Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Champions Cup 2019/20

24567…26

Comments

  • #32
    Leinstertomas
    Registered Users Posts: 296 ✭✭Leinstertomas


    Venjur wrote: »
    It really is all to play for going into the final two rounds.

    Leinster, Ulster, Racing, Toulouse and I expect Exeter all look pretty good at this point.

    There are 7 teams in the running for those final three slots and some really important fixtures the final two rounds.

    Not a bad tournament this year.

    Think Clermont are pretty certain as well at this point. They are on 16 right now and should at least beat an uninterested Harlequins in final round which would guarantee a minimum of 20 which would be enough to go through as runner-up.


  • #33
    171170
    Closed Accounts Posts: 321 ✭✭171170


    ScrubsfanChris wrote: »
    Clermont in blue and Bath in yellow. Who's idea was that? :pac:

    Bath decided to use their away strip which happens to be yellow - mind games from the lamentable Mike Hooper? Presumably they hoped it would stop Clermont scoring 100 points against them - which it did.

    Entertaining game for 50 minutes until Clermont switched off - but Whitehouse junior really is a mediocre ref. :(


  • #34
    icdg
    Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 11,499 Mod ✭✭✭✭icdg


    One of the real strengths of the Heineken Champions Cup is it’s self-selecting QF draw - it usually gives everyone something to play for all the way through Round 6, even if a team is assured of qualification after Round 4 (take a bow Leinster), there will always be that coveted home QF to chase or even top seeding. Compare the UEFA Champions League where a large chunk of Round 6 games are normally dead rubbers. If the price of the self selecting draw is that there might be a repeat pairing it’s a price worth paying.


  • #35
    thomond2006
    Registered Users Posts: 45,433 ✭✭✭✭thomond2006


    Can we please change to the French system of try bonus points: 3 more tries than the opposition. Or alternatively only award a try bonus point to the winner.

    Bath get a bonus point today despite losing by 26 points. It's ridiculous.


  • #36
    The Lost Sheep
    Registered Users Posts: 14,967 ✭✭✭✭The Lost Sheep


    thomond2006 wrote: »
    Can we please change to the French system of try bonus points: 3 more tries than the opposition.

    Bath get a bonus point today despite losing by 26 points. It's ridiculous.
    you cant get a try bonus in defeat then in any situation and I dont see that as a good thing.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    thomond2006
    Registered Users Posts: 45,433 ✭✭✭✭thomond2006


    The Lost Sheep wrote: »
    you cant get a try bonus in defeat then in any situation and I dont see that as a good thing.

    It's absolute nonsense that you can get a point despite getting hammered. It happens too much.

    Want a point from a game? Don't get hammered.


  • #38
    The Lost Sheep
    Registered Users Posts: 14,967 ✭✭✭✭The Lost Sheep


    thomond2006 wrote: »
    It's absolute nonsense that you can get a point despite getting hammered. It happens too much.

    Want a point from a game? Don't get hammered.

    But your proposal and French system never allows side who loses a game get a bonus points for tries scored. That is nonsense as well


  • #39
    Bazzo
    Registered Users Posts: 7,047 ✭✭✭Bazzo


    Don't have an issue with the current system to be honest.


  • #40
    Squidgy Black
    Registered Users Posts: 21,605 ✭✭✭✭Squidgy Black


    Have to agree with Thomond, if you lose by more than 7 points (and miss out on a LBP), then I don't see why teams should be given a point, it doesn't really matter how many tries you've scored if you've been beaten comprehensively.


  • #41
    The Lost Sheep
    Registered Users Posts: 14,967 ✭✭✭✭The Lost Sheep


    Squidgy Black wrote: »
    Have to agree with Thomond, if you lose by more than 7 points (and miss out on a LBP), then I don't see why teams should be given a point, it doesn't really matter how many tries you've scored if you've been beaten comprehensively.
    it allows teams to fight for something rather than just wave white flag and do nothing. What does that achieve exactly?


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    prawnsambo
    Registered Users Posts: 12,984 ✭✭✭✭prawnsambo


    Squidgy Black wrote: »
    Have to agree with Thomond, if you lose by more than 7 points (and miss out on a LBP), then I don't see why teams should be given a point, it doesn't really matter how many tries you've scored if you've been beaten comprehensively.
    You've been beaten comprehensively if you're beaten by eight points and have scored 4 tries? The difference there could be as little as missing all your conversions or a couple of penalties.


  • #43
    ClanofLams
    Registered Users Posts: 4,210 ✭✭✭ClanofLams


    I guess the current method keeps some interest in games when otherwise there would be none? Eg - Leinster Northampton yesterday, I didn’t see it but presume Northampton we’re trying to the last minute to get fourth try?

    Games like that would be irrelevant at half time.


  • #44
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 40,953 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    thomond2006 wrote: »
    Can we please change to the French system of try bonus points: 3 more tries than the opposition. Or alternatively only award a try bonus point to the winner.

    Bath get a bonus point today despite losing by 26 points. It's ridiculous.

    100%

    super rugby use that system too and its way better


  • #45
    pickarooney
    Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 35,063 Mod ✭✭✭✭pickarooney


    The Lost Sheep wrote: »
    it isnt stupid at all especially when you have just 5 pools and 3 runners up qualifying and quarters need be based on rankings from pool stage. If you could expand tournament then change the tournament regs for a first knockout round but not now

    It's just my opinion. Do you always have to contradict everything?


  • #46
    Leinstertomas
    Registered Users Posts: 296 ✭✭Leinstertomas


    What I don't like about the current system is the fact that a team gets more reward for getting thrashed but picking up easy tries because the game has become unstructured and the other team no longer need to play with any caution, than if they gave them an actual contest and lost by around 10 points.


  • #47
    thomond2006
    Registered Users Posts: 45,433 ✭✭✭✭thomond2006


    The Lost Sheep wrote: »
    it allows teams to fight for something rather than just wave white flag and do nothing. What does that achieve exactly?

    It makes a mockery of the game.

    Should a team that loses by a large margin deserve anything? My opinion is no. You shouldn't earn a point for scoring tries in garbage time when the contest is over.


  • #48
    The Lost Sheep
    Registered Users Posts: 14,967 ✭✭✭✭The Lost Sheep


    pickarooney wrote: »
    It's just my opinion. Do you always have to contradict everything?
    and that was my opinion. I dont just contradict everything.
    And with 5 pools if you cant play the second placed side from your pool then the competition is ridiculous and you cant have quarter finals based on rankings which wouldnt be good either


  • #49
    Former Former
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,728 ✭✭✭Former Former


    It's swings and roundabouts. Sometimes you'll get teams picking up bonus points simply because the opposition are so far ahead they ease up.

    But then you get teams who win the game and rack up a BP because the opposition never gave a shyte to begin with or sent out the second string. How is that different?

    Or you get teams like the Ospreys this year who are an ATM for bonus points. Is it fair that the teams in their group have a guaranteed BP win even away from home?

    It all balances out.


  • #50
    The Lost Sheep
    Registered Users Posts: 14,967 ✭✭✭✭The Lost Sheep


    thomond2006 wrote: »
    It makes a mockery of the game.

    Should a team that loses by a large margin deserve anything? My opinion is no. You shouldn't earn a point for scoring tries in garbage time when the contest is over.
    should teams who play toe to toe and get 5 tries each and one just loses out on the win not get something then. Yes some times a side will get a bonus point like that but it's a far better rule than the French system where if you lose you cant ever get a try bp


  • #51
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 40,953 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    The Lost Sheep wrote: »
    but it's a far better rule than the French system where if you lose you cant ever get a try bp

    its not a "far better" rule

    it may suit this european league, but as a domestic league system, where stopping the opposition getting a TBP is valuable to each team....
    it absolutely isnt a far better system.

    Ive seen super rugby switch from the standardised system to the french system (in 2016 onwards) and the quality of games improved immensely

    you no longer had teams throwing in the towel after going down heavy in the first half... and you no longer had teams basically stop playing after getting 4 tries.

    its probably not workable in the HC because its basically 5 separate leagues where restricting a TBP doesnt really help the losing team.... but i will argue all day that in a season long domestic league its a FAR better system than the one the Pro 14 and Premiership employ.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    Burkie1203
    Registered Users Posts: 11,101 ✭✭✭✭Burkie1203


    Great defence from Zebo here. Real xfactor



    https://twitter.com/jaredwright17/status/1205596564221132800?s=19


  • #53
    Paul Smeenus
    Registered Users Posts: 4,309 ✭✭✭Paul Smeenus


    He just utterly can't be bothered.


  • #54
    171170
    Closed Accounts Posts: 321 ✭✭171170


    Paul Smeenus wrote: »
    He just utterly can't be bothered.

    It wasn't the only tackle he didn't bother to make on Friday evening. He looked good on the attack, but was incredibly lackadaisical in defence. As, in fairness, were a few of the other Racing players after they reckoned the game was in the bag, the exceptions being Chavancy and Imhoff who never gave up.


  • #55
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭[Deleted User]


    Eh lads - they won by a country mile, tackling is optional at that point.

    Albeit it's the attitude I wouldn't associate with genuine contenders.


  • #56
    The Lost Sheep
    Registered Users Posts: 14,967 ✭✭✭✭The Lost Sheep


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    its not a "far better" rule

    it may suit this european league, but as a domestic league system, where stopping the opposition getting a TBP is valuable to each team....
    it absolutely isnt a far better system.

    Ive seen super rugby switch from the standardised system to the french system (in 2016 onwards) and the qualit it ay of games improved immensely

    you no longer had teams throwing in the towel after going down heavy in the first half... and you no longer had teams basically stop playing after getting 4 tries.

    its probably not workable in the HC because its basically 5 separate leagues where restricting a TBP doesnt really help the losing team.... but i will argue all day that in a season long domestic league its a FAR better system than the one the Pro 14 and Premiership employ.
    I dont see how a system where only one side can be rewarded for converting attacking opportunities is better though.
    I cant comment on super rugby as I dont watch it enough/at all really.


  • #57
    Clegg
    Registered Users Posts: 16,626 ✭✭✭✭Clegg


    Venjur wrote: »
    Eh lads - they won by a country mile, tackling is optional at that point.

    Albeit it's the attitude I wouldn't associate with genuine contenders.

    It's a pattern with Zebo tho. He's not a small man. He has plenty of weight to throw around and make a big hit if he wants, but he just doesn't. I remember the Pro 14 semi final at the RDS last year. Came on as a sub, crabbed across the pitch and ate up all potential attacking space for Munster. Three a few Hollywood passes into touch and did a brilliant turnstiles impression to let Lowe carry right over him. When Zebo can't be arsed it really shows.


  • #58
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 40,953 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    The Lost Sheep wrote: »
    I dont see how a system where only one side can be rewarded for converting attacking opportunities is better though.
    I cant comment on super rugby as I dont watch it enough/at all really.

    Can you see why it makes for more competitive games?

    And if you can, can you see why, over the course of a season, it's a better system for real meritocratic results.


  • #59
    molloyjh
    Registered Users Posts: 24,745 ✭✭✭✭molloyjh


    I'm with TLS here. I dont see how denying a team a point in a cup competition makes any sense compared to rewarding a team. If you're playing the team coming first and you're playing for second, as Northampton were yesterday, there is absolutely nothing in it for them denying us a TBP. Nothing. Why would they bother? Getting the TBP for themselves is far more likely to make them play the 80 rather than fly the white flag early on.


  • #60
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 40,953 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    molloyjh wrote: »
    I'm with TLS here. I dont see how denying a team a point in a cup competition makes any sense compared to rewarding a team. If you're playing the team coming first and you're playing for second, as Northampton were yesterday, there is absolutely nothing in it for them denying us a TBP. Nothing. Why would they bother? Getting the TBP for themselves is far more likely to make them play the 80 rather than fly the white flag early on.

    To clarify, I've already said it's unworkable in Europe.

    Much better in a domestic league though


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    The Lost Sheep
    Registered Users Posts: 14,967 ✭✭✭✭The Lost Sheep


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    Can you see why it makes for more competitive games?

    And if you can, can you see why, over the course of a season, it's a better system for real meritocratic results.
    maybe but it completely disadvantages one side in every game. It doesnt allow for real meritocracy in that way.
    It completely ignores the role one side can play in a game. A side who loses can never get 2 match points. I dont see why that is better either


Advertisement