rugby the way it should be played!!

handsomecake

the super 14 kicked off this weekend and ive watched 4 games. it has been a breath of fresh air to see running rugby and most importantly some tries.
this isnt a thread to bash northern hemisphere skill sets or any players individually.it is an idictment of how the game is reffed and how rules are interpreted up here.
ireland played italy last week and italy were as bad as you will ever see them .we had an abundance of world class players and couldnt take advantage. it was a turgid damp squib and i flicked the channel a few times during it.the teams just blanket accross the field ,there is no line breaks and a lot of scoring from the boot.
the super 14 RIGHTLY revised the tackled ball laws and there was only 11 penalty's in 80 mins between highlanders and crusaders. 6 tries scored too. hurricanes blues 54 points in total.cheetahs bulls 85 points in total.force brumbies 39 points .reds waratahs 62 points with a last minute winning try by palu.49 points between crusaders highlanders. players making big breaks,big hits,are not afraid to have a go because the attacking team is favoured at the breakdown.the refs have a mandate to keep the game flowing.

the naysayers will come out with the ususal rhetoric that the defences are poor down south but thats nonsense.new zealand have not conceded a try on end of year tours against international sides since 2006.they know how to defend in the southern hemisphere!!all this weekend games were littered with full internationals.

i read a good article in the new zealand herald about sanzars views on the current laws.(ill try and root it out).basically it could get to a situation where the south will play a different set of rules to the north.the autumn internationals were a joke and it is insanity they are waiting until after the world cup to change the laws back.when the stakes get higher (as they always do) come world cup time its going to be even more conservative and turgid.
why not change them now?.it will be the same settling in time for everyone.

after the six nations matches finishes up today ,the sharks play the chiefs in durban and i bet its the most exciting match of the day.

Stev_o

The scorers:

For the Blues:
Tries: Brett, Afoa
Cons: Brett 2
Pens: Brett 2

For the Hurricanes:
Try: Gear
Con: Weepu
Pens: Ripia 5, Weepu 4

Sounds exciting with a massive 11 penalties needed to win a game :rolleyes:
Bulls Cheetahs game while exciting was all about shocking defence by both teams, if the Cheetahs were any good it would of been one of the all time great matches.

handsomecake

Stev_o wrote: »

The scorers:

For the Blues:
Tries: Brett, Afoa
Cons: Brett 2
Pens: Brett 2

For the Hurricanes:
Try: Gear
Con: Weepu
Pens: Ripia 5, Weepu 4

Sounds exciting with a massive 11 penalties needed to win a game :rolleyes:
Bulls Cheetahs game while exciting was all about shocking defence by both teams, if the Cheetahs were any good it would of been one of the all time great matches.

there was only 11 penalties awardedin the whole crusaders highlanders game

Stev_o

handsomecake wrote: »

there was only 11 penalties awardedin the whole crusaders highlanders game

Who ref'd it?

handsomecake

Stev_o wrote: »

Who ref'd it?

cant remember


which is a good sign. as you always remember a bad ref.

outwest

i hope u watched that scotland match there, the reason there are so many point in the super 14 is there is a number of bad defenders playing who ca nscore try from evrywere but have no international caps

laugh

i watched reds v tahs, mistake after mistake after mistake.

toomevara

handsomecake wrote: »

.

after the six nations matches finishes up today ,the sharks play the chiefs in durban and i bet its the most exciting match of the day.

It'll have to go some to beat the drama of Wales/Scotland.;)

handsomecake

outwest wrote: »

i hope u watched that scotland match there, the reason there are so many point in the super 14 is there is a number of bad defenders playing who ca nscore try from evrywere but have no international caps

yeah great match. first i can remember in a long time.
nonu mortlock carter conrad smith giteau o conner etc.awful players .your right

handsomecake

toomevara wrote: »

It'll have to go some to beat the drama of Wales/Scotland.;)

credit where its due,it was a cracker. although scots will be non plussed with ref which i kind of eluded to in first post.

ScrubsfanChris

Stev_o wrote: »

Bulls Cheetahs game while exciting was all about shocking defence by both teams, if the Cheetahs were any good it would of been one of the all time great matches.

Agree, defence from both teams was very poor, while in attack both teams looked very good because of it.
Now I'm not saying it wasn't exciting, but by the end it was getting kind of ridiculous.

dom17

outwest wrote: »

i hope u watched that scotland match there, the reason there are so many point in the super 14 is there is a number of bad defenders playing who ca nscore try from evrywere but have no international caps

gee i wish we had such poor defenders and won all but 1 of the world cups

Tim Robbins

handsomecake wrote: »

the super 14 kicked off this weekend and ive watched 4 games. it has been a breath of fresh air to see running rugby and most importantly some tries.
this isnt a thread to bash northern hemisphere skill sets or any players individually.it is an idictment of how the game is reffed and how rules are interpreted up here.
ireland played italy last week and italy were as bad as you will ever see them .we had an abundance of world class players and couldnt take advantage. it was a turgid damp squib and i flicked the channel a few times during it.the teams just blanket accross the field ,there is no line breaks and a lot of scoring from the boot.
the super 14 RIGHTLY revised the tackled ball laws and there was only 11 penalty's in 80 mins between highlanders and crusaders. 6 tries scored too. hurricanes blues 54 points in total.cheetahs bulls 85 points in total.force brumbies 39 points .reds waratahs 62 points with a last minute winning try by palu.49 points between crusaders highlanders. players making big breaks,big hits,are not afraid to have a go because the attacking team is favoured at the breakdown.the refs have a mandate to keep the game flowing.

the naysayers will come out with the ususal rhetoric that the defences are poor down south but thats nonsense.new zealand have not conceded a try on end of year tours against international sides since 2006.they know how to defend in the southern hemisphere!!all this weekend games were littered with full internationals.

i read a good article in the new zealand herald about sanzars views on the current laws.(ill try and root it out).basically it could get to a situation where the south will play a different set of rules to the north.the autumn internationals were a joke and it is insanity they are waiting until after the world cup to change the laws back.when the stakes get higher (as they always do) come world cup time its going to be even more conservative and turgid.
why not change them now?.it will be the same settling in time for everyone.

after the six nations matches finishes up today ,the sharks play the chiefs in durban and i bet its the most exciting match of the day.

We are all prone to typos but is there any chance you could punctuate a bit better as it's difficult to read your posts?

Cheers.

greendom

Well I haven't watched any of the Super 14 matches but they'd be hard pressed to match the intensity and entertainment of today's 2 matches.

Peter B

Watched the 2nd half of the Reds against the Waratahs today. Was a good game. Really made my blood boil when one of the commentators said he thought there should be no scrums in rugby union. How can he be an ambassador for the sport with an attitude like that!

One thing that did annoy me about the game (that was the only S14 game I saw) is that all the players almost look the same. The props aren't fat and the scrum half isn't small. Thats what I like about rugby. Similar to what G Hook says I like the way the fat kid can play as well as the tall lanky fellas as well as the small fellas. Still, maybe thats the way of professionalism.

PhatPiggins

To be honest I wouldn't be overly fussed if the SH played to their own set of rules, called it super rugby, played each other 9 times a season, averaged 60 points a game and still lose 7% percent of their attendences year on year mainly because they dont understand what makes rugby a great game.

Oh wait they already do. If that glorified tag is proper rugby you can keep it.

JustinDee

outwest wrote: »

i hope u watched that scotland match there, the reason there are so many point in the super 14 is there is a number of bad defenders playing who ca nscore try from evrywere but have no international caps

???
I laughed out loud at this comment. Its funny how people attribute good attack when their teams score and bad defending when the teams they have no affinity with or even dislike let one in.

JustinDee

PhatPiggins wrote: »

still lose 7% percent of their attendences year on year mainly because they dont understand what makes rugby a great game

Its only in Australia that the game has slipped off and its got a lot more to do with NRL and A League, lack of tournament success than it has the way its played.
The game is played to conditions in the three Tri Nations countries particularly at the beginning of the season and those conditions dictate a fast paced handling game.

All this 'hemisherical' tribalistic needling is pathetic, by the way.

Ciaran-Irl

JustinDee wrote: »

???
I laughed out loud at this comment. Its funny how people attribute good attack when their teams score and bad defending when the teams they have no affinity with or even dislike let one in.

I watched that highlights show that sky do, and in fairness, there was some poor defending. Moments of brilliance from crusaders, stormers & brumbies, but as error strewn as you might expect from a season's opening weekend.

Very interested in the rule change, where in short, the tackler has to release almost immediately. I want to see more, but good first impression.

PhatPiggins

JustinDee wrote: »

Its only in Australia that the game has slipped off and its got a lot more to do with NRL and A League, lack of tournament success than it has the way its played.
The game is played to conditions in the three Tri Nations countries particularly at the beginning of the season and those conditions dictate a fast paced handling game.

All this 'hemisherical' tribalistic needling is pathetic, by the way.

Numbers are down in NZ for S14 and TN's games for the past 5 years. There's real talk of them pulling the Otago franchise after the WC.

For one who claims to have such an in depth knowledge of the game I've never seen you post anything of worth.

JustinDee

JustinDee wrote: »

Its only in Australia that the game has slipped off

The Crusaders were offering season tickets at 60% off their original price at the start of this year. Thats pretty grim for the most successful side in Super rugby.

JustinDee

PhatPiggins wrote: »

For one who claims to have such an in depth knowledge of the game I've never seen you post anything of worth

For a start, I don't "claim" anything about myself.
Not my fault if you don't agree with what I say or see it as "anything of worth".

I'm sure that support for rugby union in NZ is doomed. If it was on the internet or in the media, it must be true.

JustinDee

Deleted User wrote: »

The Crusaders were offering season tickets at 60% off their original price at the start of this year. Thats pretty grim for the most successful side in Super rugby.

That would be for the world cup season.
If you remember the last time there was fuss over season tickets leading up the RWC, NZ lost the co-hosting rights and it went lock stock across the ditch to Australia (who ran a great tournament as it turned out).

wixfjord

JustinDee wrote: »

For a start, I don't "claim" anything about myself.
Not my fault if you don't agree with what I say or see it as "anything of worth".

I'm sure that support for rugby union in NZ is doomed. If it was on the internet or in the media, it must be true.

60% drop in st price is true. And Crusaders were playing to half empty stadiums last year.

JustinDee

wixfjord wrote: »

60% drop in st price is true. And Crusaders were playing to half empty stadiums last year.

It was half empty because it was half capacity.
They were rebuilding an entire section of it.

wixfjord

JustinDee wrote: »

It was half empty because it was half capacity.
They were rebuilding an entire section of it.

Yes I realised that! I meant there were empty spaces in all parts of the stadium. I think I would have realised the failings in my theory when I saw a whole half the stadium empty! My bros in NZ at the mo and he says the attendances are poor enough for such a rugby playing country.

PhatPiggins

wixfjord wrote: »

Yes I realised that! I meant there were empty spaces in all parts of the stadium. I think I would have realised the failings in my theory when I saw a whole half the stadium empty! My bros in NZ at the mo and he says the attendances are poor enough for such a rugby playing country.

They've been dropping every season since the Lions tour. Kiwi's have been satureated with rugby and its the same old same every seaon i.e OZ 3/4 times and SA 3/4 times. The only comp that regularly have decent atmospheres at the games is the NPC. It'll be interesting to see the attendances for the WC games

Claiming that falling attendances is purely an Australian problem is untrue

twinytwo

handsomecake wrote: »

the super 14 kicked off this weekend and ive watched 4 games. it has been a breath of fresh air to see running rugby and most importantly some tries.
this isnt a thread to bash northern hemisphere skill sets or any players individually.it is an idictment of how the game is reffed and how rules are interpreted up here.
ireland played italy last week and italy were as bad as you will ever see them .we had an abundance of world class players and couldnt take advantage. it was a turgid damp squib and i flicked the channel a few times during it.the teams just blanket accross the field ,there is no line breaks and a lot of scoring from the boot.
the super 14 RIGHTLY revised the tackled ball laws and there was only 11 penalty's in 80 mins between highlanders and crusaders. 6 tries scored too. hurricanes blues 54 points in total.cheetahs bulls 85 points in total.force brumbies 39 points .reds waratahs 62 points with a last minute winning try by palu.49 points between crusaders highlanders. players making big breaks,big hits,are not afraid to have a go because the attacking team is favoured at the breakdown.the refs have a mandate to keep the game flowing.

the naysayers will come out with the ususal rhetoric that the defences are poor down south but thats nonsense.new zealand have not conceded a try on end of year tours against international sides since 2006.they know how to defend in the southern hemisphere!!all this weekend games were littered with full internationals.

i read a good article in the new zealand herald about sanzars views on the current laws.(ill try and root it out).basically it could get to a situation where the south will play a different set of rules to the north.the autumn internationals were a joke and it is insanity they are waiting until after the world cup to change the laws back.when the stakes get higher (as they always do) come world cup time its going to be even more conservative and turgid.
why not change them now?.it will be the same settling in time for everyone.

after the six nations matches finishes up today ,the sharks play the chiefs in durban and i bet its the most exciting match of the day.

Funny thing is south africa dont play running rugby.. secondly the rules are a joke and should never have been brought in in the first place. Thirdly where was all this running rugby when Italy nearly and should have up ended the all blacks.

PhatPiggins

twinytwo wrote: »

Funny thing is south africa dont play running rugby.. secondly the rules are a joke and should never have been brought in in the first place. Thirdly where was all this running rugby when Italy nearly and should have up ended the all blacks.

I think the more pressing question is what use is all the running rugby when you haven't got forwards who are used to grinding out games.

Dont worry though because the world head of refereeing will make a public apology for your short comings, cringe.

d'Oracle

JustinDee wrote: »

It was half empty because it was half capacity.
They were rebuilding an entire section of it.

Dude, no-one goes to matches in NZ.

Hamilton is the only stadium which gets any sort of atmosphere/crowd for S14 games.

JustinDee

PhatPiggins wrote: »

Claiming that falling attendances is purely an Australian problem is untrue

The country where the game is in trouble is Australia. The game is not in trouble in NZ where merchandising, TV rights and sponsorship still play large parts. Nor in South Africa.
Attendances have fallen worldwide. They're hit in South Africa where the game is thriving and expanding. They've tumbled in Wales.
Attendances have fallen in a variety of sports even in the biggest sport in the world, soccer and cricket in Australia.

d'Oracle

JustinDee wrote: »

The country where the game is in trouble is Australia. The game is not in trouble in NZ

How come the highlanders had to be bailed by the NZRU in 2009?
Why did they have to terminate the contracts of their reserves in the 08-09 season?

Counties can barely hold themselves together.
The Makos nearly went bust this year.
Hell the reshuffle of Air New Zealand Cup was mainly down to the financial insustainability.


The all-blacks generate money, the game outside the AB's in New Zealand is in difficulty.

JustinDee

d'Oracle wrote: »

How come the highlanders had to be bailed by the NZRU in 2009?
Why did they have to terminate the contracts of their reserves in the 08-09 season?

Counties can barely hold themselves together.
The Makos nearly went bust this year.
Hell the reshuffle of Air New Zealand Cup was mainly down to the financial insustainability.

The all-blacks generate money, the game outside the AB's in New Zealand is in difficulty.

Same setup as here. NZRU funding its regional unions (equivalent to our provinces).
Financial jacknife in their funding the running of the up-and-coming RWC. What follows is income from the RWC and thats why they are spending like this.
If you're going to reply with one of Steve Tew's pleas to the IRB for more money, don't bother. It proves nothing more than the NZRU is seeking more money.
The 'losses' he claimed in two press releases are calculated before even one broadcaster's TV rights of the RWC are taken into account.

They're fine. They've more money than we do here. The RWC is what has caused ripples. If you don't spend, you won't earn.
If they don't win it however, there will be a hugely negative outlook on the sport.

PhatPiggins

JustinDee wrote: »

Same setup as here. NZRU funding its regional unions (equivalent to our provinces).
Financial jacknife in their funding the running of the up-and-coming RWC. What follows is income from the RWC and thats why they are spending like this.
If you're going to reply with one of Steve Tew's pleas to the IRB for more money, don't bother. It proves nothing more than the NZRU is seeking more money.
The 'losses' he claimed in two press releases are calculated before even one broadcaster's TV rights of the RWC are taken into account.

They're fine. They've more money than we do here. The RWC is what has caused ripples. If you don't spend, you won't earn.
If they don't win it however, there will be a hugely negative outlook on the sport.

Great post, sorry about the slur yesterday.

I dread to think of the public inquiry if they tank it again in 2011

d'Oracle

JustinDee wrote: »

Same setup as here. NZRU funding its regional unions (equivalent to our provinces).
Financial jacknife in their funding the running of the up-and-coming RWC. What follows is income from the RWC and thats why they are spending like this.
If you're going to reply with one of Steve Tew's pleas to the IRB for more money, don't bother. It proves nothing more than the NZRU is seeking more money.
The 'losses' he claimed in two press releases are calculated before even one broadcaster's TV rights of the RWC are taken into account.

They're fine. They've more money than we do here. The RWC is what has caused ripples. If you don't spend, you won't earn.
If they don't win it however, there will be a hugely negative outlook on the sport.

With all respect, its a totally different set up to here.
You have three tiers of rugby between club and international rugby in NZ.
Club->Regional->Province->Super Rugby-> International.

I would suggest that you, "don't bother" bringing up Steve Tew asking for money, as you brought it up and its irrelevant.
They are not fine, they are having a big shortfall in crowd numbers, I know this first hand.

They do not have more money, as they would be keeping their players if they did.
The highlanders played infront of a half filled stadium last year and they were not doing anything up. The stadium is also frickin tiny.

The RWC is irrelevant to the argument as the argument is about Super and domestic rugby. And trust me, there already is a negative outlook down there. The fans see players leaving for Europe and the AB's have just had one of their worst calender years in memory.

JustinDee

d'Oracle wrote: »

With all respect, its a totally different set up to here.
You have three tiers of rugby between club and international rugby in NZ.
Club->Regional->Province->Super Rugby-> International

There is a governing union with regional unions under its wing. The rep teams (Senior, Maori, Womens, underage) and franchises are governed by the NZRU. All else by the regional unions.

d'Oracle wrote: »

I would suggest that you, "don't bother" bringing up Steve Tew asking for money, as you brought it up and its irrelevant.
They are not fine, they are having a big shortfall in crowd numbers, I know this first hand

Its the usual reply. Thats why it was pre-emptively brought up.
Unless you deal with the NZRU yourself, I don't see how you could see this "first hand".

d'Oracle wrote: »

They do not have more money, as they would be keeping their players if they did

There are more professional players in NZ than Ireland. There are also more professional teams.
I've also pointed out already with examples that crowds in general are wilting worldwide. Are the relevant sports buggered? Nope.

d'Oracle wrote: »

The RWC is irrelevant to the argument as the argument is about Super and domestic rugby. And trust me, there already is a negative outlook down there. The fans see players leaving for Europe and the AB's have just had one of their worst calender years in memory.

It most certainly is not irrelevant as the 2011 tournament is where a large proportion of the union's investment is being directed.

JustinDee

PhatPiggins wrote: »

sorry about the slur yesterday

No worries.

d'Oracle

JustinDee wrote: »

Its the usual reply. Thats why it was pre-emptively brought up.
Unless you deal with the NZRU yourself, I don't see how you could see this "first hand".

Oh FFS.
From sitting in the stadiums and talking to fans.....

Oh and from Reading the NZ media.
Y'know the country where it is common knowledge that spectator numbers are taking a beating?

JustinDee

d'Oracle wrote: »

Oh FFS.
From sitting in the stadiums and talking to fans.....

Oh and from Reading the NZ media.
Y'know the country where it is common knowledge that spectator numbers are taking a beating?

Calm down.
Okay, so thats where you get your info on NZ rugby union. The fans and the media.
Personally speaking, I don't. I get it from nearer the game.

d'Oracle

JustinDee wrote: »

Calm down.

Not good enough.
I'll see you on the common, Dawn.
You bring the pistols.

JustinDee

d'Oracle wrote: »

Not good enough.
I'll see you on the common, Dawn.
You bring the pistols.

Wigs?

d'Oracle

JustinDee wrote: »

Wigs?

Bound to be a few lying around.

There is a recession on after all.