Are the law changes putting off the fans?

Gambler

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/8391643.stm

Rob Andrew has warned fans could be turned off by the way the laws of the game are being interpreted.

The Rugby Football Union's (RFU) director of elite rugby said the way laws are applied reduces entertainment.

"I'm concerned crowds will decline unless changes are made. I think we're seeing it already," he told the International Rugby Board (IRB).

"You just have to ask people in the game - some coaches say they're turning the TV off when watching games."

Andrew added that newly-introduced law variations make teams fearful of taking the ball into contact, with the result they are kicking for territory too often.

Interesting article, worth reading the full thing, I have to say I do think that the ball seems to spend a lot of time flying from one end of the pitch to the other but there's no fear of me abandoning the game any time soon

What do others think?

Trojan

I was concerned after the SA game on Sat that it must have been pretty awful for neutrals.

thomond2006

Quite ironic that this comes from Rob Andrew, whose team are themselves responsible (can't blame the laws) for playing boring rugby.

Another PR whoring excerise tbh.

anonymous_joe

I hate Rob Andrew. I feel dirty agreeing with the man whose killed English rugby. Actually, I quite like him now... Anyway, digressing.

Rugby's getting a bit shít. It's too kicky, too defensive, etc. I still love watching, but we all want to see mroe tries.

The problem is that the powers that be tried to make the game better artificially. They were idealistic. Overly so. It clouded their vision, and what they thought would free attacks actually enhanced defense.

[Jackass]

Aw let's face it, the game has gone to muck.

A lot of the law changes were very negative, favouring the defending team..it leads to scrappy, broken play, where teams kick the ball away aimlessly, as they don't want it, they just want the territory and then punish the opposition for being penalised with the ball in their own half.

Skill, class, invension and flair are a thing of the past now I'm afraid. The best RUGBY teams haven't a hope anymore, they try to play far too much rugby, and they are being replaced by negative, boring, skillless tripe.....for the most part!

The game peaked for a while, but the tinkering was awful and I dread to think what teams will be like in a year or two when mastering the art of negative play without the ball rugby...15 outhalves a side looking to play territory...Kind of like a really really bad version of ozzie rules...If I didn't love the game and if I wasn't so attached to the teams that I am, I think I would find it very difficult coming in as a neautral to find anything great about the game at the moment.

Luckily it's still far better than football which is no longer a contact sport and is dire dire stuff to watch.

Gambler

Yeah I have to say I haven't looked at a game as if it was my first time watching the sport in a while but now that you mention it I don't remember seeing anything as "intense" as it used to be for quite a while..

handsomecake

Trojan wrote: »

I was concerned after the SA game on Sat that it must have been pretty awful for neutrals.

i was bored out of my mind during it and the fact we won was a minor consolation.we couldnt even muster a try at home.

a win is a win BUT id love to see us win with tries like the allblacks did against france or the aussies against wales.i dont mind when penalty kicks and drop goals supplement your score ,but when they are all you can score its boring. south africa in the tri-nations is a case in point.they didnt play any rugby.the stats about mike philips making more passes on his own then the whole springbok team is incredible.whats worse is that they still won with this un-enterprising,conservative dross.and when they win it cant really be questioned.we live in a results driven world now and entertainment is second fiddle.

i even think this weekends match has the potential to be a dour affair

Podge_irl

Trojan wrote: »

I was concerned after the SA game on Sat that it must have been pretty awful for neutrals.

I think the depressing thing is that it was one of the better games for neutrals.

OldJay

handsomecake wrote: »

we couldnt even muster a try at home

Oh the horror! Imagine that. A defence like South Africa's . . . not yielding a try :rolleyes:

enda1

I quite like watching rugby but have never played so my understanding of the rules is not what it could be. I still mostly get it though (I think).

What are the major changes though which we are referring to here?
Is it the quick penalisation of holding on the ground?
Offensive support going off their feet when supporting a rook?
The fact that you can't bring the ball into the 22 to kick to touch (without bouncing in)?
?

For me the game is very interesting at the moment and the growth in defensive skill has made it more exciting. However it means even the offensive players don't expect a midfield break that when one happens the breaker is left isolated and stranded that they end up conceding a penalty holding on the ground.

Hmm...

enda1

Justind wrote: »

Oh the horror! Imagine that. A defence like South Africa's . . . not yielding a try :rolleyes:

How many breaks and half breaks did we make though??

Just the silly over the tops and chips to the corner giving away possession made it difficult to run in a try.

We rarely went past a few phases of possession in their 22.

Also they had made so many tackles (due to our superior possession) that they were bound to get tired and miss one or two.

OldJay

enda1 wrote: »

How many breaks and half breaks did we make though??

I've seen the stats here at work and I can say, around the same as the game vs Wales last March.

enda1 wrote: »

Just the silly over the tops and chips to the corner giving away possession made it difficult to run in a try

When you target the lineout as a platform for attacking in the opposition's third of the field, you'll find tactics adapt like that.

enda1 wrote: »

We rarely went past a few phases of possession in their 22

The Springboks didn't just sit there waiting for Ireland to hit them. They're a good side defensively and are very organised. Not quite as simple as some would make out in breaching their lines.

enda1 wrote: »

Also they had made so many tackles (due to our superior possession) that they were bound to get tired and miss one or two

It seems like you're praising the Irish team in order to slam them.

As I said before in one of the previous threads on the same subject, who is moaning about the laws of the game? Why do you think the season is not going well for him? Because of the laws?

lobber

Do many regular posters ever watch the Rugby Gold often on TG4 showing Ireland matches from the 80's and early 90's. I sit down to watch these to see the old style of rugby so many people seem to romanticise about, but ultimately all i end up seeing are boring helter-skelter encounters. Rucks, line outs and scrums are a free for all and there is actually less continuity of play and more stoppages.....

It is true that these games of another era might throw up more line breaks but mainly because of the vast differences in player fitness levels at the time. So before we start looking to emulate rugby and classic encounters of old we should remember that these 'classics' were few and far between.

It's not the rules that are the problem, it's a teams mindset and how they want to play rugby. SA have all the tools they need to play expansive rugby against any team but last weekend they chose not to!!!!

lobber

The 2nd time i read the article it just think it is hilarious now!!!

Martyn Thomas, the chairman of the RFU's management board, said English rugby was lucky to have extremely dedicated fans, but their support should not be taken for granted.
"We want to make sure they've left saying they've watched a great game of rugby and I'm concerned that's not going to happen,"
Eh well maybe England should get a proper coach/manager and try to play some rugby themselves!!!

"There's data to suggest that spectators are not comfortable with what's going on. Hopefully sense will prevail if attendances dive and the spectacle is not what it should be. Clearly the IRB have to look at that."
There's 'data' to 'suggest'... I remember Homer in one Simpsons episode "Oh, people can come up with statistics to prove anything. 14% of people know that.”

This is just Rob Andrews blaming passing the blame of their poor AI's onto the laws and not taking responsibility that as 'Director of Elite Rugby' he has done nothing of value! And long may that continue!

Paulw

In fairness, I was at the most boring game of rugby I've ever seen in my life last Saturday. It was Scotland V Argentina. There was very little kicking of the ball, but it was mindless rugby, passing the ball along the line, back and forth. No real line breaks, no "sensible" kicking, no real tactics. It was boring as hell.

Many teams try to use the rules to their advantage. Yes, a lot of the time, there are spells of kicking the ball back and forth which is a poor use of the quality players on the pitch. But, there are times when a good kick down the line, or across the pitch can change a game.

yimrsg

Rob Andrew is clearly trying to deflect attention away from Englands dour performances during the autumn series. In the match against Argentina, the fans booed England off the pitch at half time with the scores 9 a piece. Against New Zealand, they never looked likely winners despite being 6-6 at half time.

He would be better served looking at why so many English players were unavailable through injury and address that problem. Falling numbers of fans and booing their own team at half time is hardly the fault of the rules of the game?

I do however think that some revision of the rules needs to be done, far too often defending teams deliberately slow ball down in the 22 and only cough up a penalty and a talking to from the referee. I would like to see a yellow card for the defending team, say if there is more than one instance or a try was a real possibility. Finally, if the referee deemed the offence great/blatant enough award a penalty try.

Furthermore, there should always be 8 forwards/players in the scrum on the pitch in the event of a yellow card for a team, it would create space for the attacking 15 and hopefully encourage them to go for a try.

Webbs

yimrsg wrote: »

I do however think that some revision of the rules needs to be done, far too often defending teams deliberately slow ball down in the 22 and only cough up a penalty and a talking to from the referee. I would like to see a yellow card for the defending team, say if there is more than one instance or a try was a real possibility. Finally, if the referee deemed the offence great/blatant enough award a penalty try.

Those rules are already in place and the referees are not being strong enough in its implementation.

I would like to see the tackler not be able to compete for the ball as at present the players like Brussow and Pocock make a tackle and while getting to their feet in a one motion never really let go of the tackled player or the ball preventing the ball being put into a position for the supporting players to use quickly.
This means that all the advantage is with the defender as noone else in theory can use their hands resulting in penalty after penalty and the kicking game we are seeing

OldJay

Webbs wrote: »

I would like to see the tackler not be able to compete for the ball as at present the players like Brussow and Pocock make a tackle and while getting to their feet in a one motion never really let go of the tackled player or the ball preventing the ball being put into a position for the supporting players to use quickly

Know how to counter that? Adapt and train to do the same which is exactly what Ireland did last saturday.

Stev_o

Justind wrote: »

Know how to counter that? Adapt and train to do the same which is exactly what Ireland did last saturday.

It's possible and doable at International level, but to be honest we got really lucky against the Saffers. Hook and Popey, when talking about things Ireland need to be afraid of pointed to the breakdown and said look at all these SH teams that are flying into rucks and turning the ball over the old fashion way, they then showed a clip of SA vs France with some footage of rucks where the Saffer's laid off them and never tried to get stuck in. Doesn't matter if your whole pack consist's of Brussow's Poccocks and McCaw's if your pack isn't making a effort to contest rucks you won't get anywhere. Thankfully we went and got stuck into the breakdown and prevent any threat that could of been poised by Brussow.

Webbs

Justind wrote: »

Know how to counter that? Adapt and train to do the same which is exactly what Ireland did last saturday.

The point is Ireland didnt create much, so if all your efforts are going into combating this one area 'the breakdown' then you are not going to get an entertaining spectacle.

I also believe that SA are a knackered team after all their rugby in the past 18months and this has affected their performances hugely on this tour. Pocock murdered Ire at the breakdown and but for several moments of whitewash fever then Ireland could have been looking at a similar scoreline as Wales did. But those are arguments for another thread

anonymous_joe

Justind wrote: »

Oh the horror! Imagine that. A defence like South Africa's . . . not yielding a try :rolleyes:

Hang on, now.

South Africa do have a great defence, but so do we. We've one of the world's best defences. We also have one of the world's best attacks some of the world's best attacking players.

We should be able to score tries at home against anybody. That we don't really try to is indicative of flaws in the game. In the famous game anniversary game against the Saffers we could have scored a whole rake of tries and it would have been justified. We tore them asunder. (And, on occasion, were torn asunder ourselves)

The game has stagnated massively. Kicking reigns supreme, something we're rather good at. It's been great for us, especially because we've a load of Gah heads whose capacity for catching up and unders and kicks of all kinds is awesome.

We dominated the Saffers in the second half, tore their lineout, the world's best ffs, into little pieces and generally slapped them around. And yet, we never looked like scoring. That's not just good defense on South Africa's part, that's a structural flaw in the game. Sure even our all conquering defence was breached on Saturday.

How I look at it at least.

lobber wrote: »

Do many regular posters ever watch the Rugby Gold often on TG4 showing Ireland matches from the 80's and early 90's. I sit down to watch these to see the old style of rugby so many people seem to romanticise about, but ultimately all i end up seeing are boring helter-skelter encounters. Rucks, line outs and scrums are a free for all and there is actually less continuity of play and more stoppages.....

It is true that these games of another era might throw up more line breaks but mainly because of the vast differences in player fitness levels at the time. So before we start looking to emulate rugby and classic encounters of old we should remember that these 'classics' were few and far between.

It's not the rules that are the problem, it's a teams mindset and how they want to play rugby. SA have all the tools they need to play expansive rugby against any team but last weekend they chose not to!!!!

I've watched it once or twice, and Ireland games always consist of obviously talented players squandering their ability and dull dull play. The back play's awful, for one thing. Looking at the standard of the play back in the ould days I'd be half tempted to line out for the team myself. :pac:

danthefan

It isn't the fault of the rules we didn't score against SA. It was the fault of our gameplan/scrum half/getting tackled by the face then off the ball in promising positions, in my opinion.

anonymous_joe

danthefan wrote: »

It isn't the fault of the rules we didn't score against SA. It was the fault of our gameplan/scrum half/getting tackled by the face then off the ball in promising positions, in my opinion.

I agree with your point, but, do you not think the rules are what encourages our gameplan to be so, well, kicky?

danthefan

anonymous_joe wrote: »

I agree with your point, but, do you not think the rules are what encourages our gameplan to be so, well, kicky?

Not in this case I don't think, while camped on their line it was either our gameplan to keep the ball in the forwards or TOLs ponderance that prevented it going wide, imo. There were tries for the taking when we had the territory, we just did not take them.

anonymous_joe

danthefan wrote: »

Not in this case I don't think, while camped on their line it was either our gameplan to keep the ball in the forwards or TOLs ponderance that prevented it going wide, imo. There were tries for the taking when we had the territory, we just did not take them.

Hmmm. You're starting to sway me in this case alright. TOL did have a bit of a shocker.

Though I'd stick to my guns when talking in general terms. I think the game's laws right now are more rewarding to 'negative' play than gloriously unpredictable attacking rugby.

Traumadoc

60- 70 k for the autumn internationals, 25k for leinster home games same for Munster.

80k attending 6 nation games including against Italy.

Rugby has never been so popular.

OldJay

anonymous_joe wrote: »

We should be able to score tries at home against anybody. That we don't really try to is indicative of flaws in the game

"Don't really try"??
I'm not even going to honour that silly and utterly baseless statement, mate.
Sorry.

anonymous_joe

Justind wrote: »

"Don't really try"??
I'm not even going to honour that silly and utterly baseless statement, mate.
Sorry.

Aye.

We do try.

It's not the focus of our tactics though. That's my point. We place more emphasis on defending, and not making any mistakes and so on.

Teferi

Re: The classic games on tg4 (or whatever channel). I've seen a good few and the best thing I can see about the games is the reffing. Instant calls from the refs regarding tries and everything else instead of having to have the stars and planets correctly aligned before they can make a call.

Obviously the technology used to aid the refs is very worthwhile but it definitely leads to some refs being afraid to make a quite obvious call.

themont85

Not saying SA have a poor defence but the Lions made them look like very average at times during the summer. I think their defence tightens up near the goal line better than most, but you can make line breaks and plenty of them near the middle of the park. What we lacked on Saturday was quick offloading/rucks when we made the breaks.

Btw I didn't think Saturday was that bad a game. I found Kearney to be refreshing in how he challenged the Boks fielding a lot of kicks.

And I agree with what people say about rugbaí gold, some nice rugby but had some way worse stoppages. One thing I liked was the swiftness of the scrums. I hate the constant re setting of scrums in International rugby and scrumhalfs not being told to 1)put it in straight and 2)play the ball at the back of the scrum before its wheeled again.

handsomecake

Webbs wrote: »

Pocock murdered Ire at the breakdown and but for several moments of whitewash fever then Ireland could have been looking at a similar scoreline as Wales did. But those are arguments for another thread

the scoreline fattered us big time.
they murdered us,and had a player incorrectly binned

OldJay

handsomecake wrote: »

the scoreline fattered us big time.
they murdered us,and had a player incorrectly binned

If they murdered "us", they would have won.

handsomecake

Justind wrote: »

If they murdered "us", they would have won.

not true. sometimes it doesnt work like that.australia murdered scotland as well and lost.
spurs had 70 odd percent possession against man utd mid week and lost 2-0

Podge_irl

handsomecake wrote: »

the scoreline fattered us big time.
they murdered us

You must have been watching a different game to me. Aus are the ones who got the 1st minute interception try. Ireland didn't deserve to win, but the draw was about fair.

OldJay

handsomecake wrote: »

not true. sometimes it doesnt work like that

Yes, it does.
If the opposition can't score against you, you are most definitely not being "murdered" particularly when you win.