• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

New changes to Super Rugby - Bonus Points, TMO & Referee

TRF_heineken

RIP #J9
Staff member
TRF Legend
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
11,758
Country Flag
South Africa
Club or Nation
South Africa
SANZAR is about to introduce a radical new bonus point system to this year’s Super Rugby competition, with teams no longer getting the bonus point for scoring four tries, SuperSport.com reports.

The radical proposal, which mirrors a system being used in the French top 14, will now see teams needing to score at least three more tries than the opposition to score a bonus point.

The change, which is set to be announced on Thursday in Australia, is a tweak to still encourage teams to play attractive rugby in lopsided contests, and give both sides something to play for, while not taking their foot off the pedal if they have established a good lead in their respective games.

Another interesting addition that SANZAT will implement this season, is a system whereby the referee’s microphone is broadcast over the stadium sound system, to help fans understand what decisions are made and why they are made.

TMO's will also not have to be called upon to check for forward passes, and will only be able to assist on calls for foul play and the process of scoring a try.

http://www.supersport.com/rugby/super-rugby/news/160120/Radical_bonus_point_changes_for_Super_Rugby
http://www.supersport.com/rugby/super-rugby/news/160120/TMOs_go_back_in_time
 
I prefer this system quite a bit. It punishes teams for having poor defense (looking at those 50-40 games) and seems to incentivise playing to the final whistle. Alternatively it could result in the losing team having nothing to play for when they are significantly down so will be interesting to see how things pan out.

Generally I see this reducing the number of bonus points in the competition.
 
Last edited:
The proof is in the pudding but i prefer the old bonus point sytem but instead of only getting a BP for the 4th try, i would of gone for a BP every 4th try, i.e 8 tries equals 2 BP. This would genuinely keep teams hunting for tries in blow out games instead of shutting up shop when max BP are reached.
 
The proof is in the pudding but i prefer the old bonus point sytem but instead of only getting a BP for the 4th try, i would of gone for a BP every 4th try, i.e 8 tries equals 2 BP. This would genuinely keep teams hunting for tries in blow out games instead of shutting up shop when max BP are reached.

I don't like that idea. It definitely favours a running style of rugby but it cheapens an actual win. Also in South Africa we generally have some great tight battles which are interesting to watch even when the scores of both teams are less than 20. It seems unfair to have a team winning a gritty match like this getting no bonus point while a team that wins a blow out receiving two.

It also would skew views of which tables are more competitive as some groups may have a more competitive group while others may have two competitors with two or three or opponents that just don't pitch up all season.
 
To me this is a bit of a double edged sword. This idea is great IMHO, because it not only promotes teams who score a lot of tries, but also promotes teams with great defence. So in essence to score the bonus point, the teams should be good in both attack and defence.

It could however have a negative effect though, in that teams with very good defensive structures could just keep on defending and go for penalties on mistakes from the other team, which could result in low scoring games.

To me, this move will help the South African sides a lot more than the Aussie and NZ sides...
 
My understanding was that it was literally done on the number of tries, not the points difference. Ie. you have to score 3 tries to 0, if you are 21 points ahead by penalties alone, no bonus point.
 
My understanding was that it was literally done on the number of tries, not the points difference. Ie. you have to score 3 tries to 0, if you are 21 points ahead by penalties alone, no bonus point.

Yes you are right. This plan is with regard to the process of scoring a try, not points.

So for example if the Chiefs play against the Force and the final score is 35 - 30 but the Chiefs scored 5 tries with no conversions or penalties and the Force scored 2 tries only and the rest of their points was penalties and conversions, then both of them will get a bonus point. The Chiefs get 1BP for scoring 3 or more tries than the Force, and the Force gets 1BP for losing by less than 7 points.

Take this same example but this time both teams scored 4 tries. Then only the Force will get 1BP for losing by less than 7. The Chiefs won't get a bonus point. they will just get their 4 points for the win.
 
Yes you are right. This plan is with regard to the process of scoring a try, not points.

So for example if the Chiefs play against the Force and the final score is 35 - 30 but the Chiefs scored 5 tries with no conversions or penalties and the Force scored 2 tries only and the rest of their points was penalties and conversions, then both of them will get a bonus point. The Chiefs get 1BP for scoring 3 or more tries than the Force, and the Force gets 1BP for losing by less than 7 points.


Take this same example but this time both teams scored 4 tries. Then only the Force will get 1BP for losing by less than 7. The Chiefs won't get a bonus point. they will just get their 4 points for the win.

So is your concern that the losing team may just kick for points to catch up for the losing bonus point? I guess that may be the case, but what I am more concerned about is if a team has a great start and gets to 28-3 or something around there, the other team may just lose hope a bit and give up, because the losing bonus point seems to far out of reach and there is no incentive for them to try and keep in the game (which the 4 try bonus point may have done).
 
So is your concern that the losing team may just kick for points to catch up for the losing bonus point? I guess that may be the case, but what I am more concerned about is if a team has a great start and gets to 28-3 or something around there, the other team may just lose hope a bit and give up, because the losing bonus point seems to far out of reach and there is no incentive for them to try and keep in the game (which the 4 try bonus point may have done).

Well no not necessarily.

Let's take your example here, Team A scores 28 unanswered points very quickly, Lets say the score 3 tries in the process of accumulating the 28 points, within the first 30 minutes of the match. Team B can launch a fightback and even score 5 tries in the process and the trail by 3 points (28 - 25). If the team in the lead then goes for posts to try and hold on for the win and then lead 31 - 25 with 4 minutes left to play, and the losing team scores another unconverted try, the score will be 31 - 30. But the losing team will then get 2 Bonus points and the winning team won't get any bonus points. The losing team scored 3 more tries, and lost by less than 7.
 
Well no not necessarily.

Let's take your example here, Team A scores 28 unanswered points very quickly, Lets say the score 3 tries in the process of accumulating the 28 points, within the first 30 minutes of the match. Team B can launch a fightback and even score 5 tries in the process and the trail by 3 points (28 - 25). If the team in the lead then goes for posts to try and hold on for the win and then lead 31 - 25 with 4 minutes left to play, and the losing team scores another unconverted try, the score will be 31 - 30. But the losing team will then get 2 Bonus points and the winning team won't get any bonus points. The losing team scored 3 more tries, and lost by less than 7.

I get what you are saying, and I personally don't have a problem with that situation at all btw. But in the same way that team may be able to fight back other teams may just lose interest more quickly. All really speculation at this point. I guess the best way to find out about this is to either analyse the French league or to speak to someone who watches to French league who has a perspective on how it has worked over there so far.
 
Why do some Southern Hemisphere idiots feel the need to continue to **** with our game.

Surely they should just go watch Aussie rules instead.
 
I get what you are saying, and I personally don't have a problem with that situation at all btw. But in the same way that team may be able to fight back other teams may just lose interest more quickly. All really speculation at this point. I guess the best way to find out about this is to either analyse the French league or to speak to someone who watches to French league who has a perspective on how it has worked over there so far.

True, but then again, the French league shouldn't be used as a yardstick, as it's biased refereeing towards Home Ground Advantage is something that changes the margins in the end.

I like this idea, but I think in the end it's going to result a big congestion in the middle of the table, which is I guess the plan, and to ensure that the teams going to the knockouts are all ***le contenders.
 
First good news for the Stormers! How many times have we scored three tries but not gotten the 4rth! Also, we have tended to keep opposition from scoring tries (though our defence wasn't quite as tight just last year).

I can see the amendment curtailing BPs overall which is a big positive for me and its just a fairer reflection of games IMO having been following the Top14 the last few years relatively closely (just soo many teams and games a fellow with a 'normal' load can only be expected to watch so many games). The Stormers would've been much much higher in overall logs in recent years sans bonus points because we win many games but not by huge margins generally so a big whoop from me!
 
Why do some Southern Hemisphere idiots feel the need to continue to **** with our game.

Surely they should just go watch Aussie rules instead.

Well I would agree as a rule but think that the Top 14 bonus system is by far the best and, tho not mentioned here, also for a losing bonus point you have to be within 5 points not 7.......all leagues should change to that!
 
Why do some Southern Hemisphere idiots feel the need to continue to **** with our game.

Surely they should just go watch Aussie rules instead.

Why does trialing new bonus point system at Super Rugby level - one based on a NH club model - have anything to do with your game?
 
Well I would agree as a rule but think that the Top 14 bonus system is by far the best and, tho not mentioned here, also for a losing bonus point you have to be within 5 points not 7.......all leagues should change to that!
I agree. I think it also reduces the likelihood of getting two points even though you lost.
 
TMO's will also not have to be called upon to check for forward passes, and will only be able to assist on calls for foul play and the process of scoring a try.
I read this before and to be honest, i am not sure i understand it. Let me use your quote as an example H.
According to WR's laws of the game, Foul play is "anything a player does within the playing enclosure that is against the letter and spirit of the Laws of the Game."
So, if you apply that to the statement quoted , the ref is not allowed to check (example) forward passes, but he is allowed to check for foul play which includes forward passes.

We discussed this at the pub the other day and the only rational explanation we could come up with was so far fetched it would require NASA engineers and CERN equipment to recreate it. Not very practical.
 
I read this before and to be honest, i am not sure i understand it. Let me use your quote as an example H.
According to WR's laws of the game, Foul play is "anything a player does within the playing enclosure that is against the letter and spirit of the Laws of the Game."
So, if you apply that to the statement quoted , the ref is not allowed to check (example) forward passes, but he is allowed to check for foul play which includes forward passes.

We discussed this at the pub the other day and the only rational explanation we could come up with was so far fetched it would require NASA engineers and CERN equipment to recreate it. Not very practical.

No. Foul play is something that results in a penalty or quite possibly even harsher sanction such as a yellow or red card, and these acts have no place on the rugby field. Whereas a forward pass is part of the game and doesn't result in a penalty, but a scrum.
 
When you say "no", particularly after i quoted an official source, it'd be nice if you come up with something a little stronger than a self made definition, namely a source. It's very hard to take your word at face value when it contradicts what the laws of the game state.
In order to prove me wrong, which i hope you do, you have two options:

1) Either point out where my understanding of the laws i quoted falls short
2) Quote another source that overrides mine

Since point 2) doesn't seem possible, you are left with only one option, which you have not exercised. I'm afraid i have no option other than to stand correct.

I understand where you are coming from, and that is what i though at first, but i actually took the time to check.
Foul play is not just that. Foul play is, according to the laws of the game as posted by the game's governing body:

"Foul play is anything a player does within the playing enclosure that is against the letter and spirit of the Laws of the Game. It includes obstruction, unfair play, repeated infringements, dangerous play and misconduct which is prejudicial to the Game."

Source: http://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=10&language=EN

It does state on the second sentence something along the lines of what you stated, but the first sentence is crystal clear.
 
"Foul play is anything a player does within the playing enclosure that is against the letter and spirit of the Laws of the Game. It includes obstruction, unfair play, repeated infringements, dangerous play and misconduct which is prejudicial to the Game."

You have emphasised the wrong part

"Foul play is anything a player does within the playing enclosure that is against the letter and spirit of the Laws of the Game.

Its an "AND" situation, not an "OR" situation. For an infringement to be Foul play, it must meet BOTH criteria.

Throwing a forward pass maybe against the letter of the Laws, but it is an unintentional infringement and not against the spirit of the Laws

Knocking the ball forward maybe against the letter of the Laws, but it is an unintentional infringement and not against the spirit of the Laws
BUT

Knocking the ball forward INTENTIONALLY is against both the letter of the Laws, AND the spirit of the Laws, and is therefore Foul Play.

Hope this clears things up


- - - - -

The Top 14 bonus point system is too stupid for words, and we should not be following it. The system we had wasn't broken and it didn't need fixing.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Top