The Rugby Union Thread

fretmeister · September 2023

What a game!

I thoroughly enjoyed that.

My 2nd team is usually France as I have no desire for the closer neighbours to get on the trophy, but if England can’t win, I’d be very happy for Fiji to do it.

sev112 · September 2023

I always thought Wal/Fiji/Aus could be a “all beat each other” group - next Sunday will be a good game now

MagicPigDetective · September 2023

We can beat Australia, but bitter experience says they’ll win with a try in the last seconds…. if we lose with a bonus point, what then… get the calculators out.

VimFuego · September 2023

I think any of the top seeds for this WC will be watching this England performance and quaking in their boots. The fainter hearted of them may even be thinking of packing up and going home!!!

TJT1979 · September 2023

Aus vs Wales could be a great match.

Agreed re: Fiji. Fun to watch and I really hope they go through.

Eng are looking pretty disjointed against Japan so far…

Schnozz · September 2023

Extra player is getting in the way

scrumhalf · September 2023

I've seen/heard two reports saying that the first half was "scrappy".

One letter too many at the beginning.

Schnozz · September 2023

Try of the tournament right there

VimFuego · September 2023

Schnozz said:

Try of the tournament right there

a move right off the training park. Poise, pressure, precision.

digitalscream · September 2023

Well, that didn't feel like a bonus point win at all. It doesn't help that it took until after the 80th minute for England to remember what international rugby looks like.

Based on this weekend's matches, Fiji should get all the way to the semis.

scrumhalf · September 2023

Tournament rugby is about starting at a certain level and building up as you go on to peak in the knockout rounds.

We're doing that, but remain not entirely convincing.

And we're still kicking too much ball away.

digitalscream · September 2023

You know, I was talking this over with the wife, and...not a single team has looked particularly exciting so far, with the sole exception of Fiji. Yes, Ireland and South Africa are brilliantly effective, accurate and basically points machines, but none of the top-tier teams looked remotely as fluid or as willing to run the ball and take risks as the teams from the early 2000s.

It kinda feels like international rugby's gone backwards - yes, they've scienced the shit out of it, and they've figured out the most effective ways to win games, but it just feels so...sterile and lifeless. Obviously, England are the absolute personification of this as shown today, but all the other teams seem guilty of it too.

TJT1979 · September 2023

scrumhalf said:

Tournament rugby is about starting at a certain level and building up as you go on to peak in the knockout rounds.

We're doing that, but remain not entirely convincing.

And we're still kicking too much ball away.

My issue with the way Eng are playing is just that… pointlessly kicking away possession.

A box kick should be close enough that we can compete for the catch… if not it’s pointless.

Also there were countless times today where we seemed scared to go through phases and just keep ball in hand until an opportunity opened up. We’d do 2 or 3 passes then grubber kicks which were mostly too far away to compete for. It feels like a team scared to play positive rugby for fear of making a mistake.

Smith made a difference in the on-field attitude when he came on. He was comfortable taking a bit more risk and seemed to lift those around him.

Watching here in Argentina the commentators couldn’t believe the lack of faith that Eng seemed to have in their basic running game.

fretmeister · September 2023

Borthwick claims he has stats to prove in a RWC the team that kicks the most wins.

steer · September 2023

I watched it on mute, so did not have the commentators or pundits wisdom. I thought England did OK. They have been dreadful for ages, so my expectation levels were low, and I was expecting a tough game. I was not expecting an easy win. The doom and gloom is a bit OTT, I think. This was Japans cup final, and the scoreline points to an easy win, even if at times things were not perfect.

I hope England stick with Ford at Fly Half.

England are not going to win the world cup, but a few weeks ago if offered two wins against the two other best teams in the group I think most England fans would have been delighted.

barnstorm · September 2023

digitalscream said:

You know, I was talking this over with the wife, and...not a single team has looked particularly exciting so far, with the sole exception of Fiji. Yes, Ireland and South Africa are brilliantly effective, accurate and basically points machines, but none of the top-tier teams looked remotely as fluid or as willing to run the ball and take risks as the teams from the early 2000s.

It kinda feels like international rugby's gone backwards - yes, they've scienced the shit out of it, and they've figured out the most effective ways to win games, but it just feels so...sterile and lifeless. Obviously, England are the absolute personification of this as shown today, but all the other teams seem guilty of it too.

Bit unfair on France in particular. At full strength they’ve been brilliant to watch for ages now. No Ntamack is a real shame; they’ve got good cover for him, but he’s a class above for me.

I enjoy Fiji, too, but they’re not exactly fielding a team of Serevis - in its own way, their game is as much about power as SA’s.

Offset · September 2023

Player of the tournament for me right now is RSA's Mapimpi. Incredible pace and skill.

tbm · September 2023

barnstorm said:

I enjoy Fiji, too, but they’re not exactly fielding a team of Serevis - in its own way, their game is as much about power as SA’s.

The won yesterday because of their defense and how the managed the game. Took the points on offer and pounced on a mistake to score their only try. They're a team full of skillful, hulking units, but the pragmatism of Top 14 players like Botia is what got them over the line. Tournament rugby.

barnstorm · September 2023

@tbm so glad they turned out to have another (seemingly) reliable kicker after Muntz went down – makes a world of difference to their chances. Was cringing when Lomani came on and took over from the tee!

Rocker · September 2023

digitalscream said:

You know, I was talking this over with the wife, and...not a single team has looked particularly exciting so far, with the sole exception of Fiji. Yes, Ireland and South Africa are brilliantly effective, accurate and basically points machines, but none of the top-tier teams looked remotely as fluid or as willing to run the ball and take risks as the teams from the early 2000s.

It kinda feels like international rugby's gone backwards - yes, they've scienced the shit out of it, and they've figured out the most effective ways to win games, but it just feels so...sterile and lifeless. Obviously, England are the absolute personification of this as shown today, but all the other teams seem guilty of it too.

Good point @digitalscream, the game, every game in fact, looks the same. Bash bash and more bash. In the old days there were wingers who could cover ground quickly, Simon Geoghegan, Rory Underwood and lots of that ilk. They added excitement to the game, there was always a buzz in the stands when they received the ball. These days guys like those would not get close to squad selection let alone a place on the team. Effective Rugby might be the start of the demise of this great game. Shudder!!!! Rugby could become as boring as football, sadly it seems to be heading that way.

Jalapeno · September 2023

Thought Youngs & Smith really livened things up, was pretty stodgy before they came on.

Pjon · September 2023

Rocker said:

digitalscream said:

You know, I was talking this over with the wife, and...not a single team has looked particularly exciting so far, with the sole exception of Fiji. Yes, Ireland and South Africa are brilliantly effective, accurate and basically points machines, but none of the top-tier teams looked remotely as fluid or as willing to run the ball and take risks as the teams from the early 2000s.

It kinda feels like international rugby's gone backwards - yes, they've scienced the shit out of it, and they've figured out the most effective ways to win games, but it just feels so...sterile and lifeless. Obviously, England are the absolute personification of this as shown today, but all the other teams seem guilty of it too.

Good point @digitalscream, the game, every game in fact, looks the same. Bash bash and more bash. In the old days there were wingers who could cover ground quickly, Simon Geoghegan, Rory Underwood and lots of that ilk. They added excitement to the game, there was always a buzz in the stands when they received the ball. These days guys like those would not get close to squad selection let alone a place on the team. Effective Rugby might be the start of the demise of this great game. Shudder!!!! Rugby could become as boring as football, sadly it seems to be heading that way.

I partially agree with what you're saying but those days are 30 years ago. I'd say that the best rugby of all time was early 2000s, when professionalism was just kicking in, players could play full time and not have other jobs, and there was still room for plenty of, ahem, skullduggery. It felt more tribal, even between teams. (I have fond memories of arguing with Cardiff fans, as a Swansea fan, while the teams punched each other around the field.

)

But it's a different game these days, and will develop. Hopefully, they might extend the professionalism of the players to the officiating where an offence in one game is treated the same as the same offence in the next game*, and all the rules are used all of the time, not just when the ref wants to utilise them** . I've just picked out a couple of examples there but if the rules are too complicated to use then they need to be simplified, not ignored.

*Australia's first try came from handling on the ground which saw a Welsh player sent off the previous week.

** England shamelessly sealing off the ball at rucks from the start of the game vs Japan.

crunchman · September 2023

Rocker said:

digitalscream said:

You know, I was talking this over with the wife, and...not a single team has looked particularly exciting so far, with the sole exception of Fiji. Yes, Ireland and South Africa are brilliantly effective, accurate and basically points machines, but none of the top-tier teams looked remotely as fluid or as willing to run the ball and take risks as the teams from the early 2000s.

It kinda feels like international rugby's gone backwards - yes, they've scienced the shit out of it, and they've figured out the most effective ways to win games, but it just feels so...sterile and lifeless. Obviously, England are the absolute personification of this as shown today, but all the other teams seem guilty of it too.

Good point @digitalscream, the game, every game in fact, looks the same. Bash bash and more bash. In the old days there were wingers who could cover ground quickly, Simon Geoghegan, Rory Underwood and lots of that ilk. They added excitement to the game, there was always a buzz in the stands when they received the ball. These days guys like those would not get close to squad selection let alone a place on the team. Effective Rugby might be the start of the demise of this great game. Shudder!!!! Rugby could become as boring as football, sadly it seems to be heading that way.

It's not the whole solution, but limiting the number of subs would help with the "bash, bash, and more bash" problem. Forwards would have to last 80 minutes so would have to train with more emphasis on cardio and endurance rather than power. That would make them lighter, which would help. If the pitch isn't full of players who are 18 or 20 stones, then smaller backs wouldn't be such a liability defensively, and might get a game.

Players would also be tiring in the last 20 minutes, so there would be more space for those twinkle-toed players to play.

pigface · September 2023

crunchman said:

It's not the whole solution, but limiting the number of subs would help with the "bash, bash, and more bash" problem. Forwards would have to last 80 minutes so would have to train with more emphasis on cardio and endurance rather than power. That would make them lighter, which would help. If the pitch isn't full of players who are 18 or 20 stones, then smaller backs wouldn't be such a liability defensively, and might get a game.

Players would also be tiring in the last 20 minutes, so there would be more space for those twinkle-toed players to play.

I've thought this for a long time, but the issue is complicated by injuries. I wouldn't like to back to the farce of "doctor's notes" for subs. A difficult question, I think.

Pjon · September 2023

crunchman said:

Rocker said:

digitalscream said:

You know, I was talking this over with the wife, and...not a single team has looked particularly exciting so far, with the sole exception of Fiji. Yes, Ireland and South Africa are brilliantly effective, accurate and basically points machines, but none of the top-tier teams looked remotely as fluid or as willing to run the ball and take risks as the teams from the early 2000s.

It kinda feels like international rugby's gone backwards - yes, they've scienced the shit out of it, and they've figured out the most effective ways to win games, but it just feels so...sterile and lifeless. Obviously, England are the absolute personification of this as shown today, but all the other teams seem guilty of it too.

Good point @digitalscream, the game, every game in fact, looks the same. Bash bash and more bash. In the old days there were wingers who could cover ground quickly, Simon Geoghegan, Rory Underwood and lots of that ilk. They added excitement to the game, there was always a buzz in the stands when they received the ball. These days guys like those would not get close to squad selection let alone a place on the team. Effective Rugby might be the start of the demise of this great game. Shudder!!!! Rugby could become as boring as football, sadly it seems to be heading that way.

It's not the whole solution, but limiting the number of subs would help with the "bash, bash, and more bash" problem. Forwards would have to last 80 minutes so would have to train with more emphasis on cardio and endurance rather than power. That would make them lighter, which would help. If the pitch isn't full of players who are 18 or 20 stones, then smaller backs wouldn't be such a liability defensively, and might get a game.

Players would also be tiring in the last 20 minutes, so there would be more space for those twinkle-toed players to play.

Yeah, but player welfare.... I think that's the answer to most things.

I agree with you though. I also think the game needs to sped up, with less faffing around at scrums, quicker breakdowns, fewer players on the ground (and contacting each other while on the ground). But then I also get irritated by hookers standing in field when they throw the ball into a line-out, so may not be the most rational on this.

Rocker · September 2023

Limiting the number of subs is an idea worth looking into. Also I think all penalties should be kicked from the hand and do away with the stupid tees. Conversions can be a drop goal attempt from anywhere outside the 20 metre line, again do away with the tee. For penalties, teams could keep the options that are in place now, the kicks for goal is the part that needs speeding up.
IMHO anyway.

VimFuego · September 2023

do away with tactical substitutions. It'll be tricky to police I'm sure, but mebbe you could do something like any subbed player gets checked over by an independent medical team, if they're found to be fit to play, the player who replaced them gets yellow carded. Not ideal, but it's a starting point.

digitalscream · September 2023

Rocker said:

Limiting the number of subs is an idea worth looking into. Also I think all penalties should be kicked from the hand and do away with the stupid tees. Conversions can be a drop goal attempt from anywhere outside the 20 metre line, again do away with the tee. For penalties, teams could keep the options that are in place now, the kicks for goal is the part that needs speeding up.
IMHO anyway.

Or you could simply reduce the number of penalties - if any player gets a third penalty against them, it's an automatic yellow card.

There would be a couple of shitty seasons while everybody adjusts to the new world order, but there would be an incentive to run the ball and scrummage cleanly instead of spending five minutes slowly shuffling into a kickable position and then playing for penalties.

The idea of playing for penalties as a tactic in rugby is no different to footballers rolling around on the floor like they've been shot, IMO.

TimmyO · September 2023

Jalapeno said:

Thought Youngs & Smith really livened things up, was pretty stodgy before they came on.

I thought the same but then wondered too how much of it might have been Japan tiring, which they seemed to do

hywelg · September 2023

digitalscream said:

Rocker said:

Limiting the number of subs is an idea worth looking into. Also I think all penalties should be kicked from the hand and do away with the stupid tees. Conversions can be a drop goal attempt from anywhere outside the 20 metre line, again do away with the tee. For penalties, teams could keep the options that are in place now, the kicks for goal is the part that needs speeding up.
IMHO anyway.

Or you could simply reduce the number of penalties - if any player gets a third penalty against them, it's an automatic yellow card.

There would be a couple of shitty seasons while everybody adjusts to the new world order, but there would be an incentive to run the ball and scrummage cleanly instead of spending five minutes slowly shuffling into a kickable position and then playing for penalties.

The idea of playing for penalties as a tactic in rugby is no different to footballers rolling around on the floor like they've been shot, IMO.

How about for every 5 penalties a team concedes they send a man to the bin for 10 mins, any man , not necessarily the one conceding the last penalty.

I do think that there are too many subs. Reduce to 6 then reevaluate. Ideally get it down to 4 and then teams would have to keep these back to cover injuries.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

In this Discussion

Become a Subscriber!

The Rugby Union Thread

Comments