Cheating in Rugby

[goodNumber10]

That's what I was trying to get at on page 1 of this thread before it got brushed off. Who is actually going to lead that charge? Because as I explained, if you do not do some of these things, or in some way make an attempt to slow the ball down then you are going to be left behind in the dust. Your opponents will be doing it, and you'll just be standing there like a fool "oh well, at least I was a good boy."

well that's the exact point isn't it? People do it because other people do it.

It's a self perpetuating issue.

As for leading the charge, well quite, this was why i was saying I think there needs to be a case of elite rugby taking ownership - but then it's not my job on the line.

Of course at the forefront of anything should be skill, strategy, strength, endurance, ability. That's why we employ so many specialist coaches, dietary regimes, and look abroad for innovative fitness solutions. It's not like that doesn't factor in, of course it does. It's the primary thing. If you don't have the natural ability, then forget it. But there is always going to be some bending of the rules. You have to spin a bottle top and see where it lands, see what mileage you can get out of the officiating. For better or worse, that's just how it works. And I cannot begrudge players for doing that. They take that risk, they know how it could end up, and I have known plenty of New Zealand coaches who work directly on reducing the penalty rate. But it's always going to be part of the game.

fair does, and yep, reducing the penalty rate is key to any successful team.

- - - Updated - - -

I see a world of difference between pushing the boundaries of what is allowed at tackle/ruck, which contains many shades of grey, and acts of Unfair Play, where there are less shades of grey, to Foul and Dangerous play where its mostly black and white.

1. Cheating such as playing the ball while off your feet, or entering the tackle from the side, or not releasing the player or the ball is often down to referee interpreation as to timing and/or direction. Different referees have different levels of tolerance, and materiality often comes into the equation.

2. Cheating such as pulling a chaser's jersey or grabbing a player early or obstruction is less down to interpretation and more down to observation. I see it as more serious than 1 above.

3. Striking, kicking, stomping, biting, bag-snatching, eye-gouging and head-butting are the most serious of all and ought to be eliminated from the game. IMO, player doing any of these acts ought to be automatically red carded and be sidelined for period of several weeks

I agree there are certainly different levels of cheating, and i agree the sentences should vary on the seriousness.

On point one, which is kind of what i'm interested in, do you think if there was a concerted global effort to adhere to the laws rather than exploit interpretations then the game would be better - i.e. don't use our hands when off your feet, make sure you come through the gate and so on...

I know it's a prefect world question but just humour me.

 

[TRF_heineken]

I see a world of difference between pushing the boundaries of what is allowed at tackle/ruck, which contains many shades of grey, and acts of Unfair Play, where there are less shades of grey, to Foul and Dangerous play where its mostly black and white.

1. Cheating such as playing the ball while off your feet, or entering the tackle from the side, or not releasing the player or the ball is often down to referee interpreation as to timing and/or direction. Different referees have different levels of tolerance, and materiality often comes into the equation.

2. Cheating such as pulling a chaser's jersey or grabbing a player early or obstruction is less down to interpretation and more down to observation. I see it as more serious than 1 above.

3. Striking, kicking, stomping, biting, bag-snatching, eye-gouging and head-butting are the most serious of all and ought to be eliminated from the game. IMO, player doing any of these acts ought to be automatically red carded and be sidelined for period of several weeks

This!

Thanx @smartcooky!

The levels of tolerance is also depending on how often it happens in the game, and whether the ref will be escalating the punishment. But then again, some of these offences aren't always "cheating" and there are mitigating circumstances in some instances. For instance the tackler not rolling away quick enough. sometimes it's damn near impossible to do that. And sometimes someone holds that player back in the ruck to prevent him from rolling away, which is my opinion a bigger form of cheating than the guy rolling away.

The other thing is a matter of interpretation, from both players and referees. Some see some things as cheating, while others don't.

 

[Tony Manx]

Valid if somewhat pedantic point

As is most of this thread!!

I am not sure where this is going other than round in circles before disappearing up its own ****!!

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

That's what I was trying to get at on page 1 of this thread before it got brushed off. Who is actually going to lead that charge? Because as I explained, if you do not do some of these things, or in some way make an attempt to slow the ball down then you are going to be left behind in the dust. Your opponents will be doing it, and you'll just be standing there like a fool "oh well, at least I was a good boy."

I think it'd be one hell of an undertaking and you'd have to tackle it both top down and from the bottom up because pro rugby is what kids see and what they'll use as a benchmark as much as what they get taught early tends to stick and inform the way they play the game in the future.

The way I'd try to approach it is to sell it to the different national unions on the basis of furthering the game; rugby without the constant effort to slow down opposition ball WILL lead to more attractive rugby as a ball in hand approach will get the greatest benefit. That'll also mean greater focus on skill and better player welfare all of which should mean a better chance for rugby to grow as a truly global sport and hopefully more money in their pockets which lets be honest is the only way you'll get people to change. A bigger merket = bigger income = bigger salaries and less injury = bigger salaries over longer periods of time so I am sure it can be sold to the players as well.

How to enforce/monitor a proposed change though will be the critical and most difficult aspect. You don't want to take away from Rugby's flow and the fact that posession is always up for challenge. Something that has worked well in trial in SA's varsity cup is allowing for captains to querry refereeing decisions. They got two referals each. If a referal lead to an intial ruling to be overturned they kept it. If the ref's decision was right they loss that referal. We were somewhat afraid f prolonged stoppages but the unexpected bonus was that referees backed themselves more often (some of the pressure to get it right got passed on to the on-field captains) and we don't get TMO's reviewing every try in the Varsity Cup anymore. fairer results also leads to all fans being pleased with results, even losses. that way you keep the followers you have and its easier to get fringe supporters to stick around if they don't feel the game is 'bent'. I got one of my friends to start watching rugby for the 2011 RWC for the 1st time and he stopped right there as he felt the game is rigged.

Other than the captains having more say during play I'd suggest a transparent review system and a centralized citation/penalty system. Make professional fouls missed in the game a banning offense similar to foul play- in other words hit the players' pockets.

I am not sure where this is going other than round in circles before disappearing up its own ****!!

A sure-fire recipe for a 'Thread of the year' nomination if you ask me ;P

 

[smartcooky]

There are two areas in which cheating takes place that I find most annoying

1. Teams using scrums to generate penalties to kick points
The scrum is supposed to be "a way to restart the game fairly after a stoppage or minor infringement", not a means of accumulating points. I would deal with this the same way that Aussies do in their National Rugby Championship; scrum penalties cannot be kicked for goal, but can be kicked for a gain in ground and the non-infringing team throws in.

2. Teams defending in or near their 22m, and they give up a penalty kick rather then risk conceding a try.
A team receives a penalty, and they choose to kick at goal...
a. if the kick misses, the game restarts as normal, with a 22m dropout, however
b. if the kick is successful, the game restarts with a scrum at the place where the penalty was awarded. Even if time is up, the scrum must still be set.

IMO this would disincentivise a team from trying any dodgy stuff at the tackle close to their line as they would be giving up a near certain 3 points and a 5m scrum, i.e. no relief from the field position.


Thoughts?

 

[goodNumber10]

There are two areas in which cheating takes place that I find most annoying

1. Teams using scrums to generate penalties to kick points
The scrum is supposed to be "a way to restart the game fairly after a stoppage or minor infringement", not a means of accumulating points. I would deal with this the same way that Aussies do in their National Rugby Championship; scrum penalties cannot be kicked for goal, but can be kicked for a gain in ground and the non-infringing team throws in.

2. Teams defending in or near their 22m, and they give up a penalty kick rather then risk conceding a try.
A team receives a penalty, and they choose to kick at goal...
a. if the kick misses, the game restarts as normal, with a 22m dropout, however
b. if the kick is successful, the game restarts with a scrum at the place where the penalty was awarded. Even if time is up, the scrum must still be set.

IMO this would disincentivise a team from trying any dodgy stuff at the tackle close to their line as they would be giving up a near certain 3 points and a 5m scrum, i.e. no relief from the field position.


Thoughts?

you've brought them up before and i'm a fan of them

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

There are two areas in which cheating takes place that I find most annoying

1. Teams using scrums to generate penalties to kick points
The scrum is supposed to be "a way to restart the game fairly after a stoppage or minor infringement", not a means of accumulating points. I would deal with this the same way that Aussies do in their National Rugby Championship; scrum penalties cannot be kicked for goal, but can be kicked for a gain in ground and the non-infringing team throws in.

2. Teams defending in or near their 22m, and they give up a penalty kick rather then risk conceding a try.
A team receives a penalty, and they choose to kick at goal...
a. if the kick misses, the game restarts as normal, with a 22m dropout, however
b. if the kick is successful, the game restarts with a scrum at the place where the penalty was awarded. Even if time is up, the scrum must still be set.

IMO this would disincentivise a team from trying any dodgy stuff at the tackle close to their line as they would be giving up a near certain 3 points and a 5m scrum, i.e. no relief from the field position.


Thoughts?

While I hate when teams infringe when under pressure in their own 22 (something I wish SA could get a little street smart with unless we have a concerted efort to clean up the game) I find the games that ruin it for me are when teams serially infringe in 1 or 2 particular manners constantly but get away with it all through the entire 80 rather than those games where a team gets away without conceding a try by rather conceding a cynical penalty just those few times when under pressure on their line. Things that ruin the game for me is a team constantly cashing in on scrum penalties when its off illegal scrumming from their side (I admit SA has benefitted from this; Beast on Vickery 2009 Lions tour 2nd test), a player/team offside at the line and/or one of those plethora of ruck infringements. Any of them has the ability to totally shut out 1 team out of the game. Its very much a case of ref errors though for much of it.

As for the scrum.. I don't mind scrum penalties but that is assuming the ref has a good handle on what is actually transpiring at the set piece. Something which is not always very clear even with the aid of replays and at multiple angles. But still, I see a good scrum as a legitimate weapon just like a good back three or whatever. IMO the onus should not be on the dominant scrum but on the weaker scrum to hold up and not give away a penalty; why shouldn't dominant scrums get rewarded when weaker scrums fail and end the dominant scrum moving forward? We might just as well go watch League. Now if the percieved dominant scrum is doing something underhanded to generate their ddominance, now that is something totally different.

 

[TRF_heineken]

There are two areas in which cheating takes place that I find most annoying

1. Teams using scrums to generate penalties to kick points
The scrum is supposed to be "a way to restart the game fairly after a stoppage or minor infringement", not a means of accumulating points. I would deal with this the same way that Aussies do in their National Rugby Championship; scrum penalties cannot be kicked for goal, but can be kicked for a gain in ground and the non-infringing team throws in.

2. Teams defending in or near their 22m, and they give up a penalty kick rather then risk conceding a try.
A team receives a penalty, and they choose to kick at goal...
a. if the kick misses, the game restarts as normal, with a 22m dropout, however
b. if the kick is successful, the game restarts with a scrum at the place where the penalty was awarded. Even if time is up, the scrum must still be set.

IMO this would disincentivise a team from trying any dodgy stuff at the tackle close to their line as they would be giving up a near certain 3 points and a 5m scrum, i.e. no relief from the field position.


Thoughts?

It certainly is a good idea. But before we can get to that point on the scrums, we need the referees to be better educated about the scrums, and to make better decisions at scrum time. Boring in, is also cheating, and referees seem to miss it a lot at the scrums.

I think there other acts that constitute cheating which doesn't get the attention it deserves. Acts like holding onto a player to prevent him from defending/getting to the player with the ball. How often do we see someome swinging their arms in a fierce manner, where he's trying to get an opposing player from holding onto him.

 

[Umaga's Witness]

Is it ok to openly and knowingly choose to do something ok, and should that always be dismissed as gamesmanship as opposed to out and out cheating?

I think you can answer your question by putting yourself in a players shoes. Would you feel bad for cheating? Under what circumstances? If everyone else was cheating, would you still feel bad? I'm picking no. I know I wouldn't. If everyone else was cheating I wouldn't feel like that was fair, just as I would feel guilty if i was the only one cheating - as that wouldn't feel fair either. You can extend this to the different kinds and severites of cheating. basically a player is not going to feel guilty if he is cheating to the same extent as everyone else. Humans, except sociopaths, are naturally ethical creatures. It's in our genes. THe fact that there is so much cheating therefore really points to a problem with the laws adn how they are officiated.

For example, it is a rule that the tackled player has to roll away. I don't remember ever seeing this, yet it doesn't get penalised. And of course not doing so helps your team retrieve the ball. How is it that every ref, all of whom study the laws, doesn't police this law? It is because the moneys that be don't want rucks to be equally contestable, as the game would be less exciting if they were; since there'd be a lot more kicking.

Presumably professional players read the laws too. therefore they are deliberately breaking them. but if individual players tried to play to the rules, when everyone else is allowed to get away with not doing so, then this would put their team at a disadvantage. I ask you, do you think this is not OK, for this particular situation?

 

[AzaMatt]

not so much cheating but i have a genuine question, if scrum halfs are meant to put the ball into the scrum straight (lets assume they all did) then what would be the advantage of having the put in? i just cant understand that (i do not play rugby, just a fan)

 

[goodNumber10]

not so much cheating but i have a genuine question, if scrum halfs are meant to put the ball into the scrum straight (lets assume they all did) then what would be the advantage of having the put in? i just cant understand that (i do not play rugby, just a fan)

in theory timing.

in the old days when the feed was straight the hooker and halfback would work on timing a lot, they'd have a signal so that the ball could come in and the hooker would know when as opposed to reacting and the pack could time their push to support the Hooker.

Tat all went out the window when the NZ'ers perfected the 8 man shove in the early 90's

 

[BRSTLDRGN]

There are two areas in which cheating takes place that I find most annoying

1. Teams using scrums to generate penalties to kick points
The scrum is supposed to be "a way to restart the game fairly after a stoppage or minor infringement", not a means of accumulating points. I would deal with this the same way that Aussies do in their National Rugby Championship; scrum penalties cannot be kicked for goal, but can be kicked for a gain in ground and the non-infringing team throws in.

2. Teams defending in or near their 22m, and they give up a penalty kick rather then risk conceding a try.
A team receives a penalty, and they choose to kick at goal...
a. if the kick misses, the game restarts as normal, with a 22m dropout, however
b. if the kick is successful, the game restarts with a scrum at the place where the penalty was awarded. Even if time is up, the scrum must still be set.

IMO this would disincentivise a team from trying any dodgy stuff at the tackle close to their line as they would be giving up a near certain 3 points and a 5m scrum, i.e. no relief from the field position.


Thoughts?

In regards to the latter I'd prefer more use of the sin bin for that sort of deliberate infringing that close to the line. Make it so any defending breakdown penalty in the area 5-10m from the line gets zero tolerance. Though admiteddley that may end up being a consistency nightmare

 

[valley commando]

Is cheating in rugby ok?

Is it ok to openly and knowingly choose to do something ok, and should that always be dismissed as gamesmanship as opposed to out and out cheating?

Why is it ok to berate Ref's for missing things players do then absolve the players on the bases of "he's just playing the ref"?

I think its acceptable to play the ref, if that is cheating then yes it is okay to cheat, different refs are stronger on some things than others etc and human nature dictates to a degree what players get up to on the field of play, there is a dividing line though in my opinion it is okay to stick a hand in the ruck if you think you can get away with it the better sides are adept at slowing the ball down it is up to the ref to spot this and penalise those responsible.
Some aspects of cheating are not okay such as blatant trips. What incenses me is the scrum feed when refs seem to encourage cheating, either penalise every unstraight feed or change the rule on scrum feeding.

 

[AzaMatt]

in theory timing.

in the old days when the feed was straight the hooker and halfback would work on timing a lot, they'd have a signal so that the ball could come in and the hooker would know when as opposed to reacting and the pack could time their push to support the Hooker.

Tat all went out the window when the NZ'ers perfected the 8 man shove in the early 90's

that explains it, cheers . I cannot remember the last time i saw a straight put in

 

[TRF_heineken]

In regards to the latter I'd prefer more use of the sin bin for that sort of deliberate infringing that close to the line. Make it so any defending breakdown penalty in the area 5-10m from the line gets zero tolerance. Though admiteddley that may end up being a consistency nightmare

That's another thing. The sin bin. I truly think that it is an area which should also be reviewed. To ba a man down is to penalise the entire team, whereas the punishment is given to the player.

I say instead of sending a player off for 10 minutes or whatever. Rather hit him where it matters, his own pocket. Fine him for his offence, but don't make the entire team suffer for the indiscretion of one guy.

 

[BRSTLDRGN]

That's another thing. The sin bin. I truly think that it is an area which should also be reviewed. To ba a man down is to penalise the entire team, whereas the punishment is given to the player.

I say instead of sending a player off for 10 minutes or whatever. Rather hit him where it matters, his own pocket. Fine him for his offence, but don't make the entire team suffer for the indiscretion of one guy.

But as player salaries increase will that really stop things? I agree with fines for foul play aswell as a ban but I don't think you can fine someone for not rolling away. Rugby is a team sport at the end of the day so players indescresions should hit the team in the same way as a brilliant individual try will benefit

 

[ncurd]

I don't think fines work most of the time.

Personally I'm with SelimNial slightly except anything within 5 meters is an automatic penalty try (any deliberate play a YC), teams will dole out punishments accordingly that will hurt players far more. Plus it's already in the laws we have already as I'm not sure how any penalty where the ref has stopped play within 5 meters is not a try scoring opportunity. We only really see it for multiple attacking scrums and maul infringements.

 

[goodNumber10]

That's another thing. The sin bin. I truly think that it is an area which should also be reviewed. To ba a man down is to penalise the entire team, whereas the punishment is given to the player.

I say instead of sending a player off for 10 minutes or whatever. Rather hit him where it matters, his own pocket. Fine him for his offence, but don't make the entire team suffer for the indiscretion of one guy.

how is that different to giving away three points? The team suffers not the individual.

Rugby is a team game, stand and fall collectively.

 

[Mcfadden]

That's another thing. The sin bin. I truly think that it is an area which should also be reviewed. To ba a man down is to penalise the entire team, whereas the punishment is given to the player.

I say instead of sending a player off for 10 minutes or whatever. Rather hit him where it matters, his own pocket. Fine him for his offence, but don't make the entire team suffer for the indiscretion of one guy.

Hmm, yeah. That's all very well after the fact. But if the ball is constantly being killed close to the line, then I think it's reasonable that you get a warning once, maybe even twice if you're lucky so the Captain can rally the troops and lay down the law, and if it continues then as a team everybody must cop that punishment. Doing something that close to the line, have at it, but you do so at your own risk imo.

That way, we can organize what's acceptable and keep the game flowing. A yellow card is more tangible (at least in that moment) and I think spurs both side's senior leaders into grabbing their team by the scruff of the neck and getting everyone to sort it out. That player, or even a player who continues to push their luck on the team's behalf after two warnings, needs to be removed from the situation.

 

[BRSTLDRGN]

I don't think fines work most of the time.

Personally I'm with SelimNial slightly except anything within 5 meters is an automatic penalty try (any deliberate play a YC), teams will dole out punishments accordingly that will hurt players far more. Plus it's already in the laws we have already as I'm not sure how any penalty where the ref has stopped play within 5 meters is not a try scoring opportunity. We only really see it for multiple attacking scrums and maul infringements.

I dont think penalty try is the way to go, we dont want to scare the contest at a breakdown away from the game and having such a drastic consequence for what is a minor indescrestion could do that.