans from other codes.
- the above complaints applies mostly to rugby from an aussie perspective so little chance of seeing rule changes globally so I think maybe we will just have to adjust our mind set (and hopefully not the TV set).

On a slight digression, could someone put me straight on a ruling regarding penalty tries? If an infringement is made by the defense close to the tryline where a try seemed inevitable then shouldn't a penalty try be awarded. So shouldn't a defender infringing run the risk of a 7 pointer and not just a 3 pointer? If not the case then maybe this should be introduced.

Cheers,

 

[chief]

Erickson did referee a Lions test in 97. The final one. Generally they pick the best 3 neutral referees and getting the final one would mean he could have been top 5. Henning fell just like Chris White: continued refereeing after their peak, hence missing out on selection for the 03 WC, yet he is now an IRB selector.

Yes, how on earth Bryce Lawrence continues to blow his whistle is unbeknown to me. Also O'Brien said after Lawrence's performance that it was a top piece of scrum refereeing. The nerve of O'Brien.

A lot of people are saying Wayne Barnes is going to suceed O'Brien, but I certainly hope not. Barnes has at least 5-10 more years of refereeing left in him probably a lot more as he is only 30. I don't even want to see O'Brien in that job for another 5 days.

ParisTah- The law states for a penalty try if a try would have probably been scored. Even if a try would have been scored yet the team deliberately slows down attacking oppurtunity to cover for a space out wide, it will not be awarded, 3/5 times you will not even see a yellow card (Kaplan)

This is where consistency comes into play with the yellow cards. Some referees will yellow card for cynical infringements in the 'red zone' while some will not. If a penalty try occurs, so should a yellow card to the player guilty of the cynical infringement.

 

[Gagger]

From London's Guardian today

Rugby's road to nowhere? Why 2010 is a pivotal year

If the International Board fails to acknowledge it has a major problem, it will stand accused of wasting the biggest opportunity the sport has ever had

THE FUTURE OF RUGBY

A burning question for a new decade: what sort of sport does rugby union want to become? Is it simply content to remain football's imperfect cousin? Or is there a genuine will, by the time 2020 ticks around, to shed the ugly duckling feathers which still cling so stubbornly to the professional ideal? Assuming people crave the latter option, several things are going to have to change.

First and foremost, the global rugby family needs to set aside petty differences and take a broader perspective. In truth, the problem has never really been geographical. Rugby's tribe, for the most part, divides on sub-Darwinian lines: are you a forward or a back? One loves the biff, the other the open spaces. Both camps, however, share a relish for the camaraderie, the humour, the on-field edge and the mutual respect between opponents and, on a good day, officials. If any of those essential components disappear completely, the sport is on the road to nowhere in particular.

Which is why the first few months of 2010 are so vital. What sort of rational professional sport can expect to attract a new raft of followers with the following smorgasbord of delights: vicious rows about incomprehensible law interpretations, pompous statements from the Rugby Football Union castigating coaches for stating the obvious, ongoing eye-gouging cases, endless dreary kicking, umpteen injury bulletins, sub-standard stadium facilities and serious financial problems in both hemispheres. If I had a pound for everyone who has told me they're thinking of giving England games a miss this year because of the steep cost of the tickets in relation to the entertainment on offer, I'd be living in Monte Carlo. Regardless of the impressive club attendance figures over the festive season – 221,000 fans stepped through the turnstiles to watch Premiership rugby over Christmas and the New Year – that has to be a concern.

As with any growing business, too, rugby cannot maintain its old "make it up as we go along" approach indefinitely. So what next? At least in theory this could be the decade which sees the game – particularly at club level but further afield, too – reach a whole new level. Was it purely coincidence that English football's FA Cup third-round crowds were down at the weekend while rugby's went up? Or was it a tantalising glimpse of an era when people finally object to being herded around like segregated cattle and opt not to subsidise a grossly overblown sport which sold its soul long ago? Either way, if modern rugby union can rid itself of its own current surly, hair-shirted, masochistic image, the possibilities are extraordinary.

We have already written here about the significance of rugby union's re-admittance to the Olympic Games. Sevens can be the engine which revolutionises the finances of the sport, particularly in countries like Russia, China and the United States which can now claim a slice of the Olympic funding pie hitherto denied them. Has anyone seen Kenya playing sevens recently? Or Samoa? Or the seriously-quick Clinton Sills on the wing for Australia? Just take a look. There can be no question that, soon enough, the next generation of athletes will watch sevens and think: "I could win an Olympic medal at this." Once they get a taste for it – and with standards in the abbreviated game improving steadily – the jump to 15-a-side rugby will be more manageable than the traditionalists might think.

And here's another thing. Rugby will shortly have to confront the obvious. The increasing number of people sitting in the draughty stands of northern Europe are not there by accident: they want to enjoy a family day out in convivial company watching a good game where the result matters. If any part of that equation ceases to be consistently true, they will find alternative entertainment.

Admittedly, the European winter is already the coldest for 25 years and more snow is forecast but it is not bad weather which disillusions people so much as a lack of ambition. If the International Board fails to acknowledge it has a major problem in terms of the existing directives at the breakdown and does not do something about it pronto, it will stand accused of wasting the biggest opportunity the sport has ever had.

Sections of the broadcast media also need to take a fresh guard. In the car on Saturday night, listening to Sports Report, it was necessary to sit through acres of shock-free FA Cup reports before the day's rugby results were matter-of-factly broadcast, without any reference to individuals who might have played well or what the table looked like. Apart from occasional updates from the excellent Alastair Eykyn at Saracens, it was virtually an oval-ball-free zone. Even the Premiership's own official website had still failed to update its league table deep into Saturday evening. Does rugby union aspire to be a grown-up professional sport or not?

We will know the answer soon enough. If rugby, with its new Olympic go-faster stripes, cannot prosper in a decade of three World Cups hosted by New Zealand, England and Japan it does not deserve sympathy. If those in high office do not look at what Stade Français and Harlequins have been doing marketing-wise and fail to ensure the game on the field keeps pace with its changing backdrop, they should be forced to resign and watch the X-Factor on an endless loop. The 15-man game does not need Simon Cowell but it does need a subtle makeover. The future is bright if rugby is bright enough to grasp it.

COLD COMFORT

Good to see common sense intervening this week, with evening kick-offs at Sale and Leicester switched to the afternoon in an attempt to beat the prolonged wintry chill. The other night at Wasps we all sat around in the freezing cold awaiting some action, only to be told the kick-off had been delayed for five minutes because "the cricket has overrun". The terse response is that if rugby wants full stadiums, as well as armchair viewers, it should think very carefully about early evening kick-offs in December and January. It might just be another reason why so many televised English Premiership games this season have failed to set the world alight.

SNOW JOKE

And finally, it's nice to hear overseas professionals broadening their minds in the UK. "I'd seen snow from long distance on the top of a mountain in New Zealand, but I'd never seen it close up or falling from the sky," gasped Newcastle's Tane Tu'ipulotu this week. "When I opened my front door on the first snowy morning the other week I was a bit like a big kid. It seemed like a cartoon or something. I can remember being really nervous when I first put my foot in it, because I thought I was just going to sink through to the floor." Next he'll be asking when summer starts on Tyneside...

 

[Lee Grant]

Thanks for posting that article Gagger. I gave the a lot of mental ticks as I read along.

If I had a pound for everyone who has told me they're thinking of giving England games a miss this year because of the steep cost of the tickets in relation to the entertainment on offer, I'd be living in Monte Carlo. Regardless of the impressive club attendance figures over the festive season – 221,000 fans stepped through the turnstiles to watch Premiership rugby over Christmas and the New Year – that has to be a concern.

As some other journo mentioned: England should be concerned because there are only so many stupid bankers in London.

Cue T78 to respond that it doesn't matter a rat's arse what England fans are doing or thinking. Things in his patch are OK. He would have a point: the audience size at Twickenham, by itself, is neither here nor there.

But the satisfaction of England TV audiences should be of long term concern to all rugby fans because what happens in a big market like England has a knock on affect globally. If the broadcasters think what they are offering for the entertainment of their England customers is too expensive to produce in relation to the cost of alternative customer entertainment - and not necessarily just sport - then rugby as a TV product will be tainted.

True, the TV audience for internationals is only part of the equation. One should assume that if ground crowds are up for the GP and HC etc, then the TV viewing of them should be up also. But one couldn't deny that a fall in interest in viewing test match rugby would have an effect and it would trickle down to such things as what kind of deals SANZAR can expect, long term.



As with any growing business, too, rugby cannot maintain its old "make it up as we go along" approach indefinitely.

The 15th anniversary of professional rugby falls this year. It has been disappointing that the amateur rugby charter: a game for players of all shapes and sizes at the base, has not been reconciled with the commercial reality of what should happen at the top.

The professional players have reached a high stage of development in 15 years but there is too much of the old amateur blazer brigade in the administration of the game. A professional business should be run in a professional way. Any business that ignores the needs of the market place, whether their product is for goods or services, will do so at their peril.

The trick is to recognise the signs. In my many decades working at different levels in the hospitality and tourism sector I was involved in businesses where we in management knew what the customer wanted. That was until intermittent surveys told us we had been talking to each other too much and didn't have a clue. We had lost touch with our customers and we did it time and time again.

But at least we had the nous to do the surveys. They were fairly comprehensive. If the IRB did a survey they would get a few surprises and so would we. I don't think we will get a lot of votes for Barbarians type ice cream rugby, except from the rugby league sector of consumers. We would get a lot of votes for traditional rugby, but I bet we would see that a legal framework whereby generation of quick ball by attackers would be high on the list of what people wanted to be matched to those traditional values.



Has anyone seen Kenya playing sevens recently? Or Samoa? Or the seriously-quick Clinton Sills on the wing for Australia?

Yes and yes - and no, young Clinton hasn't played senior rugby yet and is not really a footie player at this stage.

Although Sevens is not as mainstream as some would like it to be, the refereeing of it is streets ahead of what we see in the 15 man game. One reason is that with only 14 players on the park, and fewer than that at every breakdown, it is a lot easier to referee, but the thing that impresses me most is the attitude of the players. They have a legal framework that encourages compliance of the laws and respect for the referee.

This framework includes the use of cards for what we may think are minor offences. Although this works because 7s games are just 14 minutes long, and 20 in finals, and the card period is shorter, the 15 man game could learn a lot from the salutary effect on the game. We saw in 2007 that there was nothing more useful to focus a players attention on positive play than getting, or a team mate getting, a yellow card for cynical play early in the game.

But it is an old song, I sing.


Admittedly, the European winter is already the coldest for 25 years and more snow is forecast but it is not bad weather which disillusions people so much as a lack of ambition.


If the International Board fails to acknowledge it has a major problem in terms of the existing directives at the breakdown and does not do something about it pronto, it will stand accused of wasting the biggest opportunity the sport has ever had.


Ambition will not manifest itself if coaches think the percentages are not to be ambitious. The breakdown has to be cleaned up by a bold stroke. Hoping that coaches and players will change in the current legal framework is like pissing against the wind. Hoping that referees will stop cynical play with the methods they are doing now with the laws they have now will get your boots wet too.

Cynical play at the breakdown will stop in a month if teams find themselves being free kicked time and time again and being carded with it. They won't have time to realign their defences.

Sections of the broadcast media also need to take a fresh guard. In the car on Saturday night, listening to Sports Report, it was necessary to sit through acres of shock-free FA Cup reports before the day's rugby results were matter-of-factly broadcast, without any reference to individuals who might have played well or what the table looked like.

Welcome to our world in Australia where the progress of injuries to league and Aussie Rules players take precedence.

 

[Thomond78]

Actually, the game in England is in more trouble than the ML. The rugby's drek, with most teams having no ambition at all (Saracens, I'm looking in your direction; Not Nots, you're excused detention, the rest of you stay behind). And there is no question that Twickenham is doing the punters like the pretty new boy in a Turkish prison shower block at every opportunity. It's a ghastly place to get to, a worse place to get back from, and a stadium to be avoided. Charging the prices they do to watch the crap that England team produce at the moment is a bit bloody much, even for rugby tragics.

However, the English TV market can go take a flying uphill fuck at a rolling doughnut as far as I'm concerned. Munster is a province, and our fans come from up to 200kms from Limerick in the middle of winter to go to games. The major population centre is 120km from Thomond Park, let's not forget. We have asked the ERC, for two seasons now, not to put our home games on Friday night, because anyone coming to the game has to travel that distance, in mid-winter, across rush-hour traffic and students, etc, coming home for the weekend - and then head home. This has been backed by the local cops, btw.

Net result? Our last two home games at 20:00 on a fucking Friday. Just so Sky can deliver a Friday evening match to the English TV market in the pub. Fuck the fans going, they're getting what they want. So, bluntly; if we get put through that shit to suit them, they can cry me a fucking river. :angryfire:

 

[MajorlyRagerly]

If you ask me, the technology used to identify the smallest possible ways to gain advantages, has simply gotten beyond the ability of referee's, who are human, to manage.

Lets face it, every team worth their salt now has a huge posse of analysts, technical specialists who cover everything from their opposition to the referee. They actively research and study ways to get things past the referee's. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't - but I have no doubt, that this is why there are more complaints about the ref than ever before.

 

[chief]

You do hold good points, the technology being used to outline the poor decisions referees make is causing more of an uproar. Also not to mention the amount of times you see a referee persuaded by a home teams crowd (Nigel Owens takes up this role) it is a concern, but I think it is a concern also that we aren't using the TMO more frequently, maybe a referrals system similar to cricket, is what Peter Marshall was saying. Or just when you don't get a number on a foul play offense you can 'go upstairs.' I don't support it, but it is a way to get teams to shut up, however slowing the game down as well as the momentum is certainly a concern if it were to be used.

 

[Lee Grant]

Erickson did referee a Lions test in 97. The final one. Generally they pick the best 3 neutral referees and getting the final one would mean he could have been top 5.

I meant he was never in my top 5. I saw him his whole career and he never really impressed me. I've met him though and he is an affable, intelligent man and the type of bloke who might do well as a boss ref.

Bryce Lawrence has refereed a Lions test too and he will never be in my top 5 either. He dudded the Lions twice - refereeing the test when he pinged Vickery repeatedly without cause, though he apologised for his mistakes later, and as a touch judge (AR) when he didn't recommend a red card to Burger for eye gouging and said: "At least a yellow" instead.

And there is no question that Twickenham is doing the punters like the pretty new boy in a Turkish prison shower block at every opportunity.

However, the English TV market can go take a flying uphill fuck at a rolling doughnut as far as I'm concerned.

Fuck the fans going, they're getting what they want. So, bluntly; if we get put through that shit to suit them, they can cry me a fucking river. :angryfire:

:lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

More tea Vicar?

Some of your most eloquent work T78.

 

[chief]

Call me biased Lee but Matt Goddard should have refereed the first Lions test. How Lawrence is continuing to get major test matches really does bewilder me. As stated, his father being a high referee manager certainly helps.

For a normal club match in the Guiness Premiership, they got 76000 people in at Twickers, that is impressive.

Just a question will the 2015 RWC Final be held in Wembley or Twickers?