Rugby - We need a proper Title! (temp)

[Buck Birdseed]

You're missing "Homoeroticism".

[ravagon]

I'm inclined to agree that the current value of field goals/penalties are overrated - pop a couple and you'll beat out a try, three and you'll beat a converted try - given that its generally much easier to pick up a penalty in a good field position than it is to push across the line its really a no-brainer at the moment.
With a try worth 6 points though - needing 3 penalty equivalents just to match it, four to match a converted try and five to beat the same it alters the equation enough to, IMO anyway, give a team serious second thoughts about taking the easy points.
I think its a fair possibility within the next few years.

Originally posted by Havak

Martins autobiography is cracking. He talks of the return from injury of Tigers (and England) tight head Darren Garforth for our home game with Bath at the end of the 1999/2000 season.

I might just have a use for this. If its about 26mm thick it might just be able to prop up the left leg of my wobbly kitchen table...


Well, it will be able to prop it up once I've sawed off 26mm worth anyway.

[finbar]

Originally posted by ravagon
I might just have a use for this. If its about 26mm thick it might just be able to prop up the left leg of my wobbly kitchen table...

Watch out for the Creeping Wood Rot. It has been known to transfer from jaws in photographs on covers of biographies to table legs.

[finbar]

Originally posted by Caligastia
I don't think your avatar realizes it's being teased by my avatar, finbar.

Well, Dermott does sit and growl mightily at the computer screen every time I access one of our threads. I assumed he was just expressing an opinion on yet another Tamerlin post. Maybe it's been your, um, puss, after all. Certainly, the cat next door drives Dermott loopy. Well, loopier. The cat has no fear of anything that walks the earth. He sits on the other side of the see-through fence and taunts Dermott to the point of apoplexy. Forty two kilograms of enraged grey and white hair bouncing up and down on the one spot is a sight to see, I can assure you.

[flipside]

Originally posted by ravagon
I'm inclined to agree that the current value of field goals/penalties are overrated - pop a couple and you'll beat out a try, three and you'll beat a converted try - given that its generally much easier to pick up a penalty in a good field position than it is to push across the line its really a no-brainer at the moment.
With a try worth 6 points though - needing 3 penalty equivalents just to match it, four to match a converted try and five to beat the same it alters the equation enough to, IMO anyway, give a team serious second thoughts about taking the easy points.
I think its a fair possibility within the next few years.

Hi . Hope everyone is okay.

This is just a thought, and, in way it is playing devil's advocate.
While at heart I agree that the try should be worth more than it currently is, I personally think reducing the score for a penalty may well have a negative effect.
If you reduce the penalty score teams are more likely to infringe at the ruck and maul, leading to a slowing down of play. The assumption I am making here is that any professional team will think "Disrupt and risk losing two points or allow the play to go and risk losing, well six, possibly?"

Everyone likes to see fast, flowing rugby with teams opening out and trying to score tries but to me the penalty does, to some extent at least, provide a reasonable deterrent to the slowing of play and a lack of discipline in its current form.

[Tamerlin]

Originally posted by finbar


Yes!

*assumes hell has frozen over on the basis that Tamerlin has finally made a sensible suggestion*

I am hammering this one till the very moment I have stepped into these wackos laden Rugby threads.

If you reduce the penalty score teams are more likely to infringe at the ruck and maul, leading to a slowing down of play. The assumption I am making here is that any professional team will think "Disrupt and risk losing two points or allow the play to go and risk losing, well six, possibly?"
Everyone likes to see fast, flowing rugby with teams opening out and trying to score tries but to me the penalty does, to some extent at least, provide a reasonable deterrent to the slowing of play and a lack of discipline in its current form.

This is also what I have said in the previous page... don't touch our laws.

By the way I have seen too great movies tonight, the first is a hilarious gangster story named "Snatch" and the second is a great story named "Lost in Translation" directed by Sofia Coppola.

[flipside]

Originally posted by Tamerlin

By the way I have seen too great movies tonight, the first is a hilarious gangster story named "Snatch" and the second is a great story named "Lost in Translation" directed by Sofia Coppola.

If you enjoyed "Snatch," you should also watch "Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels." It is also by Guy Ritchie, and while it is not as funny, it is probably a stronger story.
They ran a telly series of " Lock, Stock's" over here a while back and while some of themes became a bit cliched after a while, the dialogue was extremely sharp and funny.

[flipside]

Oh, and Tamerlin why are you awake at this time?
The Apolyton boards are only filled with alcoholics and Australians at this time of night.
Excepting the obvious poster, it's only the fact that the state of drunkeness does not have it's own flag yet that I can tell the difference usually.

EDIT: Apparantly the state of drunkeness has not got a flag because it is a minor Irish colony. Yay. Go us.

[ravagon]

Originally posted by flipside

This is just a thought, and, in way it is playing devil's advocate.
While at heart I agree that the try should be worth more than it currently is, I personally think reducing the score for a penalty may well have a negative effect.
If you reduce the penalty score teams are more likely to infringe at the ruck and maul, leading to a slowing down of play. The assumption I am making here is that any professional team will think "Disrupt and risk losing two points or allow the play to go and risk losing, well six, possibly?"

Good point.
In that case perhaps another (or an additional) form of penalty should be considered. I've long thought the 10m sin bin for a professional foul was far too lenient. Instead you could apply this 10m send-off to said penalty situations and increase the other to 25m or somesuch?
This level/frequency of infraction though may well have to be administered by a video ref as it could well have too much of an impact to be treated lightly.

Very likely though none of this will happen as each change would seem to introduce a roll-on effect, such that counterbalancing every new variable involves adjusting something else to a degree - the entirety of which would go far beyond the number of changes that would ever be made in a single session...

[ravagon]

Originally posted by flipside
Oh, and Tamerlin why are you awake at this time?
The Apolyton boards are only filled with alcoholics and Australians at this time of night.

Tamerlin has a terminal case of haemoporphyr ..., erm, vampirism, although sunlight doesn't seem to affect the blighter any.

Oh, and mentioning Australians and alchoholics separately is generally a little ... redundant.

[flipside]

Originally posted by ravagon


Good point.
In that case perhaps another (or an additional) form of penalty should be considered. I've long thought the 10m sin bin for a professional foul was far too lenient. Instead you could apply this 10m send-off to said penalty situations and increase the other to 25m or somesuch?
This level/frequency of infraction though may well have to be administered by a video ref as it could well have too much of an impact to be treated lightly.

Very likely though none of this will happen as each change would seem to introduce a roll-on effect, such that counterbalancing every new variable involves adjusting something else to a degree - the entirety of which would go far beyond the number of changes that would ever be made in a single session...

I agree that any changes to the rules would change the current balance of the game.
I think, personally that 10m is generally about right myself.
My main problem with video ref's is that they create almost as much discussion as they end, especially with the current 2D foreshortening effect that the cameras have.
There was a classic example over here, when a cricket commentator placed a ball in his hand, rested his hand on the ground and then showed the resulting images.
I swear it was impossible to tell if was a "catch" or not.

[Havak]

I think its a fair possibility within the next few years.

And again I would counter there is no realistic chance of it. It smacks of a knee jerk reaction to just twenty seconds worth of what was after all a fantastic cup final. What lasting benefit would it bring? Both I and Flipside have point out the dangers. All the bgi sides would leak penalties like a sieve near their own try lines. It might suit the ABs now but that’s not a good enough reason to change any law – and the other major countries have more sense than to allow it I suspect.

No I expect any law changes we see in the next two years will not be points per score issues but rather technical aspects of play - the infamous decoy runners (Finbar’s insistence there is nothing wrong there not withstanding!). There’s also talk of offside being policed more vigourously – and I guess that is you best hope of drop goals being reduced in value. How can your fast guys pressure them if they have to come from onside – witness the headstart Gregan, Smith and Plank gave themselves to pressure THAT drop goal in November. Not sure why they were worried anyway – Andre Watson does not know what offside is.

The trouble with the proposal about penalties and drops is that yes it would suit the current ABs – but in five years time the ABs could be an awesome forward outfit with a great field kicker and no backs – and Wales might have a back line that rules the world. What I am saying is that all this short termism and pratting about with the laws is not necessarily good for the game. Personally I’d like to see the laws we have properly applied before we change any more.

Actually I’d like to see assisted line out jumping ,the limit of the length a scrum can role and the 5M line out clause (all truly awful SH proposed changes) removed from the game - but maybe that’s just me.

Well, it will be able to prop it up once I've sawed off 26mm worth anyway.

He held up the entire English team for four years so your table should present few problems.

Everyone likes to see fast, flowing rugby with teams opening out and trying to score tries but to me the penalty does, to some extent at least, provide a reasonable deterrent to the slowing of play and a lack of discipline in its current form.

Can we add a word of caution here – whilst fast flowing rugby is the ideal not everyone likes to see the normal result of chasing that – in other words continuity pap. S12 teams could not play in European leagues and vice versa because the damn games are so different. In fact I found watching S12 last season very trying indeed as it can hugely resemble League at times!!

What does ‘flowing’ mean? It seems to translate a lot of the time as ‘referee ignores breaches of the laws until someone scores’?

[ravagon]

Originally posted by Havak

It smacks of a knee jerk reaction to just twenty seconds worth of what was after all a fantastic cup final. What lasting benefit would it bring? Both I and Flipside have point out the dangers. All the bgi sides would leak penalties like a sieve near their own try lines. It might suit the ABs now but that’s not a good enough reason to change any law – and the other major countries have more sense than to allow it I suspect.

Don't mistake me. I don't for a moment believe that the final was a negative thing - besides which, the scores were level near full time - whether Wilco kicked a 3-pointer or a one-pointer wouldn't really have made much difference.
I'm not sure Eddie has really grasped this yet.

I doubt they'd increase the try value and reduce the kick all in one go but I do think there's a good possibility of one of the two in the not too distant future.

What does ‘flowing’ mean? It seems to translate a lot of the time as ‘referee ignores breaches of the laws until someone scores’?

... ... Oh, sorry, I thought you were going to go on to make a point here ... ?


[Edit: Are we still looking for a thread title? I was just struck by "Life, the Universe and Rugby" ]

[Havak]

I doubt they'd increase the try value and reduce the kick all in one go but I do think there's a good possibility of one of the two in the not too distant future.

I still disagree (surprised?)

The only quotes I have seen in support of either option were by various obscure veteran Kiwi and Aussie ‘pundits’ in the immediate aftermath of the RWC. No one from the IRB has given the slightest hint the subject is even on the agenda for them.

Eddie actually took the loss in far better grace than I ever expected – I think he was surprised that they competed so well to be honest. Has he been asking for the points reduction then? That alone is proof it will never happen – Eddie plagued the IRB so much a few years back his very name being mentioned now guarantees a proposal has no chance!

... ... Oh, sorry, I thought you were going to go on to make a point here ... ?

Surely I did? That in the clash of two very different fast flowing styles recently it was the one with forwards capable of securing good quality possession and competing well for (and disrupting) opposition ball that brought home Bill.

[Tamerlin]

Originally posted by flipside
Oh, and Tamerlin why are you awake at this time?

I am a nocturnal bird, when I don't have to wake up the morning after I like to stay awake very late...

The Apolyton boards are only filled with alcoholics and Australians at this time of night.

My mind is usually as clear as crystal water as I almost never drink but yesterday I must admit it was not the case...

Excepting the obvious poster, it's only the fact that the state of drunkeness does not have it's own flag yet that I can tell the difference usually.

this one is often used by the drunk poster while this one best describes how I felt yesterday night (or this morning should I say).

EDIT: Apparantly the state of drunkeness has not got a flag because it is a minor Irish colony. Yay. Go us.

Havak is doing his best to show us that the English can get as drunk as the Irish... but as he is only posting at work we are only benefiting from his hangover time.