Trends

Forum for the discussion of other Teams and Clubs as well as General Rugby chat.

Moderator: moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
IanD
Official Mascot
Posts: 1687
Joined: May 2nd, 2006, 1:51 pm
Location: Wicklow Town

Re: Trends

Post by IanD »

Oldschoolsocks wrote: May 1st, 2022, 11:32 pm
IanD wrote: May 1st, 2022, 11:23 pm Just had a new idea about fines etc.

I think Clubs\Unions should cover the cost of any injury enforced absences of opposition players due to foul play.

As an example following Euells tackle on James Ryan the RFU should pay the IRFU and Leinster to cover his wages while sidelined.

It might focus some minds if in England and France some of your Salary Cap is paying opposition players wages.
It’s an idea alright, but it could be a slippery slope. What to stop that being used as financial doping?

Say England or France or even Ireland are playing maybe a poorer union like Western Samoa and the decision is made to take out their left winger because he’s amazing and it’s a WC final (in our case QF obviously), the union can pay for his wages in his absence and we won the match YAY.

I just think financial penalties are, in general, intrinsically regressive tbh…
In the match you still receive a Red or Yellow card as deemed appropriate by Referee. This is on top of Bans etc.

This is just an idea to focus Accountants/Management/Administrators minds on down sides of red cards.
Treat life like a dog: If you can't eat it, play with it, or hump it, p1$$ on it and walk away!
User avatar
Oldschoolsocks
Seán Cronin
Posts: 3493
Joined: January 4th, 2015, 10:36 am
Location: Stepping out of the Supernova

Re: Trendsa bi

Post by Oldschoolsocks »

IanD wrote: May 2nd, 2022, 12:00 am
Oldschoolsocks wrote: May 1st, 2022, 11:32 pm
IanD wrote: May 1st, 2022, 11:23 pm Just had a new idea about fines etc.

I think Clubs\Unions should cover the cost of any injury enforced absences of opposition players due to foul play.

As an example following Euells tackle on James Ryan the RFU should pay the IRFU and Leinster to cover his wages while sidelined.

It might focus some minds if in England and France some of your Salary Cap is paying opposition players wages.
It’s an idea alright, but it could be a slippery slope. What to stop that being used as financial doping?

Say England or France or even Ireland are playing maybe a poorer union like Western Samoa and the decision is made to take out their left winger because he’s amazing and it’s a WC final (in our case QF obviously), the union can pay for his wages in his absence and we won the match YAY.

I just think financial penalties are, in general, intrinsically regressive tbh…
In the match you still receive a Red or Yellow card as deemed appropriate by Referee. This is on top of Bans etc.

This is just an idea to focus Accountants/Management/Administrators minds on down sides of red cards.
Yup, I get it. What I’m thinking of is the trademark Owen Farrell high tackle that is cited after the match.

If anyone thinks that a less than ethical coach would send a team out to “bend the rules” and that the union would foot the bill then you’re more innocent than I am.

And all of that goes before a less wealthy union, let’s say W. Samoa again here, gets a player sent off for a really bad tackle on a very well payed professional who is then out for say 12 months potentially bankrupting the union. That’s not a good thing either.

I think what I’m trying to say is that if every union had the same amount of money it would be an idea worth looking into, but in the world we live in it right now it’s probably a bit more nuanced.
User avatar
hugonaut
Shane Jennings
Posts: 6127
Joined: May 5th, 2009, 7:44 pm

Re: Trends

Post by hugonaut »

I am only going to say this 100 times: bring back the drop goal off a free kick.

Drop goals are a dying art; free-kicks are underpowered and practically useless. Remedy two issues with one solution by bringing back an original law. We'll find out soon enough why it was struck out in the first place.
User avatar
Dave Cahill
Devin Toner
Posts: 23910
Joined: January 24th, 2006, 3:32 pm
Location: None of your damn business
Contact:

Re: Trends

Post by Dave Cahill »

Mick Doyle once famously and controversially stated that the scrum was merely a way of restarting play. He's not actually wrong. Scrums are only directly awarded as a means of restarting play after an "error", not foul play
  • A knock-on or throw forward, apart from at a lineout.
  • A knock-on or throw forward at a lineout; incorrect throw at a lineout; incorrect quick throw
  • The ball is taken into in-goal by the defending team and made dead.
  • An unplayable tackle or ruck.
  • A maul that ends unsuccessfully
  • An unplayable maul after kick in open play.
  • Failure to “use it” at scrum, ruck or maul.
  • The ball or ball-carrier touches the referee and either team gains an advantage.
  • Stoppage due to injury
  • Penalty or Free kick not taken within the time limit

I would amend the laws so that no penalties can be awarded for an offense at scrum time except for foul play or if the referree decides that offense is worthy of awarding a penalty try.

If a referee decides that a team has infringed at a scrum they are punished with either a free kick against them, a scrum reversal (option to the team that hasn't offended) or a penalty try.

Too often teams try to milk penalties from scrums. It means that we have constant resets and the ball being held in the scrum until the ref awards the penalty - if you knew that in most situations that the most you were going to get from a scrum was a free kick or another scrum, then teams would use the ball much quicker and would be slower, except perhaps in the 5m zone where a PT might be an option, to opt for resets
I have Bumbleflex
User avatar
ronk
Cian Healy
Posts: 12900
Joined: April 9th, 2009, 12:42 am

Re: Trends

Post by ronk »

That wouldn't change a lot. Collapsing is foul play. Leaving the scrum early would be encouraged which would reduce attacking space for moves off the scrum.

Refs could have the same effect without changing the laws. They could penalise the team trying to milk penalties sometimes and reset a few more.

If you reward the team that's doing the messing in the scrums you get more messing.
User avatar
Oldschool
Cian Healy
Posts: 13948
Joined: March 27th, 2008, 1:10 pm

Re: Trends

Post by Oldschool »

Remove the option of opting for a scrum for a any kind of penalty award and as suggested above allow the DG option.
One benefit would be no more penalty tries being awarded for persistent penalties at a series of scrums.
Before the next RWC would be great timing.
Mirror, Mirror on the Wall who's the greatest player of them all? It is Drico your majesty.
SoupyNorman
Learner
Posts: 72
Joined: September 4th, 2018, 3:20 pm

Re: Trends

Post by SoupyNorman »

Oldschool wrote: June 16th, 2022, 10:23 am Remove the option of opting for a scrum for a any kind of penalty award and as suggested above allow the DG option.
One benefit would be no more penalty tries being awarded for persistent penalties at a series of scrums.
Before the next RWC would be great timing.
I guess it depends on your point of view. Your benefit is a major downside for me. Gives mote incentive for a weak scrum to just collapse immediately close to their line.
Ruckedtobits
Shane Jennings
Posts: 6085
Joined: April 10th, 2011, 10:23 am

Re: Trends

Post by Ruckedtobits »

The World Rugby proposals as to how they intend giving the TMO an interactive role with the Referee should be extended to the Stadium audience who deserve to have the spectacle, they have paid a premium to attend, made available for their "participation".

The TV audience, at present, get a better service than the live audience. The 'home' supporters should be given the capacity to "exert influence" on players and officials in the manner that has been the traditional benefit of a home team.
User avatar
Oldschoolsocks
Seán Cronin
Posts: 3493
Joined: January 4th, 2015, 10:36 am
Location: Stepping out of the Supernova

Re: Trends

Post by Oldschoolsocks »

Ruckedtobits wrote: June 17th, 2022, 7:30 pm The World Rugby proposals as to how they intend giving the TMO an interactive role with the Referee should be extended to the Stadium audience who deserve to have the spectacle, they have paid a premium to attend, made available for their "participation".

The TV audience, at present, get a better service than the live audience. The 'home' supporters should be given the capacity to "exert influence" on players and officials in the manner that has been the traditional benefit of a home team.
Sounds a bit pantomimey
riocard911
Seán Cronin
Posts: 3646
Joined: July 27th, 2015, 10:42 pm

Re: Trends

Post by riocard911 »

Oldschoolsocks wrote: June 18th, 2022, 7:49 am
Ruckedtobits wrote: June 17th, 2022, 7:30 pm The World Rugby proposals as to how they intend giving the TMO an interactive role with the Referee should be extended to the Stadium audience who deserve to have the spectacle, they have paid a premium to attend, made available for their "participation".

The TV audience, at present, get a better service than the live audience. The 'home' supporters should be given the capacity to "exert influence" on players and officials in the manner that has been the traditional benefit of a home team.
Sounds a bit pantomimey
Oh no it doesn't!!!
User avatar
LeRouxIsPHat
Cian Healy
Posts: 14532
Joined: January 22nd, 2009, 7:49 pm

Re: Trends

Post by LeRouxIsPHat »

hugonaut wrote: June 14th, 2022, 8:40 pm I am only going to say this 100 times: bring back the drop goal off a free kick.

Drop goals are a dying art; free-kicks are underpowered and practically useless. Remedy two issues with one solution by bringing back an original law. We'll find out soon enough why it was struck out in the first place.
I think it’s coming back into fashion. Loads of attempts recently including Toulouse last night (missed) and a nice one from Mo’unga this morning.

Mo’unga is obviously well able to go off script but I thought it was interesting that he hit that one off first phase earlier. Maybe that’s the kind of thing Goodman spotted would work against a Schmidt side a bit too focused on the potential arm wrestle? If so then it bodes well for us.

From watching La Rochelle against Toulouse last week and our game against the Bulls I really think we need to work on our counter attack instead of being happy to kick for territory and trusting our defence. Toulouse ripped La Rochelle apart in open play but we were a little bit too safe. Obviously you don’t want to overdo it but our back line is filled with guys who are well capable of picking the right moment and have the skills etc to execute it. Looking at Larmour in recent games he could be pivotal to that and and really slice teams open if we back him a bit more with ball in hand instead of chasing kicks.
FLIP
Rhys Ruddock
Posts: 2480
Joined: May 22nd, 2009, 1:00 am

Re: Trends

Post by FLIP »

LeRouxIsPHat wrote: June 18th, 2022, 3:15 pm
hugonaut wrote: June 14th, 2022, 8:40 pm I am only going to say this 100 times: bring back the drop goal off a free kick.

Drop goals are a dying art; free-kicks are underpowered and practically useless. Remedy two issues with one solution by bringing back an original law. We'll find out soon enough why it was struck out in the first place.
I think it’s coming back into fashion. Loads of attempts recently including Toulouse last night (missed) and a nice one from Mo’unga this morning.

Mo’unga is obviously well able to go off script but I thought it was interesting that he hit that one off first phase earlier. Maybe that’s the kind of thing Goodman spotted would work against a Schmidt side a bit too focused on the potential arm wrestle? If so then it bodes well for us.
And as seen today in the English Prem final
Anyone But New Zealand
Ruckedtobits
Shane Jennings
Posts: 6085
Joined: April 10th, 2011, 10:23 am

Re: Trends

Post by Ruckedtobits »

Will Ireland be tempted to adopt the now prevalent tactical approach of kicking high, long and often in an attempt to beat NZ? This strategic style, with some particular variations, has been successful for France and various NH Club teams. It appears to be the lower risk tactic preferred by some highly competent coaching groups.
User avatar
dropkick
Rhys Ruddock
Posts: 2078
Joined: January 2nd, 2007, 12:27 am
Location: Cork

Re: Trends

Post by dropkick »

Ruckedtobits wrote: June 19th, 2022, 8:52 am Will Ireland be tempted to adopt the now prevalent tactical approach of kicking high, long and often in an attempt to beat NZ? This strategic style, with some particular variations, has been successful for France and various NH Club teams. It appears to be the lower risk tactic preferred by some highly competent coaching groups.
Depends on the breakdown. If ireland are under pressure at the breakdown then kicking makes more sense. I think it's something Farrell is very aware of which is why Conway was preferred to Balacoune in the 6 nations.


It makes sense against bigger packs too as the more mobile, fitter pack can cover more ground hence get more bounces going their way etc. Gatland used to do that with Wales. They used to keep the ball in play and back their fitness.


Of course you need good kickers too. James Lowes left foot is a weapon.


Watching the games yesterday I thought the Crusaders got the balance right. The premiership final was extreme and both teams looked knackered in the last quarter.


From a leinster point of view they would be better off kicking more against organised defence if the breakdown isn't working great. Kick, get the big (eg la rochelle) fatties running a bit and then look to attack when the opposition are disorganised/needing a breather.
User avatar
LeinsterLeader
Rhys Ruddock
Posts: 2543
Joined: May 23rd, 2010, 8:51 pm

Re: Trends

Post by LeinsterLeader »

Not sure if it's been mentioned but Romain Poite to join Toulan next season as 'Contact & Discipline' coach. I think one of the other Top 14 club may already have an ex-ref doing this role for them. Will this be a new Trend? Can we see it happening over here? What's Alain Rolland doing these days? :D
Post Reply