logout
help
framed forum
go pro
subscriptions
account
create thread
RugbyGround >> New rugby union rules.
| 9/15/08 4:42 PM | |
nathan@aristeia
Member Since: 4/12/02 Posts: 6892 |
I'm in the middle of rugby season here and we didn't adopt the new rules that have been put in place. The only rule I have any problem with is that you can now haul/collapse a a maul. I find this dangerous(or maybe always taught that). Any thoughts to what you think of these rules? I know coaches/managers/players in the Northern Hemisphere aren't too happy with these new rules. |
| 9/17/08 12:11 PM | |
|
guardbr8kr
Member Since: 4/28/02 Posts: 8762 |
it's kinda like Jiu-Jitsu, Ghey. |
| 9/17/08 1:22 PM | |
|
nathan@aristeia
Member Since: 4/12/02 Posts: 6899 |
Randy just to let you know Kirik has made me the mod of this forum. So clean up your act and get your wrestling ass out of here...LOL. |
| 9/18/08 10:24 AM | |
seg
55 
Member Since: 3/28/05 Posts: 6238 |
I'm still trying to figure them all out, but I do not like allowing the collapsing of a maul. What is the rationale for that rule change? Back in England's World Cup of 2003 as I recall, one of their great tactics was to get a rolling maul going for 20-30 meters. I loved to watch that. I do like the short-arm penalties for failure to roll away. I think it speeds up the game. I'm a rugby novice, but it seems before there were far too many penalty kicks beign awarded for failing to roll away, when it looked like the tackler was just trapped under a big pile. I think penalty kicks should be reserved for major infractions. Same thing for holding on, I believe that is now a short-arm penalty, which I like. I don't view that as something that requires a penalty. Free-kick is good enough. I also like the rule about not being able to throw the ball behind the 22 and then kick for touch. There was too much of that, I think cutting back on the number of line-outs helps to speed up the game. |
| 9/18/08 12:33 PM | |
|
nathan@aristeia
Member Since: 4/12/02 Posts: 6901 |
seg great post and I completely agree with everything you said. From my understanding about the new rules being brought in is that countries like Australia and New Zealand are competing with Aussie Rules and Rugby League and they want to keep Rugby Union games moving as quickly as possible. I think taking the maul away from the game is just going to hurt what union is about. I like watching teams setup with attacking mauls and like you said rolling off of it or a set play with the backs. I will see how the Guiness Priemership goes and see if I notice any difference with hualing down mauls. So far I like the indirect(half-pentaly) because it makes the teams run with the ball in hand. |
| 9/19/08 1:22 PM | |
|
seg
55
Member Since: 3/28/05 Posts: 6254 |
I'm in the US and have never played rugby. I've self-taught myself the rules by watching games on tv. Never been to a real match. I understand that most fans either swear allegiance to the union or league code, but I love them both. A few years ago Foxsportsworld (which became Foxsoccerchannel) used to show one NRL league game a week, as well as the Tri-Nations, Super 12 (now 14), Currie Cup, and NZ provincial series (can't remember what they call that). I used to tape all those games and then play them back and rewind at the penalties to learn the rules. I've got a pretty good understanding now. They also used to show one Aussie Rules game a week. However, about 2-3 years ago those fuks changed the station to Foxsoccerchannel and now I can't see shit. I subscribe to a website called mediazone, which allows me to download a bunch of matches and watch them on my computer. But that sucks comapred to watching on the big screen. Plus, it only covers the union code. Does anyone know if there is a similar service whereby I could download the NRL and Aussie Rules? I really miss watching that stuff. |
| 9/19/08 4:57 PM | |
|
nathan@aristeia
Edited: 09/19/08 4:57 PM Member Since: 4/12/02 Posts: 6902 |
Try Setanta Sports. It has lots of soccer but it has union, league, and Aussie Rules. http://www.setantaus.com/en/NA/ |
| 9/22/08 4:38 PM | |
|
seg
55
Member Since: 3/28/05 Posts: 6278 |
^Cool. I had no idea. It has the NRL, but not the AFL, but it's better than nothing! |
| 9/22/08 6:42 PM | |
|
nathan@aristeia
Member Since: 4/12/02 Posts: 6904 |
seg is does have AFL the season is over right now. Actually a Rugy Union player from Canada that played in the last World Cup signed to play AFL...LOL. He is tall and lanky like the rest of them. |
| 9/23/08 10:54 AM | |
|
guardbr8kr
Member Since: 4/28/02 Posts: 8783 |
" He is tall and lanky like the rest of them." BEEEEPPPP !!! |
| 9/23/08 11:01 AM | |
|
seg
55
Member Since: 3/28/05 Posts: 6283 |
The NRL and the AFL both run from roughly March to September or so as I recall, so I will check out Setanta next spring. There's an Aussie Rules guy punting in the NFL right now; can't remember the team. |
| 9/24/08 8:24 PM | |
|
Tooler
Edited: 09/25/08 6:02 PM Member Since: 3/12/02 Posts: 228 |
New Rules are Great, speeds up the game makes it much better to watch. I hated the Rolling Maul, and this is coming from a hooker who played union for 15 years! England's win in the world cup with that tactic (rolling maul to get a penalty and then let Wilkinson kick a goal) was painful to watch. Short arms should now be called "tap n' go". Not matching numbers in the lineout opens up all kinds of plays in the backline and the forwards to be honest. No thrown behind the 22 for the kick is great as well, stops the kick to kick BS which is boring. The Northern Hemisphere (read England) is against the rules and say that the it's the Southern Hemisphere's rules etc. Which is crap, the rules came from the IRB, no country or region. The Brits agreed to trial the rules now they are trying to back out, as they see it hurting their style of Rugby. Canadian Player to AFL ? WTF who is that? As for AFL being over, not quite, Grand Final is this weekend, Hawks vs. Cats at the MCG ! AFL player in NFL = Sav Rocca, following in the footsteps of his Manager and former AFLer Darren Bennett. The only kicker to make the All-Madden Team (1996). Signed the Canadian Union guy in the Land of Aussie Rules :-) |
| 9/25/08 8:39 AM | |
|
nathan@aristeia
Member Since: 4/12/02 Posts: 6909 |
Thanks for your input Tooler. You from Canada? What club team did you play for? I'm from the east coast. Mike Pyke is the player. He played fullback for Canada in the 2007 World Cup. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Pyke |
| 9/25/08 5:50 PM | |
|
Tooler
Edited: 09/25/08 6:02 PM Member Since: 3/12/02 Posts: 230 |
Club -> Balmy Beach University -> Carleton, my first year there was big Al's last So Pyke is playing for the Swans eh? Sad state of affairs when we can keep our guys in Rugby and they switch codes to AFL. Historically AFL really does pay that much, especially for non-stars...shows how much $$$ Canada puts into the sport. Just had a look at the swans site, no mention of him, so he must be in one of the minor leagues getting paid in pots and pies :-) http://www.sydneyswans.com.au/Players/tabid/7920/default.aspx Up the BEACH! |
| 9/26/08 8:51 AM | |
|
nathan@aristeia
Member Since: 4/12/02 Posts: 6910 |
Yeah rugby here in Canada is growing in high school but club rugby is failing. My team is feeling it this year. We have played 3 games so far short players out of the gate. Al Charron had a great article on Rugby Canada's site about the decline of club rugby. I agreed with everything he said. We traded a few e-mails and he agreed with what I had to say. I think rugby union's in Canada need to help out rugby club's in recruiting players. Any ways rugby in Canada is having its troubles. |
| 10/6/08 3:59 PM | |
|
TheRenegadeSperm
241
Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 1407 |
Whatever happened to the move towards uncontested scrums? I saw it on BBC a while back. I decided the day that happened I would stop watching rugby. |
| 10/8/08 1:31 PM | |
|
seg
55
Member Since: 3/28/05 Posts: 6468 |
I agree with Tooler that numbers in the lineout was a stupid rule and I am glad it is gone. I hadn't heard they were thinking of an uncontested scrum, would it be like a rugby league scrum? Isn't there a possibility of an uncontested union scrum if one of the pack is in the bin and there are no substitutes left to insert? I thought I saw that done one time. I'm kind of a newb, so I may be way off base. |
| 10/9/08 9:01 AM | |
|
TheRenegadeSperm
241
Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 1409 |
I guess uncontested is a misnomer. I meant depowered scrums. I think the rule got shot down anyway. They were worried about hookers breaking their necks, but that doesn't happen that often. I thought I was gonna break mine one time, but then I'm 5'10 and 165lbs, I was only playing hooker in a C-side match with two rookie props. |
| 10/9/08 9:44 AM | |
|
seg
55
Member Since: 3/28/05 Posts: 6485 |
^So would they switch from the one foot or so gap between opposing sides that currently exists just prior to "engage", to having the opposing sides shoulders already touching? I guess that would get rid of the initial collision which probably gives rise to most injuries. |
| 10/9/08 9:52 AM | |
|
nathan@aristeia
Member Since: 4/12/02 Posts: 6919 |
Intial collision in a scrum is to try to shake up the other pack so they lose their grips so when the push comes they can't get as good as push. The key to srcumming is being lower than the other scrum and being in tight. Non-contested scrums would be the death of union. |
| 10/10/08 8:31 AM | |
|
TheRenegadeSperm
241
Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 1410 |
Yeah. They did change from 'crouch, pause, engage' though to 'crouch, touch, engage' which eliminated two opposing packs charging in from like 4-5 feet away. But touch doesn't mean touch shoulders, it just means the front row has to be arms length from the other pack. |
| 10/11/08 5:11 AM | |
|
Squatdog
12
Member Since: 1/1/01 Posts: 23130 |
The English Rugby Football Union (who arrogantly call themselves THE Rugby Football Union) will always oppose any rule changes which speed the game up because because it favours open, running play which is contrary to the English playstyle. It was the same in 1997 when they squealed and complained about the Super 12 rules used in the England vs. Wales match becuase the Northern Hemisphere teams lacked the conditioning and defensive patterns to cope with the increased pace. This lead to the appalling revised rules used for the 1998 season and the World Cup. You HAD to release the ball which meant that if you broke the line and were tackled, you'd either: A- release the ball and lose possession B- give away a penalty Fucking great. |
| 4/5/11 6:39 PM | |
|
Turd Furguson
Member Since: 9/10/09 Posts: 1934 |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Wiki-pegging.png |
Reply Post
You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.
