Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Why don't they admit defeat and play soccer??

Discussion in 'The Pub' started by hornet, Oct 21, 2007.

  1. Once again the boring Rugby World Cup is decided, not by anyone getting the ball across the line, (and in most cases not even trying to), but by every single point being from goal kicking. Honestly, if they want to play a kicking game, why don't they buzz off all the lardy forwards and play a REAL kicking game, soccer?

    Despite a try being worth 5 points, "This will encourage running, attacking Rugby", yeah, right :roll:, a penalty or drop goal being worth 3 points and a conversion from a try being worth 2 points, teams are more than content to farnackle around, waiting for an infringement of microscopic proportions from the opposition, and reap the resulting points, while not bothering to attack themselves, and stifling any attack from the opposition (admitedly, the role of defence).

    What to do?? Obviously there needs to be a mental change at administrative level, and a change to the points-scoring system as well to force these lummoxes to try and get the ball over the line (otherwise, as I said, forget the whole deal and just play soccer).

    So, a penalty kick can only be taken inside the opposition's 25 line, and only yields 1 point.

    Likewise a drop goal can only be taken inside the opposition's 25 line, and only yields 1 point.

    A conversion of a try (which stays at 5 points), yields 3 points. So a converted try yields 8 points, which would require 8 penalties, or 8 drop goals to accumulate.


    And don't give me this 'game they play in heaven' malarky; everything's perfect in heaven, and Rugby in its present state is anything but!
  2. While I was waiting for the GP to come on tv (Phillip Island one), I think I saw France VS England in Rugby. I totally thought game was soccer due to the playing that was happening as described by you Hornet. It definitely seems to be the norm for the lads to want to kick the ball (almost non stop) and it took the fun out of it for me watching the game. I agree with your point structure, it would allow for more 'proper' attacking/running as opposed to *kick* *kick*.
  3. It's all cross country bum sniffing to me.
  4. your area of expertise? :p
  5. So who won?
  6. Who cares! As long as the Poms get thumped, all is well in the world! :LOL:
  7. The problem is the teams not the game. If penalties only yielded 1 point it would be the scrappiest piece of shit game known to man once play got inside the 22.

    Bring the running rugby back, but not like that please.
  8. How do you come to that conclusion when it is obvious that teams don't care about scoring tries because they can rely on the high point value of penalties and drop goals to score all their points?? What you say just doesn't make sense :?. Rugby today is like cricket used to be, when a three and half hour innings that yielded two runs used to be applauded, but the crowds died of boredom.
  9. If you reduce the value of a penalty you reduce the cost of slowing the ball down in the ruck which leads to scrappy, slow rugby. It is an unfortunate cycle that nobody has a good solution to.

    the game could be made more expansive by penalising the two man bind that SA introduced (I'm sure there is a technical term for it but I don't know what it is) but that is hard to referee and would probably case more stoppages than not. .
  10. Much as it irks me to do so, Russ, I agree with you here :LOL:

    Oh, well, back to the drawing board. I'm SURE people who pay good money to go and watch want to see the ball being RUN and tries being scored, not goal-kicking competitions, so there needs to be an sawer found!
  11. The problem is that the Poms are relying on kicking to win, and therefore anyone who plays them has to as well. If you've been watching there's been some absolutely awesome games, with plenty of tries being scored.
  12. one way to fix the shamozzle of the world cup is to change the format. They spend 3 billion weeks playing crappy teams, then a sudden death knockout in the finals. Teams can't take risks in that format, you can't be too aggressive...
    NZ thumped SA many times in recent history and yet SA are world champions and all 'chokers' jokes aside, there is definitely a problem if the tournament to decide who is the best consistently throws up unworthy teams. You can't trust the outcome.

    A great example of a result that inspired confidence in its veracity is the Argentina v France. The first time, Argentina won, but it was dismissed as chance and poor play from France, the second time the Agries thumped France, you could be confident who the better team was.

    They need to find a format that lets you trust the results.
  13. I think you'll find that there was a try scored last night. But thats neither here nor there.

    Although it does seem to slow the game down the high points value of penalties was introduced and kept because of certain teams tendencies of giving away penalties to stop tries being scored. If you reduce the value there's a distinct possibility that there will just be more of them.

    This always comes up when Australia get beat, boo hoo we got beat someone has to change the rules.

    Rugby in the northern hemisphere is played the the WINTER in the rain snow and mud where a running passing game with a slippery ball doesn't work, so that is the way we tend to play. If the running game was better the Wallabies would have been in Paris last night not England.

    If you want to make wholesale changes to the rules why not play league. I for one always enjoy the brutality of English rugby.

    And to 2ndclasscitizen and triway I think you'll find we are English, and I'd like you to keep you're insults to yourselves.
  14. 1) Where in that post did I insult you?
    2) Stop being a whinging Pommy biatch.
  15. See you cannot help yourself can you.
  16. You set yourself up for that. If you have a problem with me saying that the Poms rely on kicking goals to win, prove me wrong. Going for field goals with more than 25min to go is pretty convincing proof of it.
  17. I think you'll find that England was the only side to score a try in that game, but strangely enough a certain video ref decided otherwise, probably felt the same way about the poms that you do.
  18. Nah, mate, that wasn't a try. His foot hit the line before the ball hit the ground. The replay from the back showed it conclusively enough for the three of us who were watching it this morning. He may have only JUST brushed it, but that's all it takes. You've either touched the line, or haven't.

    Being that I wasn't barracking for either team, I've no reason to be biased towards either of 'em. I'm just calling it like I saw it.

    Hornet - I was a bit dissapointed that all the points came from the boot myself. I think they should push the defensive line back 10m, like in league. Open things up and encourage more running.
  19. Sorry it was a try as far as I'm concerned, the video is nowhere near conclusive there is no way to tell where the foot ends and the shadow starts. The fact that you agree with your compatriot in the video box doesn't surprise me at all.
  20. Okay, so we agree to disagree and just play the whistle.

    FWEEEEET! No try! :LOL: :wink: