-
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
C
candybum
Guest
Well i fail to see the comparison lol Surely he can't be struggling with the increase pace of the game? But i agree how he said that changing between the new and old laws are pretty silly, but thats to be expected.
Give it some time (s)Habana hehe
Give it some time (s)Habana hehe
B
Bullitt
Guest
I recall saying a similar thing when the laws were first suggested.
N
nam97
Guest
It's not even like league in any way! WTF is he on?
The only gripes I have over the new rules is the kicking out from the 22. I don't think they should have changed that one, there are way too many aimless kicks and it makes it sloppy. Watching the weekends games, most teams just kicked in down the middle, the other team got it and either poked it back or just ran into trouble. Counter attacking and "free flowing" rugby had nothing to do with it, it made it worse IMO.
Everything else is great though, especially the free kicks which have now come into play. This is what Habana probably means by the game turning into league, but I love them.
The only gripes I have over the new rules is the kicking out from the 22. I don't think they should have changed that one, there are way too many aimless kicks and it makes it sloppy. Watching the weekends games, most teams just kicked in down the middle, the other team got it and either poked it back or just ran into trouble. Counter attacking and "free flowing" rugby had nothing to do with it, it made it worse IMO.
Everything else is great though, especially the free kicks which have now come into play. This is what Habana probably means by the game turning into league, but I love them.
F
Fushitsusha
Guest
My only worry from the weekend was the amount of aimless kicks as well.
This was something that occured frequently in the ARC - fullbacks kicking to each other until someone got the nerve to run it back.
I was originally pretty happy with this rule as I thought we would see less kicking, but if this keeps occuring it might be something they have to look at scrapping.
I think some players should watch what Dan Carter did to the Brumbies on Friday. I thought he was tactically brilliant with his kicking.
Anyways, the short arm penalties for ruck infringements is great, but the IRB needs to bring back rucking! It would sort out a lot of the problems rucks have faced since they got rid of it.
R
RoyalBlueStuey
Guest
It's not the done thing to say "I told you so!" but I can't believe people didn't see this coming. They wouldn't listen to us would they mate.
R
redunderthebed
Guest
Oh FFS Brian get your head out of your arse it will always be Union,we wouldnt want to mess with that but nothing wrong with changing the rules slightly, if it means if the game will be more entertaining for the masses and thats who we have to attract if we are going to prosper.
V
Vambo
Guest
The only similarity I noticed with RL was the way the ball was fed into the scrums.
S
sambãd5
Guest
you know, if it does make it more like league, isnt a better end product the winner in the day anyway? i highly doubt that one day rugby will merge into league. if we tweak the rules in a league like manner to get a faster, more free flowing running style of rugby isnt that better anyway?
however heres a idea - if so do speak - we tweaked union to be more like league slightly more each decade or so - do you think that league will become sort of what 20-20 cricket is to one dayers? or tests?
however heres a idea - if so do speak - we tweaked union to be more like league slightly more each decade or so - do you think that league will become sort of what 20-20 cricket is to one dayers? or tests?
V
Vambo
Guest
In all honesty I can't see these new laws being used in the NH and whilst in Australia (especially) union must adapt if it is to avoid being overshadowed by the other codes ie AFL, RL & Soccer, there is no need to do so in the NH where the powerbase is still going strong and playing in front of consistently good crowds and good tv ratings with very good money coming in commercially.
B
BLR
Guest
That was being done long before the laws came in....refs just don't care anymore...
V
Vambo
Guest
That was being done long before the laws came in....refs just don't care anymore...
[/b][/quote]
Aye... frustrating isn't it? :angry:
B
BLR
Guest
Coming from a team which is screwed over more then most in match deciding ways I know a lot about thier ineptitude...I think the only way rugby can work efficiently is if they raise referee standards, which can be done by a referee panel going through each weeks performance, and if huge mistakes are made those refs will be downgraded, getting paid less and reffing less desirable games, yet the more skillful refs will get the best games and the best pay...it will cause refs to always strive to get better and, for example not give away tries which aren't tries, like the Reds game....
Watching the standard of referreeing in the ARC these new laws could cause ALOT of trouble...hopefully they don't give away yellow cards as much as they blow thier whistle like the ARC though...
C
Crackdown
Guest
The new rules are shat, everyone in the NH saw this coming but people wouldn't listen - out of all the televised games throughout the world this weekend, which one was the best?
Clear winner was Barf vs Pests under the 'old' rules with 9 tries scored. Passing back into the 22 I can live with and if they want quicker ball at the breakdowns then bring back rucking, forget the rest and the job is done.
Clear winner was Barf vs Pests under the 'old' rules with 9 tries scored. Passing back into the 22 I can live with and if they want quicker ball at the breakdowns then bring back rucking, forget the rest and the job is done.
N
nam97
Guest
Crusaders v Brumbies 'cos the 'Saders pwnd those n00bs big time.
No seriously, that game and especially Blues/Chiefs were good viewing. Better than any of that Guinness Prem/Magners League stuff we get, where the score is on average 10-6 with maybe a try if we are lucky <_<
The new laws are good, with a few exceptions which will be cut out for sure if they do become permanent.
C
Crackdown
Guest
No way was that game better than the one I mentioned (scrappy and unbalanced) - did you actually see it? As for the myth of low scoring games - lets look at the weekend results:
Sale Sharks 29 - 3 Leeds Carnegie
Bath Rugby 34 - 42 London Wasps
Harlequins 36 - 15 Worcester Warriors
London Irish 22 - 13 Leicester Tigers
Bristol Rugby 29 - 26 Gloucester Rugby
Newcastle 16 - 14 Saracens
Total of 279 points scored.
Now for the Super 14 with 'speedy', new, "I want to be league" rules:
Crusaders 34 - 3 Brumbies
Reds 22 - 14 Highlanders
Sharks 17 - 10 Force
Blues 32 - 14 Chiefs
Waratahs 20 - 3 Hurricanes
Stormers 9 - 16 Bulls
Cheetahs 22 - 23 Lions
Total of 241 points scored.
Which is the supposed tryless snore-fest again?
Sale Sharks 29 - 3 Leeds Carnegie
Bath Rugby 34 - 42 London Wasps
Harlequins 36 - 15 Worcester Warriors
London Irish 22 - 13 Leicester Tigers
Bristol Rugby 29 - 26 Gloucester Rugby
Newcastle 16 - 14 Saracens
Total of 279 points scored.
Now for the Super 14 with 'speedy', new, "I want to be league" rules:
Crusaders 34 - 3 Brumbies
Reds 22 - 14 Highlanders
Sharks 17 - 10 Force
Blues 32 - 14 Chiefs
Waratahs 20 - 3 Hurricanes
Stormers 9 - 16 Bulls
Cheetahs 22 - 23 Lions
Total of 241 points scored.
Which is the supposed tryless snore-fest again?
P
peppers07
Guest
I missed all the the super 14 games this week dont even normally watch them allot so i havnt seen the new rules but the rule were you have to be 5 mtrsback from the no- 8 suck oit wont encourage free flowing rugby it wil just mean no 8s constantly pick and go of the scrum the kicking in your 22 rule as others have said just makes aimless kicking not finding touch and people will now start aiming their kicks (when there not goin fror touch) for just outside the 22
S
Steve-o
Guest
Are we gonna start a new thread every time a player has an opinion about the ELV's? Habana is not the only player to publicly share his views over the ELV's.
There is a thread about the laws already. The article could of been posted there
There is a thread about the laws already. The article could of been posted there
C
Charles
Guest
Apart from all that has benn said, smthg is really annoying me with these new rules. The aim was to have a more open game with more tries, which means quick ball at the breakdown, and less kick at goals. How is that gonna work if killing the ball is only worth a FK ? Am I the only one seeing the problem here ?
They should not use the fouls to expand the game (quick tap) they should try to have the law enforced instead. Say team A is in possession of the ball, in their half. After a ruck, they get the ball wide, and then #7 B kills the ball on the following ruck.
How is a quick tap or a scrum going to benefit the attacking team ? You can't even kick for touch and have the ball, which would have been a better try-scoring opportunity than a scrum on the 40 meters. Seems obvious to me...
Rewarding negative play by lessening the punition is not gonna work me think...
They should not use the fouls to expand the game (quick tap) they should try to have the law enforced instead. Say team A is in possession of the ball, in their half. After a ruck, they get the ball wide, and then #7 B kills the ball on the following ruck.
How is a quick tap or a scrum going to benefit the attacking team ? You can't even kick for touch and have the ball, which would have been a better try-scoring opportunity than a scrum on the 40 meters. Seems obvious to me...
Rewarding negative play by lessening the punition is not gonna work me think...
P
peppers07
Guest
Your right all these rules are doing the oposite of what they are soposed to do
It also means if your two points up with 5 mins to go you can continuously kill the ball and all theyle get is quick taps wich only work when they take you by surprise
