Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
Law Changes in the pipeline
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Peat" data-source="post: 468945" data-attributes="member: 42330"><p>Once upon a time a scrum-half might have said the same thing about his feeding.</p><p></p><p>I automatically don't like them as I think we need to let the rules settle and see how they effect things once people have thought about them rather than changing them every five seconds. I also think we have too many rules already which is leading to simply being mediocre as a ref being a considerable challenge, so more rules is stupid. So the following critique is based on that...</p><p></p><p>The scrum change - Doesn't go far enough but not bad. I'm ok with this one.</p><p></p><p>The ruck law - Stupid. The biggest change I think this could lead to is attacking teams putting more men into rucks so they've automatically got the pick and go pod available if things go wrong while the defensive team can suddenly leave them alone - this gives the attacking team a numerical disadvantage going forwards, which means its either time for a safe pick and go or a tactical kick. Might also lead to scrum-halves doing less sniping. Other possible knock-on I can see is if the ref's watching the ruck, the offside line becomes more malleable - again, not good for running rugby. I understand the frustration with 'cappucino time' service and very slow ball movement at the end of the game, but as a rule, making the attacking team's platform less secure has not been good for running rugby. </p><p></p><p>The maul law - Someone didn't enjoy Ireland's defence. Personally, I enjoy watching it and think its clever rugby. Won't change too much, but I won't enjoy the change.</p><p></p><p>The drop goal law - ok, this one is genuinely good and sensible.</p><p></p><p>The points change - If you want to encourage running rugby, don't go and encourage opposition players to cheat unrepentently at the breakdown. That is what the change in the points does. It reduces the deterrent dramatically, particularly when you consider that not conceding a try is more important. The main deterrent becomes the yellow card, which is likely to whinging about refs ruining the game by being overly pedantic.</p><p></p><p>In short - change 1 is ok but probably should have waited until they had a more comprehensive solution, change 4 is good, change 3 is bad, and change 2 and 5 are potentially imbecilic beyond all belief. We shall see how it plays out on a field should it come to it, but it took me all of three seconds to spot how a team in a negative mindset would thrive off of them, I'm not very optimistic.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Peat, post: 468945, member: 42330"] Once upon a time a scrum-half might have said the same thing about his feeding. I automatically don't like them as I think we need to let the rules settle and see how they effect things once people have thought about them rather than changing them every five seconds. I also think we have too many rules already which is leading to simply being mediocre as a ref being a considerable challenge, so more rules is stupid. So the following critique is based on that... The scrum change - Doesn't go far enough but not bad. I'm ok with this one. The ruck law - Stupid. The biggest change I think this could lead to is attacking teams putting more men into rucks so they've automatically got the pick and go pod available if things go wrong while the defensive team can suddenly leave them alone - this gives the attacking team a numerical disadvantage going forwards, which means its either time for a safe pick and go or a tactical kick. Might also lead to scrum-halves doing less sniping. Other possible knock-on I can see is if the ref's watching the ruck, the offside line becomes more malleable - again, not good for running rugby. I understand the frustration with 'cappucino time' service and very slow ball movement at the end of the game, but as a rule, making the attacking team's platform less secure has not been good for running rugby. The maul law - Someone didn't enjoy Ireland's defence. Personally, I enjoy watching it and think its clever rugby. Won't change too much, but I won't enjoy the change. The drop goal law - ok, this one is genuinely good and sensible. The points change - If you want to encourage running rugby, don't go and encourage opposition players to cheat unrepentently at the breakdown. That is what the change in the points does. It reduces the deterrent dramatically, particularly when you consider that not conceding a try is more important. The main deterrent becomes the yellow card, which is likely to whinging about refs ruining the game by being overly pedantic. In short - change 1 is ok but probably should have waited until they had a more comprehensive solution, change 4 is good, change 3 is bad, and change 2 and 5 are potentially imbecilic beyond all belief. We shall see how it plays out on a field should it come to it, but it took me all of three seconds to spot how a team in a negative mindset would thrive off of them, I'm not very optimistic. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
Law Changes in the pipeline
Top