2024 Six Nations Chat

[Tiglon]

If England beat Scotland and run France and Ireland close it will be signs of progress

I think we lose all 3

I think you're probably right.

France and Scotland do look beatable though, and I'm sure we've all learnt never to underestimate Steve Borthwick.

[Scott1]

As easy as that!
https://rugby365.com/tournaments/super- ... ck-tennis/

[mightymouse]

Doesn’t go far enough in my view.
The Lawmakers have virtually ruined rugby in the last 40 years! Their constant tinkering with laws, changing a perfectly good set of laws for a set of inferior ones. All designed apparently to improve the game as a spectacle and in fact invariably having the opposite effect.
The old law , when, I played, was,if you were in an offside position when a player behind you kicked, you had to retreat UNTIL either the kicker or someone behind him put you onside. That is what you need to return to ..standing still is not good enough, it will still not encourage a player to run if the ball is deep.
When they’ve sorted out this nonsense they can get rid of all their other interference..from recent years, in the ruck, maul, lineout and most of all the Scrum!!

[Rugbygramps]

Doesn’t go far enough in my view.
The Lawmakers have virtually ruined rugby in the last 40 years! Their constant tinkering with laws, changing a perfectly good set of laws for a set of inferior ones. All designed apparently to improve the game as a spectacle and in fact invariably having the opposite effect.
The old law , when, I played, was,if you were in an offside position when a player behind you kicked, you had to retreat UNTIL either the kicker or someone behind him put you onside. That is what you need to return to ..standing still is not good enough, it will still not encourage a player to run if the ball is deep.
When they’ve sorted out this nonsense they can get rid of all their other interference..from recent years, in the ruck, maul, lineout and most of all the Scrum!!

With the passing of some greats recently I’ve watched some footage from the 70s and 80s and to say scrums and line outs were better back then is a fallacy imo they were a complete mess as were any semblance of a defensive line.
I’m happy with this amendment it really makes no difference if a player has to retreat or wait to be put on side. If they do retreat then they will be on side quicker as the kicker or chaser will pass you quicker

[Old Hob]

As easy as that!
https://rugby365.com/tournaments/super- ... ck-tennis/

I'm not sure this sorts it all out : FB receives the ball and boots it as far as he can then follows it up, putting players onside as he passes them. Pretty much like now except the FBs or 10s who stay back won't be able to, however, others will.

[Tiglon]

It's a welcome change and will get rid of the silliness we saw in Scotland vs France where no one would chase and the catcher would just stand still.

However, that very rarely happens anyway and the rule change just reinforces the idea that if you're going to kick then you need a chaser... which most teams routinely have anyway.

It won't do anything to reduce kick tennis.

What's needed is the creation of a situation in which it's not actually easy to defend than attack. With professionally organised defences the traditional rules don't really work and make it too difficult/risky to attack.

Maybe fewer consequences for errors in possession somehow? Knock on in possession in your own half and the opposition get a scrum on the halfway instead of where it happened? Knock on catching a kick and the opposition get a scrum from where they kicked it?

I haven't thought those through, and to be honest the obvious answer is just to have 1 or 2 fewer players on the pitch. More space for attacking, more running required so smaller fitter players come to the fore, and smaller squads making the game more financially sustainable.

[Rugbygramps]

Possibly in danger of making a mountain out of a molehill.

Let’s go whole hog reduce each side by 2 players and get rid of line outs all together to remove strategic kicking from the game.

I know we could call it Rugby League

[Pellsey]

Possibly in danger of making a mountain out of a molehill.

Let’s go whole hog reduce each side by 2 players and get rid of line outs all together to remove strategic kicking from the game.

I know we could call it Rugby League

Unfortunately RG, I fear our beloved game is going this way.

I am not a big fan of Rugby Light (or League as some people call it,) and I would hate it if there were some kind of merge in the future.

[Tiglon]

Possibly in danger of making a mountain out of a molehill.

Let’s go whole hog reduce each side by 2 players and get rid of line outs all together to remove strategic kicking from the game.

I know we could call it Rugby League

Unfortunately RG, I fear our beloved game is going this way.

I am not a big fan of Rugby Light (or League as some people call it,) and I would hate it if there were some kind of merge in the future.

Or, you could skip the hyperbole and reduce by 1 or 2 players but keep the lineouts, scrums, rucks, mauls and everything else we love about Rugby union.

The effect would be that styles of play would go much more back to pre-proffessionalism, before defences dominated. A world where the existence of a Barry John is actually possible.

[Pellsey]

Apologies for the hyperbole, but reducing players in union already exists - sevens. If the pure running game is what is wanted, this is what should be watched. I personally like big blokes bashing each other - it is one of the reasons I used to love playing - smashing arrogant flankers peeling off against me (a 10 or a 12!) and it is certainly one of the reasons I love watching the game. Sure, that is obviously an injury risk, but that is true of other sports, especially fighting sports.

[ancientmariner]

Do defences really dominate now ? Take the Five Nations of 1973 as an example; the biggest single score was Wales' 25 against England. Otherwise 10-9, 14-6, 12-3 and 6-4 are representative examples that year.

[Tiglon]

Apologies for the hyperbole, but reducing players in union already exists - sevens. If the pure running game is what is wanted, this is what should be watched. I personally like big blokes bashing each other - it is one of the reasons I used to love playing - smashing arrogant flankers peeling off against me (a 10 or a 12!) and it is certainly one of the reasons I love watching the game. Sure, that is obviously an injury risk, but that is true of other sports, especially fighting sports.

Why does it have to be one extreme or another? There are plenty of numbers in between 7 and 15.

[Tiglon]

Do defences really dominate now ? Take the Five Nations of 1973 as an example; the biggest single score was Wales' 25 against England. Otherwise 10-9, 14-6, 12-3 and 6-4 are representative examples that year.

I don't know, I wasn't around in the 70's, but I'm led to believe that years ago rugby was free-flowing beauty and today it is just kicking and boredom.

Scores don't tell the whole story, a lot of tries these days come from muscle and kicking.

[Darc Tiger]

Do defences really dominate now ? Take the Five Nations of 1973 as an example; the biggest single score was Wales' 25 against England. Otherwise 10-9, 14-6, 12-3 and 6-4 are representative examples that year.

The rose-tinted specs always paint the good ol' days as an era of beautiful, free-flowing rugby. Perceptions perhaps reinforced by replays of specific snapshots, or simply nostalgia. But the reality is the game has never been as high skilled and high scoring as it is now.

I'm sure I've seen stats that kicking was actually as common, if not moreso, back in the day, and much of it was far more aimless than it is today.

[Rugbygramps]

Do defences really dominate now ? Take the Five Nations of 1973 as an example; the biggest single score was Wales' 25 against England. Otherwise 10-9, 14-6, 12-3 and 6-4 are representative examples that year.

The rose-tinted specs always paint the good ol' days as an era of beautiful, free-flowing rugby. Perceptions perhaps reinforced by replays of specific snapshots, or simply nostalgia. But the reality is the game has never been as high skilled and high scoring as it is now.

I'm sure I've seen stats that kicking was actually as common, if not moreso, back in the day, and much of it was far more aimless than it is today.

Totally agree. Looking back to the good old days there wasn’t the multi phase rugby you see now. Ball was won kicked or spun down the line. There were no forwards standing out looking to punch holes, backs never got involved in rucks or mauls, and no one had ever heard of a jackal or a counter ruck. It was all a bit of a mess tbh but it was what we were used to and we loved it.
I’m no stato but I would imagine that the average score in the premiership, for example has risen yearly, the introduction of bonus points no doubt helping.