unionist curious about league rules

[gutterfax]

Another reason why union is called kick and clap. Look at how many tries have been scored in the last three world cup finals.

2007 = None
2003 = 2 Lote Tuqiri and Jason Robinson :lol:
1999 = 2 (13 kicks at goal FFS)
1995 = None
1991 = 1
1987 = 4 :shock:

So, in 6 games watched by Billions of people ther have been 9 tries. 480 minutes, + another 20 minutes extra time in 2003, the "Billions of fans at home have witnessed 1 try every 55 minutes.

 

[Parra]

one major difference is that Union encourages attacking kicks, as they give HUGE in goal areas, compared with league.

Leagues tighter in goals demand the attacking kick is accurate, or the defence will just get a 20m restart.
A high kick to the in goal will result in a jump off, if accurate and well pursued, but again, if caught by the defence will result in a 20m restart.

Don't forget that in union a player only has to ground the ball in goal for a 22m restart. What matters is which team took the ball across the line.

Another key rule in union is that if a kick in general play goes dead in goal, the defending team gets a scrum from where the ball was kicked. This results in some significant territorial changes when a kick is too long.

 

[docbrown]

Another key rule in union is that if a kick in general play goes dead in goal, the defending team gets a scrum from where the ball was kicked. This results in some significant territorial changes when a kick is too long.

As I've said though, it's ruined by the subsequent scrum.

In League the player usually races to get back to the 20. In Union they shuffle back.

League should have that rule but without the awful scrum. It should be for a kick dead in goal and for a clean catch in goal.

 

[Parra]

As I've said though, it's ruined by the subsequent scrum.

In League the player usually races to get back to the 20. In Union they shuffle back.

League should have that rule but without the awful scrum. It should be for a kick dead in goal and for a clean catch in goal.

Assuming that if modified, the league rule would involve a turnover then the same argument applies - just insert 'awful play-the-ball' where you have scrum.

A free kick would be too harsh a penalty.

 

[bobrock]

Right so your here to troll. f**k off then.

No I'm not. I'm here to learn. And I did, thank to many kind and generous people. But if you, or anyone else, want to know why I rate "sometimes unjustified" the trust you put in your knowledge of the game of Rugby Union, I'll be happy to explain it.

 

[Evil Homer]

No I'm not. I'm here to learn. And I did, thank to many kind and generous people. But if you, or anyone else, want to know why I rate "sometimes unjustified" the trust you put in your knowledge of the game of Rugby Union, I'll be happy to explain it.

I don't think many people are claiming to have a particularly in-depth knowledge of Union - I certainly don't know any more than average, that's because I find Union absolutely terrible both to watch and to play and so have very little interest in it. However I'm not sure which Union comments you could question on this thread? You can explain why Union players do the things that they do and the reasoning behind it, but I think most already understand this. The fact is that Union's rules make for an extremely slow, tedious game where the majority of the emphasis is on kicking compared to League, and so it seemed strange for you as a Union fan to complain about kicking. In league, you were able to pick one fault with a very small aspect of the game - it was then pointed out that you were incorrect by everyone except 'Parra', who is a worthless Union troll. I'm not sure what you could question about this?

 

[Parra]

I don't think many people are claiming to have a particularly in-depth knowledge of Union - I certainly don't know any more than average, that's because I find Union absolutely terrible both to watch and to play and so have very little interest in it. However I'm not sure which Union comments you could question on this thread? You can explain why Union players do the things that they do and the reasoning behind it, but I think most already understand this. The fact is that Union's rules make for an extremely slow, tedious game where the majority of the emphasis is on kicking compared to League, and so it seemed strange for you as a Union fan to complain about kicking. In league, you were able to pick one fault with a very small aspect of the game - it was then pointed out that you were incorrect by everyone except 'Parra', who is a worthless Union troll. I'm not sure what you could question about this?

The speculator kick in league is a necessary evil given todays rules and tactics. "too many tries from kicks" is a common complaint from long-term fans. But they do seem to stimulate people who'd rather wacth a big screen than live sport.

Homer, you either watch a lot of rugby union (with very poor game choice it seems) or you are talking through your arse with your criticism. You don't like the game, or don't understand it and none of that matters - you don't need to attempt to validate your opinion with BS descriptions.

 

[Evil Homer]

The speculator kick in league is a necessary evil given todays rules and tactics. "too many tries from kicks" is a common complaint from long-term fans. But they do seem to stimulate people who'd rather wacth a big screen than live sport.

Homer, you either watch a lot of rugby union (with very poor game choice it seems) or you are talking through your arse with your criticism. You don't like the game, or don't understand it and none of that matters - you don't need to attempt to validate your opinion with BS descriptions.

WTF is a 'speculator kick'? I already said that I neither watch nor like Union, however that does not take away from the validity of my post. If you have any arguments with any points that I made about the sport, then please state them. I doubt you do because you are a worthless Union troll.

 

[Parra]

This isn't the fight club homer. Plenty of threads there for your bile.

The speculator is the kick to the corners, usually on the fifth tackle. It is an effective way to get the ball across the try line in the face of tough defence. It is used to the point of absolute predictability and is often a messy end to a tight strategic set. The benefit is that the defender will be flat footed and the attackers will be running at almost full pace. The allows the attackers to use their momentum to overwhelm the defender. This often results in dropped ball and dodgy groundings, with the video referee called in to watch multiple replays from multiple angles to work out what ruling to make. This builds tension in morons, and frustration in everyone else. Numerous rules have been bought in dating right back to the days of 'defusing the bomb' and probably earlier. Each season new rules are suggested to provide some benefit & protection to the defenders, but the tactic is still the best option given today's circumstances.

Do you watch any footy at all? Any other basics you'd like explained?

 

[docbrown]

Assuming that if modified, the league rule would involve a turnover then the same argument applies - just insert 'awful play-the-ball' where you have scrum.

A free kick would be too harsh a penalty.

It's a tap, not a play the ball. Hence why the receivers try and race back to the 20metres. Do you even watch league?

In Union it's a "oh the ball went dead, let's slowly shuffle back for a 5 minute scrum"

 

[Evil Homer]

This isn't the fight club homer. Plenty of threads there for your bile.

The speculator is the kick to the corners, usually on the fifth tackle. It is an effective way to get the ball across the try line in the face of tough defence. It is used to the point of absolute predictability and is often a messy end to a tight strategic set. The benefit is that the defender will be flat footed and the attackers will be running at almost full pace. The allows the attackers to use their momentum to overwhelm the defender. This often results in dropped ball and dodgy groundings, with the video referee called in to watch multiple replays from multiple angles to work out what ruling to make. This builds tension in morons, and frustration in everyone else. Numerous rules have been bought in dating right back to the days of 'defusing the bomb' and probably earlier. Each season new rules are suggested to provide some benefit & protection to the defenders, but the tactic is still the best option given today's circumstances.

Do you watch any footy at all? Any other basics you'd like explained?

A 'speculator' would imply a directionless hoof of the ball. Do you realise how difficult it is to accurately place a high kick in such a way? The fact that first-grade players are talented enough to regularly execute the play should not be punished and doesn't mean the play is any less valid. Also, it's hardly as if this happens all the time, you might get a couple such kicks in a game that are properly executed, it's a high-skill play and it's never repetitive. The only way you could claim it is frustrating to watch would be if you were purposely going out and trying to find fault, and even then the frustration caused would be barely a millionth of that experienced in an average game of Union.

 

[Sam_the_man]

No I'm not. I'm here to learn. And I did, thank to many kind and generous people. But if you, or anyone else, want to know why I rate "sometimes unjustified" the trust you put in your knowledge of the game of Rugby Union, I'll be happy to explain it.

My apologies for my comments. I'm sure you'll understand that we get our fair share of union trouble makers on this part of the forum which can make one quick to fire.
Not to sure what your meaning my or our knowledge of rugby union. My experience comes from having played both forms of rugby. In my opinion there is no comparison between the two if you want to actually run tackle and pass the rugby ball. Hands down league is the superior code.
Thats not to say that union doesn't produce some good games of football because it does but i've long since stopped watching union and only watch the odd game of ITM cup here in New Zealand.

 

[Parra]

It's a tap, not a play the ball. Hence why the receivers try and race back to the 20metres. Do you even watch league?

In Union it's a "oh the ball went dead, let's slowly shuffle back for a 5 minute scrum"

So you would advocate a tap (as in a free kick) from where the ball was kicked?

 

[Parra]

A 'speculator' would imply a directionless hoof of the ball. Do you realise how difficult it is to accurately place a high kick in such a way? The fact that first-grade players are talented enough to regularly execute the play should not be punished and doesn't mean the play is any less valid. Also, it's hardly as if this happens all the time, you might get a couple such kicks in a game that are properly executed, it's a high-skill play and it's never repetitive. The only way you could claim it is frustrating to watch would be if you were purposely going out and trying to find fault, and even then the frustration caused would be barely a millionth of that experienced in an average game of Union.

I never implied any kick was skill-less. To accurately place the kick requires rare skill. I am not questioning the kicker, just pointing out why the kick is taken in the first place. This tactic has not been in vogue for that long.

The speculation is in the outcome. It is 50/50 at best and a mess and tries from kicks are a source of frustration for a lot of spectators. Point is, that with current rules and defences, a-50/50-at-best shot is still the best option.

In the same way, a penalty shot at goal is taken for the same reasons. It is not a matter of skill, entertainment or anything other than being the best option given the rules and conditions of the game.

No game should be blindly followed to the point where rules and tactics cannot be discussed. Rules change every year. The games evolve.

 

[Evil Homer]

I never implied any kick was skill-less. To accurately place the kick requires rare skill. I am not questioning the kicker, just pointing out why the kick is taken in the first place. This tactic has not been in vogue for that long.

The speculation is in the outcome. It is 50/50 at best and a mess and tries from kicks are a source of frustration for a lot of spectators. Point is, that with current rules and defences, a-50/50-at-best shot is still the best option.

In the same way, a penalty shot at goal is taken for the same reasons. It is not a matter of skill, entertainment or anything other than being the best option given the rules and conditions of the game.

No game should be blindly followed to the point where rules and tactics cannot be discussed. Rules change every year. The games evolve.

I agree, like I said nobody is trying to question the tactical reasoning behind the play, I think that's blatantly obvious to everyone. The point is, the kick in RL doesn't stifle other play, kicking on the last tackle is in integral part of the game and the game would be much worse and wouldn't really make much sense without it. Conversely, the overwhelming reliance on kicking in Union clearly does stifle play. As such, I'm not sure how you could possibly argue that the kicking in RL is 'frustrating', and it seems a little hypocritical and also quite strange to try and argue that when the problem is infinitely worse in Union. In fact it's not really a problem at all in league, because as I've said it doesn't stifle the game.

As for your proposed rule change that you asked another poster about, then no, I think that rule would make the game a lot worse. If you are talking about attacking kicks, which I had assumed you were, then in the majority of cases this would result in the defending team starting within the 20 metres that are currently gained from a tap, and thus putting them at even more of a disadvantage, which I had thought was what you were trying to avoid in the first place. If we're talking about kicks from further than 20 metres out, then that's too harsh a penalty on the attacking side. RL is a territory-based game, the rule you have proposed would just completely disbalance the game and, dare I say, make it more like Union. The rules are fine as they are.

 

[Parra]

I'm not proposing the rule change for RL.

Interesting that the Eels used the kick it dead from a long way out tactic a few weeks ago. Hayne repeatedly did this and the commentators suggested that it was a negative tactic and also raised the union rule.

It is an effective option when a team has a lead to protect and the opposition have a great kick return. A set play from 20m is a better option for the team who kicks it dead. The rule change this year to allow a quick tap goes a small way to address concerns about this type of kicking and the negative perceptions that follow.

Union , league and NFL are all territory based games. Nothing highlights this as much as the way defences have developed in all three codes to simply stop the attack before the advantage line. Hence, the increases in kicking we see in league and union, particularly when you watch games from as recent as twenty years ago.

In the 80's it was nothing to see teams run it on the last. Changes to scrum/turnover rules have seen this diminish in favour of a lot more kicking. The game is more predictable as a result.

 

[docbrown]

So you would advocate a tap (as in a free kick) from where the ball was kicked?

Quick tap from the kicker's position. It's up to the (formerly attacking side) to get back in position.

For me this:
* Encourages the kicking team to rush the defence to prevent the ball going dead. They will want to put as much pressure on the defence as possible.

* Encourage the team returning ball to immediately go on the attack and race back.

If we're talking about kicks from further than 20 metres out, then that's too harsh a penalty on the attacking side. RL is a territory-based game, the rule you have proposed would just completely disbalance the game and, dare I say, make it more like Union. The rules are fine as they are.

At the moment our 20 metre rule is much better than Union's rule because teams immediately go on the attack.

However what I'm suggesting would make teams mix up the last tackle options more. They might be inclined to throw the ball around and make a run, even just to get into a closer/better kicking position.

At most these kicks at the moment that go dead are taken from around the half way or 40 metre line - so the returning team would gain an additionL 10-25 metres metres under what I'm suggestiong. They still need to go 40-50 metres in their set to put pressure on.

From the 20 metre returns at the moment they usually only get to the 20 metres at the moment and the opposition gets it back without much pressure - to me a bad kick/thoughtless kick should be punished more than that. Either that or increase the 20 metre rule to 30 metres maybe.

I'll go one step further too - I think we should have a 40 metre gain kick (basically a 40/20 from any position on the field). This would mean the defence has to drop another man back to cover which would encourage teams to throw the ball around more.

 

[Parra]

40/20 from anywhere would be a good rule to introduce.

20m restart + more if the kick is outside the 20 would probably work as well. Would definitely see more kick returns as with narrow in goals a league side would need to remove the risk on all of the deep kicks from the 40-50m range.

 

[Evil Homer]

I'm not proposing the rule change for RL.

Interesting that the Eels used the kick it dead from a long way out tactic a few weeks ago. Hayne repeatedly did this and the commentators suggested that it was a negative tactic and also raised the union rule.

It is an effective option when a team has a lead to protect and the opposition have a great kick return. A set play from 20m is a better option for the team who kicks it dead. The rule change this year to allow a quick tap goes a small way to address concerns about this type of kicking and the negative perceptions that follow.

Union , league and NFL are all territory based games. Nothing highlights this as much as the way defences have developed in all three codes to simply stop the attack before the advantage line. Hence, the increases in kicking we see in league and union, particularly when you watch games from as recent as twenty years ago.

In the 80's it was nothing to see teams run it on the last. Changes to scrum/turnover rules have seen this diminish in favour of a lot more kicking. The game is more predictable as a result.

In any situation though, it's better to have the ball stay in play. If teams purposely kick it out of the back then that's stupid because they gain so much more from putting a good kick in with the ball staying in-goal. The fact that one team did this for a while a couple of years ago doesn't mean it's some sort of blight on the game, as you seem to be implying. Equally it's not predictable, it's just the nature of the game, every sport is predictable to an extent in that you know what teams are going to do. I don't understand why you would want to reduce kicking on the last tackle, it's just a part of the game like any other. Also, wasn't your initial point about attacking kicks, or 'speculators' as you called them? Like I said, the rule would only worsen the impact of those kicks for defending teams. You seem to have completely changed track.

 

[Parra]

No problem. Everything is spot on. Thanks for your time.