<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (InsaneAsylum @ Aug 12 2009, 08:14 AM)
<{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KZNSharksFan @ Aug 12 2009, 02:02 PM)
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (InsaneAsylum @ Aug 12 2009, 01:49 PM)
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
kicking is boring.
there should be a rule that you can't immediately return a kick if you recieve a kick, unless you run 10 metres or you are tackled or it's a mark. hopefully this will stop the gay aerial ping pong that's being played at the moment[/b]
This isn't rugby bloody league, you can't just change the rules when you dont like the way teams are playing. It wont always be like this. SA can only play like they do because they have huge forward dominance at the moment. When they lose that, they will have to resort to the backs more. Anyway i reckon it's great that a team like SA can win by kicking and playing a structured game and a team like Australia can also win by playing more expansively.
[/b][/quote]
i didn't mention south africa, australia or rugby league in my post, and if you think "you can't just change the rules" well think again, they were changed not that long ago. there is way too much up and under kicking going on in today's game. if rugby could go back to what it was in the 1990's and early 2000's then it's a good thing regarldless of which teams were winning or losing. from what
i remember there was a lot more quick ball at the rucks, a lot more running rugby and
a lot more tries were scored. that's what's average joe in front of the TV at home or watching the game wants to see,
not two teams taking it in turns to kick the ball as high as they can while trying to put the opposition off catching the ball cleanly.
[/b][/quote]
The slow rucking problem is -basicaly- down to the irb not being able to come up with concise instructions to the bloody ref. This time last year everyone was WTFing over the wistle being blown every 7 seconds because a prop couldn't stay on his feet in a ruck because the defensive team were too lazy to get to the ruck and the prop had nobody to put weight on. I've noticed during the last couiple of months the enforcement of that rule has become less stringent. What they need to be doing is refing hands in the ruck and lieing on the wrong side of the ball more quickly.
The tries being scored does come down to style and that will change from time to time. In the pacific nations cup, matches averaged over 7 tres per match. Whereas Six Nations and Tri Nations are giving us 3 tries a match. I won't put it all down to tighter defense because alot of it is down to the...
Annoying up and under obsession which kicked off (pardon the pun) I believe during the 2007 World Cup when Argentina managed to get to a semi-final via the up and unders of Juam Martin Hernandez being near perfect everytime and happening everytime he touched the ball. The next world cup will come and France or Australia or Wales or Portugal or something will gave a stormer of a tournie by playing expansive rugby and everyone will copy that.
I don't think the kicky thing will stick.
And to answer the original question which wasn't about the style of play bt about the format of the competition. I liked it when there was a home and an away match and now there's 3 matches a year and it's all a bit much. Bring the argies in and bring ti back to the home and away match basis. Or go absolutely mental and have Wales, France, Ireland or England or when/if they good again; Scotland do a tour during the start of the season. And When NZ are playing Aus, then lets say, France play SA, then when Aus start their tour of SA, then France play NZ, and the next weekend let NZ play SA and France have their last match against AUS and count those results in the table and France can f*** off on home. - But like I said, that's mental.
The main reason why Tri-Nations could be seen as boring is All Blacks. They are not as competetive as we used to. So, New Zealand should come back to basis, change coach or reconsider option to select players who play club rugby in NH.
