Ideas to improve the standard of rugby in the NH

[Peat]

Really!? That's awesome. Maybe I'll start supporting Ulster for something to do...

It's a slippery path that, take it from me.

 

[big ginger 8]

Really!? That's awesome. Maybe I'll start supporting Ulster for something to do...

Apart from H Cup they're all on BBC Northern Ireland so not sure if you guys can get it.

 

[Peat]

Apart from H Cup they're all on BBC Northern Ireland so not sure if you guys can get it.

Believe it can be done with a satellite dish/box and it can certainly be done using the Beeb site.

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

It's a slippery path that, take it from me.

for sure, wouldn't want to end up like you

I do wish bbc england had coverage rights for anything besides the six nations.

 

[Peat]

for sure, wouldn't want to end up like you

I do wish bbc england had coverage rights for anything besides the six nations.

You're not the first to say that...

It's a bloody weird thing, but I don't regret it at all. The semi-final win against Embra has to rank as one of the greatest days of my life. Plus, every Friday, I get to watch my team play on tv - and then the next day I can play myself without any scheduling clash. Not shabby at all.

 

[powerfulduck]

I really believe that it has alot to do with development at youth level, rather than any tinkering to how the game is run in the NH. 15 years ago when I was in Secondary school our sports program existed of Football some athlectics and Football, I never even held a rugby ball until i was approx 18 and even then it was in the Guinness Storehouse in Dublin. It was a pretty large school also approx 300 pupils per year with a 50/50 split in Gender. Sadly underinvestment meant that we only had a Football team nothing else and this is one of the largest secondary Schools in Birmingham. From what i gather from family not much has changed either which is uplifting

Sadly from my exp Rugby is still very much a sport for the Grammar schools, and Football will always be King, and that isn't in to rude a health domestically if the technical deficiency our players display at the Major international tournaments are anything to go by.

 

[Teh Mite]

Would love to know what laws you want us to ditch. Personally, I'm a fan of rugby the way it is. We shouldn't change our game to suit other people. These other people will either like our sport or they won't and that is up to them. We don't want to ruin what we have already got.

New to the game, are we?

 

[Shovenose]

Would love to know what laws you want us to ditch. Personally, I'm a fan of rugby the way it is. We shouldn't change our game to suit other people. These other people will either like our sport or they won't and that is up to them. We don't want to ruin what we have already got.

Your from NZ. They change it to fit in with your style of play.

 

[dasNdanger]

I really believe that it has alot to do with development at youth level, rather than any tinkering to how the game is run in the NH. 15 years ago when I was in Secondary school our sports program existed of Football some athlectics and Football, I never even held a rugby ball until i was approx 18 and even then it was in the Guinness Storehouse in Dublin. It was a pretty large school also approx 300 pupils per year with a 50/50 split in Gender. Sadly underinvestment meant that we only had a Football team nothing else and this is one of the largest secondary Schools in Birmingham. From what i gather from family not much has changed either which is uplifting

Sadly from my exp Rugby is still very much a sport for the Grammar schools, and Football will always be King, and that isn't in to rude a health domestically if the technical deficiency our players display at the Major international tournaments are anything to go by.

A few years back I had a neighbor - an older gentleman - from Scotland. I got to talking with him about sports, and asked if he liked rugby. The man about bit my head off! "Noooo! Rugby is for the elite - the snobs! I'm a football man!"

So, just wondering - is there an overall attitude that rugby is just for the more affluent, and football is for everyone else? If so, could that be affecting the game? Does there need to be a re-education (along the lines of what happened in SA) to make rugby more appealing to the common man?


das

 

[Teh Mite]

Its only considered an elitist game the same way cricket and F1 are considered elitist (in the UK at least, can't comment for other countries). Basically because grammar schools used to play rugby while state schools played sniff the glue.

There is an element of reverse snobbery from some soccer and most mungoball fans where its cool not to like union, because that makes you working class blah blah blah (all politically left wing, champaigne socialist ********). In reality, the people who attend & play all come from different walks of life.

 

[donmcdazzle]

A few years back I had a neighbor - an older gentleman - from Scotland. I got to talking with him about sports, and asked if he liked rugby. The man about bit my head off! "Noooo! Rugby is for the elite - the snobs! I'm a football man!"

So, just wondering - is there an overall attitude that rugby is just for the more affluent, and football is for everyone else? If so, could that be affecting the game? Does there need to be a re-education (along the lines of what happened in SA) to make rugby more appealing to the common man?


das

Definitely not elitist on NZ; everyone plays rugby pretty much regardless of background. I knew very rich kids and very poor kids growing up and pretty much everyone played rugby against everyone. If anything I'd say soccer is more popular with the richer schools/kids, kind of the opposite to the UK but maybe not to the same degree.

 

[dasNdanger]

Definitely not elitist on NZ; everyone plays rugby pretty much regardless of background. I knew very rich kids and very poor kids growing up and pretty much everyone played rugby against everyone. If anything I'd say soccer is more popular with the richer schools/kids, kind of the opposite to the UK but maybe not to the same degree.

Thanks! I do mention NZ below - and it's in line with what you say here. I've always been under the impression that if you cut someone from NZ, their blood runs all black.

Its only considered an elitist game the same way cricket and F1 are considered elitist (in the UK at least, can't comment for other countries). Basically because grammar schools used to play rugby while state schools played sniff the glue.

There is an element of reverse snobbery from some soccer and most mungoball fans where its cool not to like union, because that makes you working class blah blah blah (all politically left wing, champaigne socialist ********). In reality, the people who attend & play all come from different walks of life.

Thanks, much!

I now understand why my football-lovin' pals from across the pond give a sniff of displeasure when I mention rugby, and also why the few who do like rugby prefer league ('mungoball' - :lol: - I learned a new word!).

So, does this idea that rugby is an elitist sport keep young people from becoming interested in it? Even if fans and/or players are from all walks of life, is there a stigma associated with the game that keeps kids away (or keeps schools from promoting it)? If so, how does one change that? In Wales and NZ where rugby is a much beloved sport their teams have been strong over the years, with NZ coming out on top. But NZ is - from all accounts - rugby-crazed. That certainly must affect how young people feel about the sport growing up. But if there's a stigma of elitism in the NH associated with the game, then that might scare kids off, especially those who at a tender age long for acceptance. And football, it seems, is far more acceptable for the kids to play.

Does that mean that rugby in the NH needs to work on its image?


das

 

[Teh Mite]

The only stigma comes from the "its cool to be stupid" crowd - everywhere has the elements who are "top" of the food chain because they have less money/no job/ dropped out of school/been to hail.

Those sorts of people appeal to teenagers, mostly because of the media gloryfying them with shite like "shameless", but in reality they're ****wits who should be exterminated.

 

[admartian]

Good kicking is a must, but it shouldn't be the entire game. I prefer the flow of the SH game - it's faster, with more passing and running and those delicious little grubber kicks and less kicking for territory (though it's sneaking in more and more - personally, I find the latter boring as hell, esp. when it dominates play). At least that's how it seems to me. I may be totally off, and forgive me if I sound like a noob - this is the first time in all my years of watching the game that I can actually discuss and analyze it with fellow fans, so I am weak on understanding some of the more technical aspects of the game.

Sometimes kicking for territory is necessary. The best teams (or the teams with smart first 5's) know just when to do this. It has to be a balance of when to run it out; pick and drive it up the middle; or just kick it for a breather.

Think of it like some NFL teams use it to close out games or protect the ball. Not many these days with the rule changes, but the AFC North still does it.

I find Super Rugby far more exciting than H Cup, but I'm watching on tv and never have gone to any pro matches in the NH or SH, and I have no idea what fan enthusiasm is like for these respective competitions. I will say that a few games ago (not sure if it was during Super Rugby or the spring test matches), one of the commentators said something about it being better to watch the game at home in front of the fire, sipping a glass of wine. Perhaps this is a SH mentality - watching at home instead of freezing one's arse off in the stadium? Thoughts?


das

So you expect players to play their youth rugby in Winter conditions and then their careers in the Summer? Coaches will pick player suited for the conditions they're plying in and these are the ones who come through they'll also be used to a gameplan this is where they're been moulded.

That's a redundant argument. In NZ the Super 15 season starts way before any school or club rugby does, and the ITM cup is played after club and school rugby is finished. Hasn't hurt our players development.

If anything we've got a pretty good development system going on.

If we had a bigger population like South Africa or Australia, we might have to field 4 All Black teams at the world cup.

Your from NZ. They change it to fit in with your style of play.

No, it's changed to try and make it a less cynical style of rugby.

Definitely not elitist on NZ; everyone plays rugby pretty much regardless of background. I knew very rich kids and very poor kids growing up and pretty much everyone played rugby against everyone. If anything I'd say soccer is more popular with the richer schools/kids, kind of the opposite to the UK but maybe not to the same degree.

This.

Anyone can play rugby.

 

[dullonien]

I've not read through all the posts, but here's my take:

I think that having a global calendar would be a good thing. It all depends if it's viable, and would most likely involve both the NH and SH altering their seasons slightly to bring it into alignment. I don't feel that there's too much wrong with having the NH season switching to the summer, at least it would eradicate the issues we've been having of postponed games due to snow and ice in the winter. I also feel that support would be better during the summer, after all I'm sure plenty of possible supporters are out off by the winter weather.

I don't agree with any major re-structuring of the NH domestic leagues, or the 6 nations though. The Pro12 isn't the strongest at the moment, but that's due to the poor standard of some of the teams, but these teams will improve over time, and as such the standard of the league will improve over time as well. The Pro12 is a very young league, it's going to take time. This is true for the Welsh regions as well. The money and level of support present in both the Aviva Prem and the Top14 (especially the Top14) means there is no incentive for England and France to change their domestic competitions too much. The style of play in the Aviva leaves a little to be desired on occasion, and it doesn't seem to be a great building block for the HC, but that's a different matter entirely.

The 6 nations really doesn't need changing. It's a great competition full of history. It never fails to deliver, with great drama almost every year. The attendances and tv figures are excellent, and with Scotland and Italy improving it will only get better. There may be scope in the future to introduce a second division with promotion and relegation, but that's still a way off imo.

One thing I do think that needs to change in the NH, is the way the season is spit up. I really dislike the fact that the season is always chopping and changing between domestic, Europe, International, back to domestic etc. At the moment I think the season runs something like: Domestic -> Europe -> Domestic -> 6 Nations -> Domestic -> Europe -> Domestic (with domestic being Pro12, Aviva Prem and Top14 respectfully). In France and England, the domestic leagues continue during the 6 nations as well, making it even worse! This is way to disjointed, and I feel it should go -> Domestic -> 6 Nations -> Europe, or something similar. There must be a way to organise it so that each competition runs its entirety before the next one begins, although this might involve England and France reducing the number of games played in their leagues (especially France). If all three leagues had equal numbers (12 seems logical, especially because there is no other teams to bring into the Pro12), then the leagues could all follow the same schedule.

 

[TRF_heineken]

A few years back I had a neighbor - an older gentleman - from Scotland. I got to talking with him about sports, and asked if he liked rugby. The man about bit my head off! "Noooo! Rugby is for the elite - the snobs! I'm a football man!"

So, just wondering - is there an overall attitude that rugby is just for the more affluent, and football is for everyone else? If so, could that be affecting the game? Does there need to be a re-education (along the lines of what happened in SA) to make rugby more appealing to the common man?


das

That's a bit false also... Rugby wasn't an elitist sport in SA to begin with. When then British and Dutch settled on our lands, they brought their culture and their sports with them. Soccer, Rugby, Cricket etc. and through the years, some areas chose to play certain sports more than others.

In some aspects, it's a race-thing, as when I was in school, the black kids didn't want to play rugby because they didn't want to get hurt, or go home with bloodied shirts or missing teeth or whatever, so they played soccer. My primary and secondary school had a cricket, rugby and soccer pitch. And the kids had the choice to play what they wanted. it just happened to be that way that the black kids played soccer and the white kids rugby or cricket.

I think where the elitist part comes in is from the stores where you had to buy equipment... for soccer they just need a ball. for rugby, it's balls, mouthguards, shoulder pads, headgear, and even training jerseys so that the kids don't rip their quality shirts to shreds.

This whole thread is a bit funny to me, because if it weren't for nations like England, Netherlands, Spain and France, us SH nations would have been severely underfunded, under developed and wouldn't have matured in the Sports-mad nations we are today...

the NH nations should only blame themselves...

 

[big ginger 8]

In Dublin it's very much a middle class sport. Limerick I believe everyone plays and Cork is somewhere between. I think it's actually more elitist in Belfast than Dublin though. In the countryside most play G.A.A. so the rugby players are generally anyone who's willing to play. It's like that in Dublin because in Ireland it's very much a private school sport and they're the best at it loads of schools now have a team but a lot of the public schools are pretty poor and it's not very fun for them getting thrashed.

The only surefire way for a sport to grow IMO is success after the Grand Slam rugbys popularity increased incredibly and the Heineken Cups have brought a certain amount of followers as well. Unfortunately it's hard to be successful with a small player base.

 

[Shovenose]

Sometimes kicking for territory is necessary. The best teams (or the teams with smart first 5's) know just when to do this. It has to be a balance of when to run it out; pick and drive it up the middle; or just kick it for a breather.

Think of it like some NFL teams use it to close out games or protect the ball. Not many these days with the rule changes, but the AFC North still does it.

So you expect players to play their youth rugby in Winter conditions and then their careers in the Summer? Coaches will pick player suited for the conditions they're plying in and these are the ones who come through they'll also be used to a gameplan this is where they're been moulded.

If anything we've got a pretty good development system going on.

If we had a bigger population like South Africa or Australia, we might have to field 4 All Black teams at the world cup.

No, it's changed to try and make it a less cynical style of rugby.


This.

Anyone can play rugby.

Define cynical. Because at the moment the AB can score tries and prevent others from doing so without fear of being carded. 46 penalties per yc says it all.

 

[big ginger 8]

Why did you quote me on something I didn't say?

 

[Zed]

This.

The passing skills of northern hemisphere clubs are generally terrible. As a Leinster fan, I pay particular attention to their style of play. They defend really narrowly offering buckets of space to outside wingers in the full knowledge that teams probably aren't skillful enough to exploit the space - only the Ospreys seem good enough to take advantage of it.

For standards to improve at senior level, the ground work must be laid at age grade rugby. In Ireland, I'd scrap the JCT and Medallion Cup competitions (under 16) and only keep the SCT competitions (under 19). At lower ages, introduce more tip/tag rugby and sevens tournaments. Concentrate on improving players skills (passing off both hands, offloading etc) at underage level and you won't have a bunch of gym monkeys who are big and have no other talent when it comes to adult rugby.

At pro level, I'd like to see more cooperation between the provinces at the start of each season. If, for example, Munster have a great maul, why can't the IRFU (as paymasters) gleam information off them as to how it's achieved.? Likewise if Ulster have a powerful rucking game, Connacht a top defence or Leinster a quality passing game, how they do it should be shared for the overall benefit of Irish rugby.Laa

Lastly, I agree with the original poster that a European league is the way forward in the long term. My proposal would be a bigger league however. As is there are too many low quality games. A more streamlined European league would address the quality problem, be better for TV (in my opinion) and reduce player fatigue.

I noticed this when I played in the UK, there was quite a difference in skill level between the Uk & Australia/NZ. Part of the reason is we play touch rugby as soon as we can walk and during summer most rugby guys play in competitive touch rugby comps. I play 3 times a week in summer. And touch is fantastic for ball skills, passing, learning to run certain lines, learning structured moves etc So you end up with 12, 13 year olds that have been playing touch for 5 years and can throw 20m bullet passes off both sides. I remember watching Tindall play a few times and he can't spin pass of his left! That's pretty poor for an international centre. I think NH teams also have a tendency to go for size (in the backs) rather than speed/skill. I think ever since Lomu burst onto the scene, teams have been trying to find their own Lomus. The big wing for England (Banahan?) - I have to admit I haven't watched him at club level, but when he has played for England he has been shithouse. Picked for his size and that's it. He's not quick or blessed with great skill and he's the kind of player England need to avoid. I think the NH teams are closer to the SH teams and that is because they have got better, but also (at the moment) both SA & Australia aren't at their best.