Hansen worried about future of rugby

[ratsapprentice]

I think there is definitely a case to be made for a wider pitch.

Increasing the space available comes down to which is more difficult:

Mandating wider pitches, or reducing the number of players?

 

[Feicarsinn]

Bit of impracticality widening the pitches - lots of the happen to have stadiums built around them.

 

[lucky number 7]

Increasing the space available comes down to which is more difficult:

Mandating wider pitches, or reducing the number of players?

I would really hate to see the number of players fall. It really wouldn't be the same game in my opinion.
The functional roles of every position work so well as they are and have such cultural significance in my opinion it would be a disgrace to change.

At club level I don't want to have to tell my potential future kids about a position I used to play but that it doesn't exist anymore because professionals got too good at defending.

"Daddy what's an openside flanker?"
"Well son when I was your age there was a position where you could run around like a rabid gazzelle on the serengeti without any responsibility except to **** **** up"

Or

"Daddy what's a hooker?"
"Well son when I met your mothe...."

- - - Updated - - -

Bit of impracticality widening the pitches - lots of the happen to have stadiums built around them.

 

[The_Wol]

Because the king of the Kiwi's says it, it's automatically a real issue that needs solving. Grow up pls

 

[FrenchFan]

Steve Hansen the All Blacks coach says in an interview in Wales (Daily Telegraph) that he is concerned that the lack of tries in current rugby is going to turn Fans off rugby.

Certainly with the introduction of Rugby League defensive lines, and coaches use of scrums as penalty making machines, he has a point in my way of thinking!!

Instead of gifted centers like Guscott, Bod, Greenwood, we instead get the bish bash bosh centers like Tuilagi, Roberts, Bastereaud. The art of looking for space, in the main, has been left the wrong side of the whitewash in the hope that defenses will keep their line and tire the opposition out which is more difficult due to the prolific use of substitutes. Surely the day of a sub getting to a century of caps is not that far away belittling the achievements of Sella, McCaw and their ilk!!

Is modern rugby becoming a bore fest! Can we do anything to make it more attack orientated? Is Hansen right?

it's Toulouse's fault!! http://www.therugbyforum.com/threads/35025-2015-Six-Nations-France-vs-Wales-%28Round-3%29?p=712853&viewfull=1#post712853

 

[smartcooky]

Although most of it makes sense sat reading it on a PC would adding those rules simply make the game even more complex and harder to ref?

If a mid-grade referee and 30 or so teenagers can grasp the suggested Law changes in a 30 minute classroom session and a 60 minute trial match, why would professional rugby players and referees given weeks of training and several preseason games not be able to do so?

Plus, there is no real additional complexity to the Laws. The ruck/maul 5m just moves the offside line back - retiring players have to go 5m further back, joining players have to approach directly behind the ruck/maul and rejoining player just do what they have always done.

The scrum penalties are even easier. You don't have to remember which is a free kick and which is a penalty kick; if its a scrum they are all indirect penalty kicks.

 

[McTallshort]

If a mid-grade referee and 30 or so teenagers can grasp the suggested Law changes in a 30 minute classroom session and a 60 minute trial match, why would professional rugby players and referees given weeks of training and several preseason games not be able to do so?

Plus, there is no real additional complexity to the Laws. The ruck/maul 5m just moves the offside line back - retiring players have to go 5m further back, joining players have to approach directly behind the ruck/maul and rejoining player just do what they have always done.

The scrum penalties are even easier. You don't have to remember which is a free kick and which is a penalty kick; if its a scrum they are all indirect penalty kicks.

For the same reason most scrums outside the elite level dont end collapsing or in the awarding of a penalty where as the ones at elite level do.

As for the scrum penalties, well that could work. I would even go further and only award free kicks outside the defending 22 for scrum.

 

[smartcooky]

For the same reason most scrums outside the elite level dont end collapsing or in the awarding of a penalty where as the ones at elite level do.

I hear what you're saying, but in the scrum its very easy to conceal illegalities under the "fog of the dark arts" and much of the decision making is subjective; with offside lines, not so much! The referee may not be able to see what is going on in the iniquitous depths of an elite scrum, but out here in the exposed light of the back-line, offside is not so easy to hide. Policing a 5m offside line is no more difficult than policing a hind foot one, and with elite AR's its even easier.

IMO, its worth a trial.

 

[goodNumber10]

I hear what you're saying, but in the scrum its very easy to conceal illegalities under the "fog of the dark arts" and much of the decision making is subjective; with offside lines, not so much! The referee may not be able to see what is going on in the iniquitous depths of an elite scrum, but out here in the exposed light of the back-line, offside is not so easy to hide. Policing a 5m offside line is no more difficult than policing a hind foot one, and with elite AR's its even easier.

IMO, its worth a trial.

do you not think that having 13 players stood 5 metres back, with better vision and a bigger run up is going to create space at the professional level?

IMHO, It's going to bring about even larger collisions, and more of a rugby league style attack, just with a ruck instead of a play the ball. Defences will have even more room to drift and adjust in and it will be even harder to break down a well drilled defensive system.

Maybe people just need to get better at executing under pressure/on the tackle line?

having said that, i can see the attraction in attacking a defence that is still retreating it's 5 metres, so the benefits of quick ruck ball would possibly be increased.

 

[TRF_heineken]

Because the king of the Kiwi's says it, it's automatically a real issue that needs solving. Grow up pls

This!!

It's not the lack of tries that is turning people away from rugby, it's the standard of refereeing, the calls that are made the one week, and the other week they take a total different route. The citing commisioners who give harsh sanctions to certain players, and small to zero sanctions to others.

People are turning away from rugby because the game is getting way too technical. I look at my father, who was a Craven Week and Blue Bulls youth player long time ago. More than half of the laws/rules doesn't make sense to him. He's a practising attorney who specializes in drafting of contracts and he says the laws of rugby are way too technical and half of them doesn't make any sense.

Also, there are experimentations currently being done to look at ways to make the game better and more exciting. This year's South African Varsity Cup, has implemented the 2-referees per game experiment, as well as a new experiment, where the defending scrumhalf is not allowed to move past his no. 8 at scrum time, allowing the attacking team to have more space around the scrums to attack from.

 

[smartcooky]

This!!

It's not the lack of tries that is turning people away from rugby, it's the standard of refereeing

With respect mate that is utter rubbish.

What is boring is watching 16st midfielders masquarading as human battering rams. Its tiresome and repetitive and a complete turn off. I would love to see the game return to the time when centres had BALL SKILLS rather than the one-dimension bish bosh bash of players like Bastaraud whose ball skills are comparable to that of a rhinocerous. I want to see midfielders like Mauger and Guscott and ODriscoll who could spot a gap and glide through it with guile and footwork rather than try to create a gap with brute force. Unfortunately we are never going to see this as long as the game continues to give defences the big advantage it has in the modern game. Well organsed defenses are stifling the game and turning it into a borefest.

 

[TRF_heineken]

With respect mate that is utter rubbish.

What is boring is watching 16st midfielders masquarading as human battering rams. Its tiresome and repetitive and a complete turn off. I would love to see the game return to the time when centres had BALL SKILLS rather than the one-dimension bish bosh bash of players like Bastaraud whose ball skills are comparable to that of a rhinocerous. I want to see midfielders like Mauger and Guscott and ODriscoll who could spot a gap and glide through it with guile and footwork rather than try to create a gap with brute force. Unfortunately we are never going to see this as long as the game continues to give defences the big advantage it has in the modern game. Well organsed defenses are stifling the game and turning it into a borefest.

There aren't many players like Basteraud in midfield though.

Players like SBW, Juan De Jongh, Frans Steyn, Adam Ashley-Cooper and Jared Payne all have a veriety of skills, whether it is step-offs, offloads, running lines, passing etc. The Bish bash doesn't work that well nowadays, because of the defensive patterns being used.

The thing is though, those skills aren't being used by just centres anymore, it is expected from each and every player in the team, from prop to fullback. If we look at the players who have been talked up the most last year, it was Willie Le Roux, Ben Smith, Leigh Halfpenny, Handre Pollard, and Rob Kearney, to name a few. These are all guys with a wide variety of skills, not a behemoth that runs over every one. The only guy I can think of that might fit into that category would be Duane Vermeulen. But that would also be a bit of a false statement, as he too has a wide variety of skills.

These guys with skills are putting fans in the stadiums. But what is stopping the fans from continually coming to the stands are the shoddy refereeing decisions being made. Just look at the Bulls vs. Sharks game last week. The 3 bad calls made between the ref and the TMO is the only talking point coming out of that game, nobody is talking about how exciting the game was, or how Pollard and Lambie were performing against one another. Instead you get millions of posts and articles about the ref calls, and you get about 5 or six posts about the game itself and the performances of the players.

Come on Cooky, even you would have to agree with me that this trend for the last 5 years or more, is the big negativity-marker that is World Rugby.

 

[smartcooky]

Come on Cooky, even you would have to agree with me that this trend for the last 5 years or more, is the big negativity-marker that is World Rugby.

No, I don't agree actually. I think fans hold referees to a much higher standard that they do players. Referees don't knock the ball on, throw forward passes or miss tackles. They don't make poor tactical decisions either. Referees also do not spend their spare time look for ways to subvert the Laws to their advantage the way that coaches do.

If you really want to repair the game, then one way would be to suspend and heavily fine coaches whose teams play the game outside the spirit of the Laws Dock those teams competition points too.

Rugby was a really exciting sport to watch in the early years of Professionalism (1996 to 2000). Wind back some time and watch some of the exhilarating matches in the Super 12 from those years, and compare them with the stagnant borefest that passes as rugby union these days,,, endless bash and crash, endless scrum resetsssssszzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

 

[William18]

Because the king of the Kiwi's says it, it's automatically a real issue that needs solving. Grow up pls

This is one of the worst ways to engage an argument I have seen. Apparently you need to "grow up" if you suggest law changes to rugby?

Having the offside line 5 metres back is a horrible idea. In league it is okay that the defence in 10 metres back. Why? Because they only have a limited number of possessions of the football. Having an offside line further back and unlimited possessions won't work because it is too easy to make ground.

"1. As I suggested in another thread, make all scrum sanctions a penalty that can be kicked to touch for a gain in ground and retention of the throw in but cannot be kicked at goal. This keeps the scrum as a contest, the reward for a dominant scrum being possession and field position, but preventing it from being a points generator."

This is a terrible idea. It just encourages every time there is an attacking scrum for the defending team to deliberately infringe. I don't see why a scrum penalty is any less valid than any other penalty.

I also don't like reducing penalty kicks to two points as that almost eliminated penalty goals in the Australian competition (which I happen to enjoy).

- - - Updated - - -

This!!

It's not the lack of tries that is turning people away from rugby, it's the standard of refereeing, the calls that are made the one week, and the other week they take a total different route. The citing commisioners who give harsh sanctions to certain players, and small to zero sanctions to others.

People are turning away from rugby because the game is getting way too technical. I look at my father, who was a Craven Week and Blue Bulls youth player long time ago. More than half of the laws/rules doesn't make sense to him. He's a practising attorney who specializes in drafting of contracts and he says the laws of rugby are way too technical and half of them doesn't make any sense.

Also, there are experimentations currently being done to look at ways to make the game better and more exciting. This year's South African Varsity Cup, has implemented the 2-referees per game experiment, as well as a new experiment, where the defending scrumhalf is not allowed to move past his no. 8 at scrum time, allowing the attacking team to have more space around the scrums to attack from.

What laws don't make sense? People say that there are too many laws but laws are constantly reviewed and many were put in place for a good reason. I also don't think it is possible to improve refereeing standards. Rugby is by nature a subjective sport and everyone will have their own interpretation.

 

[TRF_heineken]

No, I don't agree actually. I think fans hold referees to a much higher standard that they do players. Referees don't knock the ball on, throw forward passes or miss tackles. They don't make poor tactical decisions either. Referees also do not spend their spare time look for ways to subvert the Laws to their advantage the way that coaches do.

If you really want to repair the game, then one way would be to suspend and heavily fine coaches whose teams play the game outside the spirit of the Laws Dock those teams competition points too.

Rugby was a really exciting sport to watch in the early years of Professionalism (1996 to 2000). Wind back some time and watch some of the exhilarating matches in the Super 12 from those years, and compare them with the stagnant borefest that passes as rugby union these days,,, endless bash and crash, endless scrum resetsssssszzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

I agree with you here. But look at it from a spectator's perspective, and not from a referee's perspective.

Most fans, don't know each and every law in the book. They watch the game, and talk about that what they see in front of them. With technology and replays, the fans see more things which they didn't in the past.

While I do agree with you that most of the Ref-bashing is unwarranted, there are way too many instances nowadays where bad calls goes unpunished. Scrum resets is an area that frustrates me the most. And I wonder how many there will be if we implement a "stop the clock" approach regarding scrums. If the ref stops time during the binding setup of the scrum, up to the point where the scrumhalf puts in the ball, there will be a lot less resets, because no team will benefit from wasting any time. The ref can still blow for a penalty if the scrum is collapsed, or early engagement, but there will be no time lost.

But scrum resets is something that the players, coaches and the referees should focus on, and get a more simplified approach to ruling on the scrums. I'm sure no coach will agree with the ref if their prop gets penalised, when he's not the one collapsing the scrum. Jonathan Kaplan has been very verbal about this matter. And he says it's an area that needs a lot more focus from the Referees panel.

Bad calls is what makes fans extremely angry. They feel their team are being mistreated, and that "why should I bother going if the game is spoilt by bad calls" -approach is warranted. Without bad calls, the ref doesn't paint a target on his back, and fans, coaches and writers will have no choice but to revert to the team and the players to take the blame. We humans love it to point the finger at someone else. If referees ensure that they make the correct calls according to the laws, then no matter what anybody says, their decision is warranted. I'm sure each and every person in this world wants that comfort that "I know I was right" feeling. There is no judgement, and there is no self-doubt, which results in confidence.

 

[goodNumber10]

With respect mate that is utter rubbish.

What is boring is watching 16st midfielders masquarading as human battering rams. Its tiresome and repetitive and a complete turn off. I would love to see the game return to the time when centres had BALL SKILLS rather than the one-dimension bish bosh bash of players like Bastaraud whose ball skills are comparable to that of a rhinocerous. I want to see midfielders like Mauger and Guscott and ODriscoll who could spot a gap and glide through it with guile and footwork rather than try to create a gap with brute force. Unfortunately we are never going to see this as long as the game continues to give defences the big advantage it has in the modern game. Well organsed defenses are stifling the game and turning it into a borefest.

I think we all want to see that, but i don't think moving a defensive line back 5m is going to encourage that, the 5m scrum law hasn't really changed that much other than we see more pick and goes from 8.

You'd essentially be creating a 10m standoff like league and with that run up you're going to get even bigger guys heading at the tackle line looking for extra yards, and more defenders committing to leaving the ruck area to combat this.

Personally it has to be a mental thing, the AB's play open attractive rugby as do many other teams, if you don't coach your players to be battering rams then you don't' produce battering rams.

Offside Lines need to be policed.

I like your idea off penalising teams that break the laws.

How about if a team concedes over XXX amount of penalties in a quarter of their fixtures they are docked XX league points?

 

[Rugga-lad]

The attractiveness of rugby has certainly decreased over a vast number of years.

Teams are concentrating too much on defense, and less on attacking skills. I also think the scrum as a weapon has decreased significantly. I wish they would eliminate lifting in the line-out and bring back where locks actually have to jump again. That would make it fun.

Rugby is not all about tries in my view, it's about competing in all facets of the game.

 

[William18]

I agree with you here. But look at it from a spectator's perspective, and not from a referee's perspective.

Most fans, don't know each and every law in the book. They watch the game, and talk about that what they see in front of them. With technology and replays, the fans see more things which they didn't in the past.

While I do agree with you that most of the Ref-bashing is unwarranted, there are way too many instances nowadays where bad calls goes unpunished. Scrum resets is an area that frustrates me the most. And I wonder how many there will be if we implement a "stop the clock" approach regarding scrums. If the ref stops time during the binding setup of the scrum, up to the point where the scrumhalf puts in the ball, there will be a lot less resets, because no team will benefit from wasting any time. The ref can still blow for a penalty if the scrum is collapsed, or early engagement, but there will be no time lost.

But scrum resets is something that the players, coaches and the referees should focus on, and get a more simplified approach to ruling on the scrums. I'm sure no coach will agree with the ref if their prop gets penalised, when he's not the one collapsing the scrum. Jonathan Kaplan has been very verbal about this matter. And he says it's an area that needs a lot more focus from the Referees panel.

Bad calls is what makes fans extremely angry. They feel their team are being mistreated, and that "why should I bother going if the game is spoilt by bad calls" -approach is warranted. Without bad calls, the ref doesn't paint a target on his back, and fans, coaches and writers will have no choice but to revert to the team and the players to take the blame. We humans love it to point the finger at someone else. If referees ensure that they make the correct calls according to the laws, then no matter what anybody says, their decision is warranted. I'm sure each and every person in this world wants that comfort that "I know I was right" feeling. There is no judgement, and there is no self-doubt, which results in confidence.

Heineken I think you are correct in that bad refereeing is a problem. What we need though is to find solutions and not problems. I'm not seeing in your post any way to actually improve refereeing. You are saying it needs to be improved but not how you do that.

 

[TRF_heineken]

Heineken I think you are correct in that bad refereeing is a problem. What we need though is to find solutions and not problems. I'm not seeing in your post any way to actually improve refereeing. You are saying it needs to be improved but not how you do that.

Well, Like I've said in other posts they should get coaches and players to participate in the law making procedure.

For instance, the scrummaging area: It makes absolutely no sense to ask someone like Percy Montgomery or Leigh Halfpenny to make a contribution at the scrums. Rather get a coach like Os Du Randt, who was also a 2-time World Cup winner, to assist in making the scrums and the laws surrounding it easier and better. I also made the suggestion to stop the time during the binding procedure up to when the scrumhalf puts in the ball, to prevent the scrum resets.

I also think that there should be some kind of Refereeing Summit. Get all the nations' referees, representatives, coaches and players together and put forward a plan to better the game and the refereeing standards as well as the laws.

This would also assist in the SH vs NH referees and their interpretations.

The Varsity Cup used the White Card where captains can invoke the White Card if they feel the ref made the wrong call, or missed something which should have been reviewed.

 

[Rugga-lad]

Well, Like I've said in other posts they should get coaches and players to participate in the law making procedure.

I like this idea.