Future of International Rugby

Stev_o

(For a start im trying to approach this as objective as possible so rest assure it's not just gripes against teams.)

Right so as im typing this Australia are taking on New Zealand in the 3N with the commentators describing it as the best 3N match so far, sadly they are clutching at straws and this game is no different from the rest of the matches we'v seen so far. Everything is decided kicks at goals and kicking is still the first option of choice for both teams. In fact you can get this game and compare it to most games in the past two years that have involved two teams of equal ability and draw alot of similarities and it ain't nice.

Modern game internationals now have become a conservative ridden mess and every single major rugby nation is guilty of taking this approach to win higher awards. Wales and ourselves won the GS in 2008/2009 both on the basis of good defence and grinding teams out by playing very little rugby. 2010 6N looks to follow this route with England trying to get a fit Wilko back in the fry, France can hardly throw 4 phases together and Scotland and Italy and way too limited at the moment.

As international rugby goes there are only a handfull of really good games that were played over the past two years, the only two that come to mind were Australia vs New Zealand in the 3N decider i think in Brisbane and probably Barbarians vs SA.

If you want to be picky you can finger the rot during the 2007 RWC with Argentina's success with kicking teams out, now don't get my wrong i said fair play to them during the RWC and i will so now but their tactics against France in the pool stages was to become a blueprint of most international matches from there on in.

Now we'v had the likes of Graham Henry and Robbie Deans critiseing the increased kicking elements of international saying that the IRB need to do something as teams are too afraid to run the ball back!

So the question is if international rugby continues on this route how long will it take for people to completely loose interest. I know some people here will say they ll take this style of rugby if it nets them trophies but seriously what team would you prefer to wacth Ireland 2005/6 team or Ireland now?

Instead of positivity you are encouraged to not make a mistake,the kicking means that you are trying to force the opposition into a mistake,its sad stuff alright and I dont think it will change.

handsomecake

stevo i was going to write a massive thread on this after the SA VS AUS game.

habana,sivivatu,rokocoko,pietersen,muliaina,turner ,giteau,steyn, have not scored a try between them in 5 matches so far.what odds would you have gotten in the bookies for that?no winger has scored after 5 games....incrdible.i cant remember the last time i seen a breakaway try for anyone????????
in the south africa vs australia game NO TEAM PUT 5 CONSECUTIVE PHASES TOGETHER.
rugby is on the verge of falling apart.
what happened to the halcion days of larkham,cullen,lomu, tiquiri and players making scithing clean breaks and incisive moves.ITS GONE.there is no enterprise at all any more with strike runners petrified to run the ball.

a few things i have noticed are
1:the world over defending teams are yards off side all the time. the recipient of a pass nearly gets ball and tackler at the same time in so many cases.
2:the breakdown is a shambles..........say what you like but nobody has a breeze any more.my younger brother was asking me to explain to him today why certain penalties were given and i couldnt tell him because i hadnt a clue.
3: the kicking element.as o driscoll said after a match in the last world cup(cant remember which) "you were better off without the ball" .field position has become the preeminent facet of rugby.stay in their half,they will eventually drop it or infringe and we will kick it over the bar for 3 points.
i can only think of a few ways to change it.


allow hands in the ruck from anyone.once you come in the gate and are on your feet fair game.then its just whoever has the biggest biceps can rip it away!!
reduce drop goals to either 2 or 1 point and maybe reduce a penalty to 2.
the advantage rule CHRIST THIS WINDS ME UP.you should not get a "free shot at goal " ie a drop kick and then you miss and they pull it back for a penalty. its ridiculous. if the other team infringes and you go through a few rucks etc THATS YOUR ADVANTAGE ,you still have the bloody ball.if someone fouls you in football and the ball goes to one of your teammates feet you play on......you still have advantage. they should employ this in rugby.

its horrible to see masaga,hosea gear,digby ione ,david smith et al run in bundles of tries in the super 14 but not get picked for their national teams due to a lack of kicking prowess.running rugby should be encouraged and embraced.
we should not embrace munster(pre howlett ,mafi) england world cup 03 style rugby.its negative and is ruining the product.its winning rugby yes but its paint dryingly boring.

we have not even got in to double figure for tries in this years tri nations after five games. its outrageous.i look back at my old tri nations dvd's and they are amazing......the reason i like the sport in the first place.the product i know and love ( and played) is dying.

i will also point you to the comments from the lions physio(think his name is mayhew) where he points to all players on the pitch being the same size and speed.its a bi-product of professionalism yes,but it also lends in part to the attritional nature of the modern game.crash bash wallop,penalty goal,crash bash wallop,penalty goal.every team will become a mirror image of each other.

munster,argentina,england 03 et al have formed a blueprint for ugly winning rugby.munster england and argie/south africa fans will applaud and rightly so. if i was their coach/fan i would be chuffed.
BUT HOW DO YOU ATTRACT NEW FANS TO THE GAME.
rugby league and union are becoming one and the same
sorry for the blog but its really annoying me.

most of you on here think im a pratt anyway!!!!!!

Stev_o

It's good to see that other people share the same views but ill take you up on Union becoming League, because unlike Union you actually see great worked tries in League these days. Watch some Super League during the summer to get your rugby fix as chances are you ll be half asleep watching these internationals.

funky penguin

handsomecake wrote: »

BUT HOW DO YOU ATTRACT NEW FANS TO THE GAME.
rugby league and union are becoming one and the same
sorry for the blog but its really annoying me.

It is a little boring the way its played these days, but like it or not, winning has brought in new fans.

I've NEVER seen as many Leinster jersey's in my home town as I have this summer. Seriously, combine all the summers of my life and they wouldn't come close. More Irish jersey's, but no where near the amount of Leinster ones.

handsomecake

funky penguin wrote: »

It is a little boring the way its played these days, but like it or not, winning has brought in new fans.

I've NEVER seen as many Leinster jersey's in my home town as I have this summer. Seriously, combine all the summers of my life and they wouldn't come close. More Irish jersey's, but no where near the amount of Leinster ones.

i think there is a plastic element to that.as in "falseness". it was trendy to be a leinster fan last year with the way things went.
what i mean is attracting new fans fron non-rugby playing nations and non rugby strong holds.

of course leinster jerseys multiplied after the heineken cup win. its not that more loved the game ........its the bandwagon.the same way you didnt see any one wearing a chelsea shirt in ireland pre -mourinho.they all came out of the wood work after he won the league the first time.
doesnt mean the game is more attractive. being a leinster fan was in vogue this year.and as a side note.................lets see how many of them are still around next year after leinster get their arse handed to them this year (and im from leinster).

anonymous_joe

The fault lies with two groups of men:

One is made up of the likes of Les Kiss, Shaun Edwards, etc. Basically the defensive coaches. Defence in rugby has come on leaps and bounds in recent years. Watch a game from four or five seasons ago, let alone ten and the defences are just awful. Really low grade stuff. And that's all been made possible by;

Conditioning coaches - rugby players are a lot faster, fitter and stronger these days. One of the lads I was in school with has been in the Leinster squad a few years ago (think he's just gone to another club on loan or something) and the contrast between him in school and even just a year later was staggering.

Defences are so good because players are so fit and strong, they can cover an enormous area of the field. If you don't challenge at the breakdown, you basically have one two at most lads in the ruck, one or two full backs, and the rest in your defensive line. It's nearly impossible to break that, so you start to kick to target wholes in their defensive line, to which they respond with excellent fielders and kickers, until eventually you end up just kicking until someone makes a mistake.

ALH-06

It seems like Henry & Deans both agree with you, lads.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/8213630.stm

The decisive scores in the Lions series, Heineken Cup final, 6N Grandslam decider & most 3N matches including todays one have all been from kicks, not tries.

The second Lions test stands out in my mind - there was a fatalistic sense of what was gonna happen as soon as O'Gara put that ball up in the air in the last minute. Saffers would look for the penalty off the reclaim / pick and drive until they forced a penalty... Horrific to watch but that's what wins matches now.

funky penguin

handsomecake wrote: »

i think there is a plastic element to that.as in "falseness". it was trendy to be a leinster fan last year with the way things went.
what i mean is attracting new fans fron non-rugby playing nations and non rugby strong holds.

of course leinster jerseys multiplied after the heineken cup win. its not that more loved the game ........its the bandwagon.the same way you didnt see any one wearing a chelsea shirt in ireland pre -mourinho.they all came out of the wood work after he won the league the first time.
doesnt mean the game is more attractive. being a leinster fan was in vogue this year.and as a side note.................lets see how many of them are still around next year after leinster get their arse handed to them this year (and im from leinster).

Very true. However, this is how the majority of sport fans come to follow their respective sport.

I won't lie, I started loving rugby because I saw Leinster beat some mickey mouse team (can't remember, so long ago and I was only a wee young un!). I don't know how I'd feel if they had lost. But anyways it got me playing it for a bit and I grew to love the game (and still do, despite its problems).

A friend of mine is (or was rather) a chelsea bandwagon supporter. Mysteriously turned up in the pub one day with a blue jersey despite showing no interest in soccer whatsoever! However, in fairness to him, he stuck through their difficult times and now plays soccer for his local club.

I suppose my point is that bandwaggon support isn't all that bad. True, as you said, alot can be plastic support. But if it gets a handful interested in the sport, supporting their local clubs and going on to truely love the sport, I'm all for it.

I do see what you mean though - if the game was more attractive perhaps it would give cause for more people to stick with their teams through the tough times.

Crash

Simplest way? all kicks worth 2 points instead of three. Score today would then have been 12 - 15, which probably more accurately represents the game and posession stats than 18-19 did. Also means that Oz would have had to push for the try no matter what at the close of the game, rather than just gain field position and hope McCaw would get pinged again :P

FridaysWell

Look best way of solving this problem, is that if you play rugby, have some nuts and try something different. One thing that international players must have is the ability and nous to make (good) independent desicions on the pitch, individually and collectively. So therefore maybe they are relying on the sideline a bit too much. I'm not saying they should play completely by themselves, but there should be a balance if ye get me. Now as people pointed out above, players are afraid to run the ball back and kick hoping that the other team makes a mistake. Needless to say this is negative rugby.

It all comes down to basics! If you pass the ball quickly, and properly, you can find space. Two hands on the ball, its what caused BO'D to slip up defensivly against the All Blacks down under in 2008, Conrad Smith got through and they scored. There is always a way to break a defence. Surprise them. Kicking ain't the way to do it. As ye all said lol. . .

Anyway basics, basics!:p:p

[Jackass]

Fix the laws at the breakdown and fix the problem.

Teams are kicking away the ball because staying on the feet and not being allowed to shield the ball by the tackler and next in not being able to esentially flop on the ball (has to be on 2 feet and supporting his own weight, not leaning on the tackled player or over him) means the it is very difficult to defend the rook and any kind of isolation going forward and you're likely to be turned over or penalty given away, so teams are not opting for a gain of 5 yards and being penalised at the rook when they can make a 50 yard gain and not be penalised with a kick...it's all about percentages and with the current laws, the percentage gain is always with a kick because of the conscession at the break down.

Give advantage at the breakdown back to the attacking team and you will see a hell of a lot more running rugby, flair and attack.

corny

[Jackass] wrote: »

Give advantage at the breakdown back to the attacking team and you will see a hell of a lot more running rugby, flair and attack.

Agreed.

The emphasis of late has been to promote a fairer contest at the breakdown. Now in theory that sounds great but in practice teams are just not willing to take the ball up in their own half anymore. Can you blame them? I can't. Especially when you have a team like South Africa leading the way. You try string the phases together and you'll probably give away 15 points from the pressure they exert at the breakdown. The prudent thing to do is to kick it away.

Peter B

I've been thinking about this recently and have come up with something which I reckon would really help to improve the game. I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere by rugby experts so maybe its all hot air.

Unfortunately the rugby football is far too good quality. Players can kick 50+ metres out of hand and can score penalties and drop goals from inside their own half. Also they can kick up and unders so high allowing the chasers to arrive at the same time the ball is landing. If the ball was worse quality, maybe by being heavier, players would kick far less. It would not eradicate kicking all together but would largely reduce the boring kicking game we see today. I think kicking a conversion from the sideline would be made far more difficult and would force teams to try score as near to under the posts as possible. Far fewer trys would be converted.

This, in my opinion would far improve the game and force teams to run a lot more making it a more enjoyable experience for both fans and players.

Morf

Peter B wrote: »

I've been thinking about this recently and have come up with something which I reckon would really help to improve the game. I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere by rugby experts so maybe its all hot air.

Unfortunately the rugby football is far too good quality. Players can kick 50+ metres out of hand and can score penalties and drop goals from inside their own half. Also they can kick up and unders so high allowing the chasers to arrive at the same time the ball is landing. If the ball was worse quality, maybe by being heavier, players would kick far less. It would not eradicate kicking all together but would largely reduce the boring kicking game we see today. I think kicking a conversion from the sideline would be made far more difficult and would force teams to try score as near to under the posts as possible. Far fewer trys would be converted.

This, in my opinion would far improve the game and force teams to run a lot more making it a more enjoyable experience for both fans and players.

For a look into the future of this scenario see: Javelin.

Do you restart scoring records post deliberately hindered ball performance?

FridaysWell

Peter B wrote: »

I've been thinking about this recently and have come up with something which I reckon would really help to improve the game. I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere by rugby experts so maybe its all hot air.

Unfortunately the rugby football is far too good quality. Players can kick 50+ metres out of hand and can score penalties and drop goals from inside their own half. Also they can kick up and unders so high allowing the chasers to arrive at the same time the ball is landing. If the ball was worse quality, maybe by being heavier, players would kick far less. It would not eradicate kicking all together but would largely reduce the boring kicking game we see today. I think kicking a conversion from the sideline would be made far more difficult and would force teams to try score as near to under the posts as possible. Far fewer trys would be converted.

This, in my opinion would far improve the game and force teams to run a lot more making it a more enjoyable experience for both fans and players.

In a perfect world, a decent idea. But honestly??

Not everyone can kick that good! And if you make the ball harder to get the basics right with then the game would worsen.

I can see you would like to blame Gilbert and Webb Ellis for making good balls!! lol:p:p

2040

emphasis needs to be on tries, which it isn't currently. It need's to be remedied alright.

FridaysWell

2040 wrote: »

emphasis needs to be on tries, which it isn't currently. It need's to be remedied alright.

When one scores a try = third best thing after sex

So that means you made an excellent point good sir.

Diamondmaker

Crash wrote: »

Simplest way? all kicks worth 2 points instead of three. Score today would then have been 12 - 15, which probably more accurately represents the game and posession stats than 18-19 did. Also means that Oz would have had to push for the try no matter what at the close of the game, rather than just gain field position and hope McCaw would get pinged again :P

It IS that simple I believe. When the try was changed to 5 points that chanmged the game for the better for years.

The game has evolved more since and the try again must be made more attractive a points option.

Penalties and DGs = 2 makes the try way more attractive again.

A penalty is worth 60% of a try, or 2 trump an unconverted try. The penalty and DG need to be dramatically de valued, so as 1 try is not trumped by 2 forays into opponent half possibly yielding 2 penalties.

Im not statistician but its interesting that an NRL try is worth double the penanlty and field goal. They never kick penanties, a 2nd set of 6 is almost always used on winning a penalty. The FG option is mainly used to win a tied game in OT. There are way more tries in NRL than union...........

gosplan

RE: The advantage rule.

I always wondered, what's the point of going for a drop goal that's basically the same as converting a penalty?

Wouldn't teams be better trying a crosskick?

Depp

The future of international rugby...its clearly me:D:D:D

emergingstar

what are the chances of them cahnging the rules

Stev_o

emergingstar wrote: »

what are the chances of them cahnging the rules

When they realise that people would rather watch paint dry then watch international rugby.

If anything once the Aussie crowds say call it time and go watch a better spectacle in League that's when you ll see something being done about the rules, John O'Neil can guarantee that!

irishbucsfan

gosplan wrote: »

RE: The advantage rule.

I always wondered, what's the point of going for a drop goal that's basically the same as converting a penalty?

Wouldn't teams be better trying a crosskick?

I can see where you're coming from... but generally when you see players taking snap drop goals when the referee sticks his arm out its more a reactionary thing. Almost a "lets get this over with so we can get the penalty" thing.

With a crosskick that would involve the out half signalling the move to the rest of his players and ensuring the signal is understood and then kicking it, whereas with a dropgoal he just has to look up and kick the thing.

irishbucsfan

Stev_o wrote: »

When the realise that people would rather watch paint dry then watch international rugby.

If anything once the Aussie crowds say call it time and go watch a better spectacle in League that's when you ll see something being done about the rules, John O'Neil can guarantee that!

Aussies are switching to footy anyway.

Dont have statistical proof, just noticing the folks on the street.

Hyperbullet

FridaysWell wrote: »

When one scores a try = third best thing after sex

So that means you made an excellent point good sir.

Sorry to go o/t but whats the second best thing??

A blowie?

anonymous_joe

Hyperbullet wrote: »

Sorry to go o/t but whats the second best thing??

Sex, food, sport? In that order?

FridaysWell

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Sex, food, sport? In that order?

anon joe answered my question

Don't forget seeing Leinster thrash Munster in croker. . . Being there was the three thrown together

sock puppet

FridaysWell wrote: »

anon joe answered my question

Don't forget seeing Leinster thrash Munster in croker. . . Being there was the three thrown together

I hope to God I never sit next to you at a match!

FridaysWell

sock puppet wrote: »

I hope to God I never sit next to you at a match!

Im the best Leinster supporter ever. Period.

Oh and you would be missing out on all the freebies I give out.

chupacabra

FridaysWell wrote: »

Im the best Leinster supporter ever. Period.

Oh and you would be missing out on all the freebies I give out.

Id rather not leave the stadium covered in cum thank you very much.

anonymous_joe

chupacabra wrote: »

Id rather not leave the stadium covered in cum thank you very much.

There's definitely a Bruno reference that could go in here.

Diamondmaker

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Aussies are switching to footy anyway.

Dont have statistical proof, just noticing the folks on the street.

Thats also down to the failure of the Oz team to be competitive at all really, to their expectations, over the last few years..

I can totally see the appeal of NRL these days, more tries, more ball through hands and the rules allow pace and therefore big hits and big plays. I have seen some insane tries over the last season that you would never dream up in any Union league.

Sophisticated it is not sometimes but it is entertaining.

anonymous_joe

Diamondmaker wrote: »

Thats also down to the failure of the Oz team to be competitive at all really, to their expectations, over the last few years..

I can totally see the appeal of NRL these days, more tries, more ball through hands and the rules allow pace and therefore big hits and big plays. I have seen some insane tries over the last season that you would never dream up in any Union league.

Sophisticated it is not sometimes but it is entertaining.

They've the smallest player pool of the Tri Nations, and it really shows.

Diamondmaker

Diamondmaker wrote: »

Thats also down to the failure of the Oz team to be competitive at all really, to their expectations, over the last few years..

I can totally see the appeal of NRL these days, more tries, more ball through hands and the rules allow pace and therefore big hits and big plays. I have seen some insane tries over the last season that you would never dream up in any Union league.

Sophisticated it is not sometimes but it is entertaining.

And more wife/girlfriend beaters,rapists,druggies and alchoholics than you can shake a stick at.
How any parent in AUS would encourage their children to follow league instead of rugby is beyond me,you couldnt find a more disgusting bunch as role models if you tried.

I love league but they are a horrible bunch over there.

Stev_o

Tbh if Union doesn't step up in the next few years i can definitely see alot of SH fanbase going to Rugby League which at the moment is infinitely more impressive and entertaining. Even worse is if the RFL got their fingers out and pushed the game in the States i could easily see it overleap unions progression there.

One suggestion that was made was the introduction of rolling substitutions, to me it sounds like a good idea as it would mean that there wouldn't be a lull in the game where most players are dead on their feat.

@Goose it's the same with the New Zealanders in Union there have been a few high cases of assault on their wives by husbands.

Stev_o

Stev_o wrote: »

Tbh if Union doesn't step up in the next few years i can definitely see alot of SH fanbase going to Rugby League which at the moment is infinitely more impressive and entertaining. Even worse is if the RFL got their fingers out and pushed the game in the States i could easily see it overleap unions progression there.

One suggestion that was made was the introduction of rolling substitutions, to me it sounds like a good idea as it would mean that there wouldn't be a lull in the game where most players are dead on their feat.

I would love that.

Steve I agree with you on the NZ's in union but league players take the piss,they are 10x worse than any premiership footballers.Most are plain scum.

Stev_o

Kaiden Fat Paperweight wrote: »

I would love that.

Steve I agree with you on the NZ's in union but league players take the piss,they are 10x worse than any premiership footballers.Most are plain scum.

Oh yeah i know that there is some serious lunatics playing footy over there caused by the celebrity status, booze women and lifestyle .

If only international rugby had more of this,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knVapkn5T2k

FridaysWell

chupacabra wrote: »

Id rather not leave the stadium covered in cum thank you very much.

I don't blame you. But would a free Malcom O'Kelly worn jersey be enuff compensation?? :P

chupacabra

FridaysWell wrote: »

I don't blame you. But would a free Malcom O'Kelly worn jersey be enuff compensation?? :P

Dont want to leave covered in shít either :rolleyes:

FridaysWell

chupacabra wrote: »

Dont want to leave covered in shít either :rolleyes:

I take my hat off to you.


Nice one :P

OldJay

anonymous_joe wrote: »

One is made up of the likes of Les Kiss, Shaun Edwards, etc. Basically the defensive coaches. Defence in rugby has come on leaps and bounds in recent years

Coaches like Les are not just used for defence patterns or the technical side of a tackle, they are used for coaching in attack too. After all, if anyone is going to know how to crack open a defence line, it will be a defence specialist.

The area which has choked the game, in my opinion anyway, is the ruck. Teams should have no reason to not have to commit players to a ruck. It should be a contestable affair. Not a done and dusted stage of possession. More players in the ruck and there's more space.

I feel a lot of the posts about the game changing are slightly overreactive.
As for the sport in Aussie, it needs success via tournament wins.

Be that in the S14, Tri or World Cup. Post-1999 in Australia, rugby union was doing very well indeed on top of the RWC, Tri Nations/Bledisloe wins. They'd a great squad, best captain ever, a super backline and wonderful pack plus excellent support on the back of that.

OldJay

Kaiden Fat Paperweight wrote: »

Steve I agree with you on the NZ's in union but league players take the piss,they are 10x worse than any premiership footballers.Most are plain scum.

Thats a disgraceful generalisation and entirely blinkered, I'd say. Unless of course, you've been ignoring the rugby union headlines over the past few years.

OldJay

Kaiden Fat Paperweight wrote: »

And more wife/girlfriend beaters,rapists,druggies and alchoholics than you can shake a stick at.
How any parent in AUS would encourage their children to follow league instead of rugby is beyond me,you couldnt find a more disgusting bunch as role models if you tried

Wife beaters? How about Tuituopu? Sivivatu? Cecillon, the ex France intl even shot his wife dead.
Rapists? Japie Mulder?
Drugs? An especially RL thing? Are you serious especially with the past few months in mind??? :eek:
Alcoholics? And you finish off with the demon drink. Of course, no rugby union player or staffer has ever gone overboard with grog and made the papers, eh? Henjak, Barkley, Dunning, Henson, Thomas, Philips, Jeffrey...
Ask Mike Tindall for a lift and he'll say "not quite yet, mate"...
Don't forget racism and GBH (on and off-field) and you'll have more fair overview.

No angels in either code. Its down to the individuals. Not the code they play.

Amabokke

Nothing wrong with rugby in it's current game. You not going to please everyone by changing the rules to suit expansive rugby. Teams will always adjust to the rules of the game and play a game that is attractive to some and boring to others.

The big question here is what is important for teams and their supporters. Playing expansive all the time, scoring tries but only win every 2nd game. Would Irish supporters be happy if Ireland play expansive running rugby, score 3-6 great tries in each match but win/loose 50/50? Or would they be happy if Ireland score lower amount of tries but win every game?

In this year's 6N Eng and France scored more tries than Ireland but both lost. NZ in the 2007 WC played expansive and lost before the finals, which drove the fans mad!

In the first WC there was over quarter of a million spectators watching the rugby WC, in the last one over 4 billion. The game will never changed to League regardless of the rules. There is too much history, culture and passion with this game. Sponsorships are also a big thing.

The IRB can change the laws again and some teams will just rise again with some gameplan that others will find boring.

Although I also do like a bit more action in rugby I won't ever loose interest in this game or switch to league.

I believe any changes that will be made in future will be the change in tournaments. Greater integration between SH and NH and bigger club competitions.

Stev_o

Amabokke wrote: »

Nothing wrong with rugby in it's current game. You not going to please everyone by changing the rules to suit expansive rugby. Teams will always adjust to the rules of the game and play a game that is attractive to some and boring to others.

The big question here is what is important for teams and their supporters. Playing expansive all the time, scoring tries but only win every 2nd game. Would Irish supporters be happy if Ireland play expansive running rugby, score 3-6 great tries in each match but win/loose 50/50? Or would they be happy if Ireland score lower amount of tries but win every game?

.

But the thing is though that was what more or less happened to us, besides the RWC and 08 6N we played lovely heads up rugby that was very pleasing to watch but we never got past the final hurdle we'd always land straight on our face.

This year we played a very low que gameplan which was more rugged and win at all costs sort of mold and it won us the GS. You can jump for joy that we won yes but christ it was boring rugby.

Amabokke

Stev_o wrote: »

But the thing is though that was what more or less happened to us, besides the RWC and 08 6N we played lovely heads up rugby that was very pleasing to watch but we never got past the final hurdle we'd always land straight on our face.

This year we played a very low que gameplan which was more rugged and win at all costs sort of mold and it won us the GS. You can jump for joy that we won yes but christ it was boring rugby.

Well, I believe you have answered your own question. Nobody wants to see their team loose, boring rugby or not supporters would take a win any day.

anonymous_joe

Amabokke wrote: »

Well, I believe you have answered your own question. Nobody wants to see their team loose, boring rugby or not supporters would take a win any day.

Yeah, true that, but if you're playing boring rugby and losing you risk losing all your fans.

I can see rugby losing out to football a lot in Australia and South Africa for definite. It's growing in this country because we're doing well, imagine if we'd gone the route of Scotland at the turn of the millenium...

2040

I agree with most of what has been said on this thread, but it's depressing me.

Amabokke

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Yeah, true that, but if you're playing boring rugby and losing you risk losing all your fans.

Every goes through good and bad phases. Fans will just have to suck it up when they loose and enjoy it when they win. You might loose fans when teams start to loose but they'll always be back when things go well.

Nobody wants to see Darvis Patton running the 100m, most people would follow Usain Bolt.