It's funny that we have one thread in which Genge is being praised for being a master of winding opposition players up and another saying that behaviour is bad for the game. I don't like to see the head-patting etc, it's really not in the traditional spirit of the game.
Celebrating small things is a different matter and it is there for a reason. It's about building and maintaining confidence and it's something all the best teams do to get psychological momentum. Farrell is brilliant at it and it's a big part of his leadership skillset. You need that in a team and it's something Tigers need to be better at. It may not make you look as cool as a 90's hard man couldn't care less attitude, but if it gives you a 1% advantage it's worthwhile.
Gamesmanship shenanigans
Moderators: Tigerbeat, Rizzo, Tigers Press Office, Tigers Webmaster
-
- Gold Member
- Posts: 1359
- Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 5:15 pm
- Location: High Wycombe, Bucks.
Re: Gamesmanship shenanigans
I have no problem with it at all. A fuss over nothing in my opinion.
-
- Super User
- Posts: 3838
- Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 11:53 am
- Location: The Salt Mines
Re: Gamesmanship shenanigans
Wrong sport but I think it applies to Rugby Union as well
"Its just not Cricket"
There is a difference between a verbal wind up & unsporting behaviour, Genge treads a very fine line for me, as for Castro I think most opponents just shook their head at a lot of his stuff.
"Its just not Cricket"
There is a difference between a verbal wind up & unsporting behaviour, Genge treads a very fine line for me, as for Castro I think most opponents just shook their head at a lot of his stuff.
To win is not as important as playing with style!
Re: Gamesmanship shenanigans
"It's just not cricket"
Hear, hear. I have a very old-fashioned view. I think modesty and sportsmanship are valuable traits worthy of imbuing in the next generation, particularly in the current violent and aggressive world. Of course, the world of rugby was never completely Corinthian in its application but it aspired to be. That was the message. Added to a bit of Kipling "if you can meet with triumph and disaster and treat those two imposters just the same" it attempted to show a code of decent behaviour that was applicable outside the game.
We are in danger of losing even the pretence of that. At the current rate of decline, I would not be surprised to see trouble in crowds in 10 years time
Hear, hear. I have a very old-fashioned view. I think modesty and sportsmanship are valuable traits worthy of imbuing in the next generation, particularly in the current violent and aggressive world. Of course, the world of rugby was never completely Corinthian in its application but it aspired to be. That was the message. Added to a bit of Kipling "if you can meet with triumph and disaster and treat those two imposters just the same" it attempted to show a code of decent behaviour that was applicable outside the game.
We are in danger of losing even the pretence of that. At the current rate of decline, I would not be surprised to see trouble in crowds in 10 years time
Omnia dicta fortiora si dicta Latina
Re: Gamesmanship shenanigans
The banter/chat is fine just got no time for the annoying head patting let alone the cheering a technical penalty.
-
- Super User
- Posts: 2013
- Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 12:37 am
Re: Gamesmanship shenanigans
I think I am probably of the same generation as Old Hob and understand and agree with much of his post above. However memory tells me that rugby even at local level in the 60's and 70's was not quite as pure as some would think and the off pitch antics of some would be hard to explain to ones grandchildren. Crowd behaviour was pretty good but then there were not many people watching apart from Barbarians day and most of us could not remember much of after the match the following day. Society has changed and rugby watchers have changed, crowd trouble is already with us maybe not to the level of soccer crowds of a few years back but enough to keep professional stewards at Tigers busy.
On the pitch we have banter and wind-up merchants but frankly we always did, the difference is that the response these days is often a card and suspension whereas the referees of yesteryear if you appealed having been punched would have been to tell you you asked for it or to sort it out yourself. Of course if you even considered questioning the refs decision or lack of it you were likely to be off the pitch very quickly although I frankly do not recall that happening in any match I played in as players knew better than to argue with the ref.
On the pitch we have banter and wind-up merchants but frankly we always did, the difference is that the response these days is often a card and suspension whereas the referees of yesteryear if you appealed having been punched would have been to tell you you asked for it or to sort it out yourself. Of course if you even considered questioning the refs decision or lack of it you were likely to be off the pitch very quickly although I frankly do not recall that happening in any match I played in as players knew better than to argue with the ref.
-
- Super User
- Posts: 3014
- Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2010 6:36 am
- Location: Haute-Garonne
Re: Gamesmanship shenanigans
Good points, John.johnthegriff wrote: ↑Wed Nov 11, 2020 10:37 pm I think I am probably of the same generation as Old Hob and understand and agree with much of his post above. However memory tells me that rugby even at local level in the 60's and 70's was not quite as pure as some would think and the off pitch antics of some would be hard to explain to ones grandchildren. Crowd behaviour was pretty good but then there were not many people watching apart from Barbarians day and most of us could not remember much of after the match the following day. Society has changed and rugby watchers have changed, crowd trouble is already with us maybe not to the level of soccer crowds of a few years back but enough to keep professional stewards at Tigers busy.
On the pitch we have banter and wind-up merchants but frankly we always did, the difference is that the response these days is often a card and suspension whereas the referees of yesteryear if you appealed having been punched would have been to tell you you asked for it or to sort it out yourself. Of course if you even considered questioning the refs decision or lack of it you were likely to be off the pitch very quickly although I frankly do not recall that happening in any match I played in as players knew better than to argue with the ref.
I played club rugby from 1968 'til the mid 80s and have the same values as you and Old Hob. There were the wind-up merchants on the pitch who attempted to influence the ref, who most of the time just smiled and told them to just get on with the game. Off-field antics were often referred to as "high jinks", and if I reflect on them I wonder how we ever got away with what we did!
There certainly wasn't any unnecessary "celebrating", if for example, a scrum penalty was won, and call me old school, but I don't buy into this need or desire to gain psychological points over the opposition. However, it's part and parcel of the modern game at elite level, and I wonder if the Extra 3rd XVs of junior clubs follow the example of first class players - I hope not.
It seems to me that in general, rugby players respect and accept the referees' decisions, and I'm relieved that we don't see the referee being surrounded and jostled as football players do if a dodgy decision has been given against a team. I remember the Neil Back incident at Twickenham with shame and am not aware of any similar incident since.
Semper in excretia