What would you change?

Real FM

Was listening in on an interesting argument on how rugby and football were governed last night. It got me thinking that if I was to become the Vladimir Putin of the rugby world what would I change. To be honest not much in general.

1. Remove league playoffs.
The team that plays the best over the course of the season deserves to win the league. I can't understand how a team that finishes in fourth place and maybe 20 point behind the team in first can win the title. It can be argued that this brings an anti-climatic end to the season but just look at the AIL at the moment. Maybe a winner takes all may have pushed some teams hard in chasing Leinster this year in the RABO?

2. Extend the amount of time it takes for a foreign born player to be illigible for the national team.
This idea is based on a previous thread here. Looking at the likes of Ricky Flutey who was born in NZ, had no English grand/parents, was playing in France but also playing for England (a year ago). I don't think it needs to be increased dramatically. Maybe 1/2 years.

3. Introduce a quota of home grown players that have to line out for clubs in all developed nations.
Similar to what the IRFU are currently doing (Not their proposed plan of 1 player per position). I think this would strenghten Northern Hemisphere nations such as England and France whose leagues have a huge proportion of Southern Hemisphere players. It'll give their youngsters more experience whilst also aiding Welsh clubs whose players all seem to be legging it for the exits. This wouldn't apply to developing nations (including Italy) as they will prosper from the help of experienced players.

I'm sure I've left out plenty.

Agree, disagree, hopefully it'll kick off a bit of a discussion as to what the biggest building blocks and issues that the IRB are. What would you change?

.ak

I think home advantage cancels out your league play-off point tbh.

The rest of your points are interesting...

bilston

The traditionalist in me can see where you're coming from with regards to the Play Offs. However the Play Offs have IMO been a great addition to the Pro 12. Every other professional rugby league uses them, they bring more money into the game and they keep interest going in the season.

Any player that plays U20 for a country so be forever tied to them IMO. No length of residency in another country should be able to change that. That would effectively end residency players as the vast majority of players good enough to play test rugby will have played U20 international rugby (I assume anyway).

I'd love to see a World Club Championship. The two finalists from the HEC and Super 15 could play in a round robin tournament. For example you'd have had Queensland Reds, Canterbury Crusaders, Leinster and Northampton playing in the 2011 competition. Where and when it would be played is another matter but I think it will happen sooner or later.

Real FM

I knew I'd left something else out...

Yeah a match between the winner of the Super 15s and The Heineken Cup would be fantastic to see. I'd love to see it. That being said it'd come at the end of a very long season and would involve a lot of travel for a nackered squad.

durkadurka

I would expand the scope of the tmo.

I would allow a touch judge to step In field a bit to help to ref the scrum.

I agree with the poster above re eligibility. Three years is not enough.

I would make the HEC semi final draw merit based.

I would revise the HEC group stages seeding scheme. Not fair.

I would allow each province two niq props only and any three other Niq players.

I would allow more short term loans to Connacht. Eg nagle.

I would fine teams for fielding b teams in the HEC.

Finally extra points should be awarded for fanciness.

Fireball07

durkadurka wrote: »

I would expand the scope of the tmo.

I would allow a touch judge to step In field a bit to help to ref the scrum.

I agree with the poster above re eligibility. Three years is not enough.

I would make the HEC semi final draw merit based.

I would revise the HEC group stages seeding scheme. Not fair.

I would allow each province two niq props only and any three other Niq players.

I would allow more short term loans to Connacht. Eg nagle.

I would fine teams for fielding b teams in the HEC.

Finally extra points should be awarded for fanciness.

Hmmm...few interesting points there. I agree with some of them but a couple of questions.

1. When you say merit-based semi-final draws, what exactly do you mean?

2. What do you think isn't fair about the seeding system? I don't think it's too bad myself...it could be revised and improved, sure but it's not absolutely terrible.

3. Are short-term loans to Connacht not already allowed? Just that no one seems to take advantage of them.

4. And fanciness

irishbucsfan

I would find a way to change the rules to allow for loan deals to happen alright. At the moment they can happen (ie Borlase) but 99% of teams squads are "cuptied" so the rules would have to change to allow players to play for more than one team in the league. That will mean convincing other nations to allow it which is extremely unlikely.

As for making heineken cup semi final merit based, I see no way it can be done without over-emphasising the groups which would be just as unfair.

Id love a club world championship. I'm sure it could be done somehow and it would be huge in terms of TV and attendance. Question is when really.


I would agree with bringing the touch judge in for scrums. I think it'd be an improvement.

durkadurka

Re HEC seedlings, it's based on five years which is too long and makes it too hard to move up and down.
Plus you get too many points for winning the amlin.
And it takes no account of domestic form.
So excellent French teams are seeded fourth while rubbish Scottish teams are third by virtue of always playing in the competition. Eg Glasgow and Montpelier this year.

CIARAN_BOYLE

durkadurka wrote: »

Re HEC seedlings, it's based on five years which is too long and makes it too hard to move up and down.

Based on four years actually

I'd make it so that last years performances counted double and four years ago would be halved but otherwise I think its a decent system

ArmaniJeanss

Promotion/relegation via playoff between bottom 6N team and top 6N B-Division team.

Force the big six European teams to play one full Autumn International in Tblisi, Bucharest or Moscow every second year. Disgraceful that these guys are ignored by the top table for 4 years til they are wheeled out for the World Cup, given a ridiculous 3 games in 11 days schedule, and then told to fcuk off again for 4 years.

Make it a rule that touring teams must play a game in a Tier B nation. So instead of Ireland playing 3 Tests in New Zealand, instead one of the tests must be in Tonga, Samoa or Japan.
Ditto Aussie,SA,Arg and NZ would always play a game in Russia or Romania.

ormond lad

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Promotion/relegation via playoff between bottom 6N team and top 6N B-Division team.

Force the big six European teams to play one full Autumn International in Tblisi, Bucharest or Moscow every second year. Disgraceful that these guys are ignored by the top table for 4 years til they are wheeled out for the World Cup, given a ridiculous 3 games in 11 days schedule, and then told to fcuk off again for 4 years.

Make it a rule that touring teams must play a game in a Tier B nation. So instead of Ireland playing 3 Tests in New Zealand, instead one of the tests must be in Tonga, Samoa or Japan.
Ditto Aussie,SA,Arg and NZ would always play a game in Russia or Romania.

Isnt the 6 Nations B still played over 2 seasons. Relegation not really possible unless that changes(though isnt that changing?????)

The big 6 should have to play an autumn international in georgia/moscow every 2nd year

NZ/AUS/SA should be made play a game in 1 of the pacific islands. When was the last time a full NZ or Oz team played in Samoa or Tonga??

New Zealand/Australia should be forced to play a game in fiji/tonga/samoa.

desertcircus

The winners of the second tier competitions should get a tour against Tier One sides - so Georgia would play in Dublin, Edinburgh and Paris, and the next year's winners get London, Cardiff and Rome. Same with the southern/Pacific sides: you win, you get games against NZ and Argentina, or SA and Australia.

And every single Tier One nation should be required to play one match a year in a development country.

BoardsMember

Can we include suggested law changes or suggested changes to how laws are implemeneted? Right, I'll take that as a yes so....

It really annoys me when I see a team with a lead consistently giving away penalties in the latter stages of a game. Whether it is to stop the opposition scoring top win the game or get a bonus point, or to stop them getting field position etc.

I'd be really keen to see referees encouraged to deal more stringently with this. The complication is that the attacking team is running everything, quick penalties, and there is no time for the referee to stop the clock. If there was some sort of time window, e.g. 5 minutes left on the clock, where a refereee is allowed to send someone to the bin without stopping play it might be ideal - the ref can just shout "red thirteen off", or something like that.

So often we see a team down by 4 points or more, so a penalty is no use, and you end up with the team in the lead having a really good defence and continually giving away penalties without any risk of losing a man.

Another option would be to add minutes onto the scoreboard maybe. Anything to alter the way these tight matches go. It's really bad for the sport.

NikNak8

Some interesting points there but I disagree with the playoff point. Another way of looking at it is if there were no playoffs then the league may already be over for most teams and they would have nothing to play for.
2 refs for scrums is worth consideration but may slow it down even more.
I'd like to see bonus points in the six nations to reward teams for scoring tries (i.e. fanciness)

conf101

desertcircus wrote: »

The winners of the second tier competitions should get a tour against Tier One sides - so Georgia would play in Dublin, Edinburgh and Paris, and the next year's winners get London, Cardiff and Rome. Same with the southern/Pacific sides: you win, you get games against NZ and Argentina, or SA and Australia.

And every single Tier One nation should be required to play one match a year in a development country.

This is a fantastic idea!

I'm not a fan of relegation/promotion between the 6 nations and the next tier down, I think the gap is still too big. But the gap will always be too big unless the guys in the lower tiers get games against the big hitters and this seems like a great way to go about it.

Seriously, this idea needs to be looked at

jaansu

Top 6 in pro12 qualify for the HC and home advantage for HC semi-finals to go to top 2 qualifying teams from the group stages.