Does rugby need uncontested rucks?

[lturner]

Last week Graham Henry said rugby union "needs some attention" to make the games more entertaining.

His primary concern was that there was not enough ball in hand running and too much kicking and playing for field position. He suggested a possible solution - allowing players to mark the ball anywhere on the field. But wouldn't this just mean more free kicks or scrums?

What about introducing a limited number of uncontested rucks when a team is in their own half? For example, when a side has the ball in their own half, they might have 3 phases where the rucks where not contested, that is when the ball carrier releases the ball, the opposition cannot touch the ball for say 3 seconds. After the third tackle, or if the team gets into the opposition half, play reverts to full contest, GAME ON!

The idea is that fullbacks and wingers would be much more likely to counterattack after a kick as there would be less risk in running the ball out of their own half.

Any thoughts?

 

[Timbo]

No.

 

[shiznit]

f**k that.... thats no where near what Ted meant when he said that...

it would basically ruin rugby union.... turn it into 3 tackle rugby league....

it wouldn't work at all.... teams wouldn't commit players to the first 3 breakdowns as theres no chance of a turnover and you will see 2 or 3 person rucks with the rest as defenders... it would take away what little space is left.

if you want to make it more entertaining you want to do the opposite... encourage more people to the breakdown to open space outwide

 

[lturner]

f**k that.... thats no where near what Ted meant when he said that...

it would basically ruin rugby union.... turn it into 3 tackle rugby league....

it wouldn't work at all.... teams wouldn't commit players to the first 3 breakdowns as theres no chance of a turnover and you will see 2 or 3 person rucks with the rest as defenders... it would take away what little space is left.

if you want to make it more entertaining you want to do the opposite... encourage more people to the breakdown to open space outwide

Well what do you think he meant? I thought it was pretty clear he was saying there's far too much kicking back and forth. I'm not sure why there's so much more kicking now than there has been in the past, but it seems like teams aren't counter-attacking from their own territory because the risk of turning the ball over is too high.

Do you think this is a problem, and what is your solution? It's not a matter of getting more into the breakdown to free up space out wide - the breakdowns aren't happening because players are kicking the ball away before they get caught, because the risk/reward is not encouraging them to run.

 

[Parra]

Well what do you think he meant? I thought it was pretty clear he was saying there's far too much kicking back and forth. I'm not sure why there's so much more kicking now than there has been in the past, but it seems like teams aren't counter-attacking from their own territory because the risk of turning the ball over is too high.

Do you think this is a problem, and what is your solution? It's not a matter of getting more into the breakdown to free up space out wide - the breakdowns aren't happening because players are kicking the ball away before they get caught, because the risk/reward is not encouraging them to run.

Non contested rucks? Why don't you just ask them to tackle less?

Why piss away a game for the sake of people who don't like a contest? It's the same as people who demand knock-outs from every fight, or who bought us 20/20 cricket - dumbing down sport so some joker can finally 'get it'.

Rugby needs some tweaking - but weakening the game so idiots can see manufactured tries is not the way to go.

 

[lturner]

Non contested rucks? Why don't you just ask them to tackle less?

Why piss away a game for the sake of people who don't like a contest? It's the same as people who demand knock-outs from every fight, or who bought us 20/20 cricket - dumbing down sport so some joker can finally 'get it'.

Rugby needs some tweaking - but weakening the game so idiots can see manufactured tries is not the way to go.

OK what's your tweak then?

 

[Te Kaha]

Bring back rucking!!!!

 

[Parra]

Hard to go past bringing back rucking and short arm sanctions for minor ruck & scrum infringements. Keep full penalties for offside and other blatant offences.

 

[Thomas]

I've always liked this idea:

If a team decides to have a shot at goal from outside the 40m line, and they miss and the ball goes dead, then the defending team gets a scrum from where the ball is kicked. It'd make teams think twice about automatically going for the long range goal and instead kick for touch and a lineout.

Or if the ball goes dead from a missed penalty kick then the defending team gets a scrum on the 22 rather than a 22m drop kick which basically gives the ball back to the attacking team.

Uncontested scrums? No way.

 

[maccattack]

They should just pour petrol on the rule book and light it.

Radical I know, but I good place to start.

 

[shiznit]

Well what do you think he meant? I thought it was pretty clear he was saying there's far too much kicking back and forth. I'm not sure why there's so much more kicking now than there has been in the past, but it seems like teams aren't counter-attacking from their own territory because the risk of turning the ball over is too high.

Do you think this is a problem, and what is your solution? It's not a matter of getting more into the breakdown to free up space out wide - the breakdowns aren't happening because players are kicking the ball away before they get caught, because the risk/reward is not encouraging them to run.

he didnt mean get rid of kicking... he meant getting rid of aimless kicking... theres a massive difference.

i have no problems with teams basing there game on kicking for field position.

what ted is frustrated is with the tactic that south africa are using which is just bombing and waiting for the other team to make a mistake then kicking the penalties.

the way to stop it is to not make mistakes... take the highball, retain possession and dont give away penalties. sides will soon adapt to it...

 

[Thomas]

Yeah, you are dead right.

Sides WILL adapt to it. And the only reason it is successful is that South Africa have a very switched on backline (great chasers) and an awesome pack.

 

[KHunt]

Bringing back rucking will solve most of rugby's problems.

 

[aussies1st]

Get the Super 14 ELVs in that would be a good start

 

[Parra]

ELV's are gone. Club rugby has had to abandon them as well.

No more law revisions until after the world cup.

The morons of the world have won again. for the time being at least.

 

[aussies1st]

Oh wtf, so the Super 14/15 is going to be boring again? I seriously don't get how you can't like it.

 

[Te Kaha]

The ELVs have led to the abortion there is now with all the kicking.. ther was no surity of possesion so it was kicked... all they need to do is bring back rucking to clean out the rucks and the game will be right again.

 

[Parra]

Te Kaha you keep singing that song - but there is nothing to back it up.

The aimless mid field kicking, with the majority of points coming from 3 pointers, has all been the result of the reversion to the rules we currently have.

Rather than ditch the entire ELV ruleset, it would have made sense to keep the scrum feed for the team moving forward in a maul, and ban pulling them down.

But either change requires teams to commit more forwards to the ruck/maul and this is just not going to happen.

The reason we see so much mid field kicking, and more now than ever, is teams will not commit players to the breakdown. So we see impenetrable defensive lines. Kicking is seen as the way around this.

The ELV sanctions kept the game moving, led to less repacking of scrums, less minor lineout infringements (less lineouts as well) and less penalty goals for minor infringements.

Non-ELV matches are very stop/start because of all the full arm penalties, and referees stuff around with scrums a lot more, because their only sanction is a full arm penalty.

 

[Iafeta]

Yak, can you imagine an NRL team having some goof trying for field goals from beyond halfway early into the second half? Fair play, they got the trophies, but South Africa play a style of football that says to the average bloke "where's the remote?" All they do is punt the ball, and wait for a penalty within a range of 65m and then ask their ponce to come forward and have a shot. Generally, all they had to do was punt the ball out, watch the All Blacks screw up another line out (up there for vision and execution Einstein Hore), and then pop back some ponce 15 metres behind the ruck to drop a goal. Or continue the 12 man fat waddle maul until someone gave away a penalty.

The first thing rugby union needs to do is seriously diminish the value of penalty goals, and in particular drop goals. Drop goals need to revert to 1 point. Penalty goals back to 2, EXCEPT leave it at three if its in the 22. The reason for that is once you get into the 22 you see a lot of cynical offences to stop the try, so that infringement should be worth more. Rugby, due to its point scoring system has become so cynical against attack that even last night, when the All Blacks decided to go for a scrum rather than a clear penalty, the NZ commentators were giving it to McCaw as a mistake. Perhaps due to the rules being the way they are, they were right. But McCaw was trying to be what we all hope Kiwi union players would be, adventurous and tough. Accepting the challenge to find that fourth try. Its the sort of mantle that legends like Lohore and Meads are built on.

 

[KHunt]

ELVS were stupid. I'd only agree with half arm for a few ruck offenses, maybe not releasing.

Watch the 2000 bledisloe where rucking was present. Players roll away quicker and the game is a lot faster. Now players are just lieing around the breakdown because they are content with giving away a penalty, or even more content during the ELVS only giving away half arm.

The ELVS turned the game into league, we don't want that.