The game could be improved markedly by applying some of the existing laws. What’s happened to scrums, especially the feeds? The croc roll could be removed from the game by applying the laws too. You’re supposed to join from behind the last feet and push. Where is the push in a croc roll? And a favourite of mine. Collapse the maul near the line and concede a penalty try, fair enough. But why yellow card the player? The non-offending team just got 7 points. Depending on the source, about 5 points will be scored during the carded player’s absence. So a penalty try is worth about 12 points and can ruin the game as a spectacle owing to the 12-point deficit.
I agree that the game should apply its current laws more rigorously, but the whole point of compound punishment for teams collapsing the maul is to eradicate the desire to cheat. If you don't want to concede 12 points, stay on your feet and just concede 7.
Nothing fails like success. This desire to push rugby, basically for more and more money, could well lead to its doom. Rugby does not have to be the worlds’s most popular sport. If it tries to do this then it will morph into a shadow of its former self and simply become a spectacle with no substance and by that I mean no culture. Are we going to morph into league? Will all the players be the same size because we think we can get more spectators by getting rid of the scrum and line outs? Don’t think it won’t happen. Money is doing the talking now and making the decisions not the men who made the game and the players that understand the profound respect that resides in playing alongside a giant second rower, a fearless beast of a prop, a maverick outside-half cool under pressure and a lightning winger,?whose skills around everyone. Those are the elements we know in our heart of hearts makes rugby Union unique but the game could easily disappear in the mad rush for ever increasing popularity.
Exactly boet they keep on changing rules to suit who; the Du pont one I understand but it's until that underdog exploits that rules than slowly were moving to nfl. Let's just get rugby back
Exactly, because people don't want to watch a fast free-flowing game with 13 extremely fit athletes they would prefer to watch start-and-stop games riddled with kicks, penalty goal kicks and a bunch of overweight slow forwards that pick and go for 1 meter at a time.🤣😴😴😴😴
@@monk4258 Rugby league is a but repetitive and that makes it boring, for me. If you have nuance, the line breaks are more interesting. Rugby league is a bit cookie cutter. We already have rugby 7s for new fans.
@@monk4258Union has tactics that don't just involve running and throwing the ball around. Feel free to go and watch Rugby League if that's what you want. Leave the rest of us to our Code
I think also to help every penalty called should then come up written on the screen, and there should be a special scrum ref who is a ex-scrumager, that comes on only to ref the scrum as most refs are clueless. If a scrum penalty is called then it can also come up on screen, and the broadcaster can do quick highlights using markers to explain what just happened.
From someone who’s basically played every possible position except front row in 15s and having reffed scrums it’s never going to be consistent and it comes to interpretation. Basically 90% of the time you see the ball not coming out or the scrum collapsing and getting reset someone in there should be penalised but the ref doesn’t know who it is so it’s a reset. It can be extremely hard to see see who’s at fault and be sure enough to penalise that team so unless it’s obvious the safe decision is to let it play on or reset. Won’t matter if you put an « expert scrummager » because they still only have two eyes. Your only valid choice to catch any and all infringements is TMO but then you’d stop the time every scrum so they can look over and over again who did what and nobody wants that. Actually their rule of letting it play if it’s available should fix that because a scrum penalty is usually awarded to reward a team for their legal effort force a foul from their opponents not necessarily to punish the opponent otherwise every ruck and every scrum could be a penalty if you u stick religiously to the words in the law and you’d essentially have as much flow as NFL which is exactly none
Thats an absolutely ridiculous take, if sticking to the law means there's 'no flow' then the laws aren't fit for purpose and need to be changed. Maybe at amateur level fine, but at pro level, there are massive investments, huge amounts of money riding on winning and loosing and massive massive betting industry. There cannot be selective application of the laws, but refs. That would also make Rugby massively open to corruption. Laws need to be applied consistently and fairly, like all pro games. And Rugby is finally after 30 or so years realising it is pro game and this has to happen. As for scrums, again a questionable take on your behalf. If you can't draw penalty, and it it is play on, and the feed is not straight, literally what is the point? No contest, just boring theatre at this point to justify 8 forwards existing in the game, might as well take them out of the game. Scrums need to be contested and penalties need have a clearer set of rules. Personally I think they need to invent a new style of rugby involving 12 people. (6Fs, 6Bs) 30 minute halfs. and new rules to make it exciting.
@@mysteryhombre81 If you think that’s ridiculous then you don’t understand rugby union. « Your idea » already exists its called rugby’ league perhaps that’s for you. Understand rugby was not initially designed to be a professional sport like most sports and it’s seen it’s fair share of changes. The scrum is important because it gives you an attacking platform same as a line out. It’s a place where your backs and forwards can excite moves to try a break a hole in the defence, they make the game more exciting. I mean if you look at the scrum back in the day it was more a maule than anything just 8 dudes ramming into each other head first. Then they changed that because well brain damage isn’t that entertaining so now no more running into it props started from a certain distance and just rammed into each other. Still incredibly dangerous but a bit better and as time went on and the sport was more popular you ought to make it safer because well you don’t want everyone to end up with brain damage. Slowly and surely the scrum became less about raw power but more about skill. As rugby went pro players became bigger and better so the differentiating factor today isn’t your size but your technique, your ability to get an edge and scrum effectively. Now South Africa took that a step further and decided rather than just push o retain the ball and stability why don’t we try and just hammer them every single time. See penalties in the scrum are about punishment, basically it is the props responsibility to keep the scrum up and stable so if you don’t you get penalised. This is great because if your opponent can best you and force you to take a knee or scrum sideways you’ve basically broken the law to avoid getting dominated and the other team is rewarded. Now that’s up to the refs interpretation, if the ref went to the book every single time SA would get a penalty every scrum and that’s unplayable, the other team can literally do nothing about it. So now a ref will award it if he deems it worthy, if the ball is available but you keep it in for no other reason than try milk it then the ref will tell you to play it and won’t award the penalty so that you don’t do that. Now if you scrumming on the five and do this then the ref will let you cause he deems then you have a chance of crossing the line and if you do try and if you do but they collapse it or do anything illegal to stop it then penalty try. Worse with rucks because if you went by the book every second ruck would be a penalty and you have no flow whatsoever because someone is off their feet or someone dived a bit or whatever it is. Now refs in practice don’t just do whatever they feel they have their standard, for example the law says as tackler you have to roll and it’s your responsibility if you are stuck that’s your problem so penalty and it used to be a lot more like that but it made it boring because team would purposely keep you there. So now if you watch some rugby you may notice if a player didn’t roll in time but the ball is available and he’s not affecting the attack then play on. If you interfere and the ref deems you’ve slowed down play on pour se or foul play then penalty. The same way look at line outs technically it has to be straight but I know many refs my self included that won’t really care if the other team doesn’t jump or even if there’s crazy wind they’ll let it slide unless as Nigel outs it the ref feels straighter than that one 😂 gotta love him Changing these rules to keep flow is basically doing another sport and it exist it’s called rugby league or American football if it’s more for you then go watch those. End of the day rugby wasn’t designed for billion dollar sponsors it was designed to be fun to play and it very much is. There’s no point in killing the fun to make it more marketable that’s exactly what the NFL does, they have stoppage at every play and every time the ball drops. There’s no flow and they want it that way because then they can shove adds in every time time stops. It’s designed for that purpose and that how they like it nothing wrong with that, I feel it’s more fun to play rugby and they may disagree that’s perfectly fine but buddy instead of trying to turn rugby into other existing sports why not just go watch those sports if you like their way of doing things better? It’s good I have diverse sports
@@dreammaker9642 Intresting points but learn to paraphrase it's a lot for a youtube comment. I grew up playing Rugby union in it heartlands in the UK, and I don't want it to turn to league, quite the opposite, what I am trying to say is that Rugby needs to keep the scrum and all the things that seperate from league, but keep them intresting competitive and become more spectator friendly or is it going to die out. Club rugby is already in a dire state over here, and less and less young people are intrested. And it's mainly due to the product. I hear what you are saying about the laws, but in professional capacity if a law cannot be consistently enforced, or laws are selectively enforced because they are so confusing, then thats not a very good law and needs changing or the refs are no going a very good job. Obviously there is going to be degree of interpretation to any sport law, but current state of Rugby laws is face palming. And I'm far from the only dude who thinks this.
the state of the scrum at the moment is that it's just become a mechanism for determining who gets a penalty. if it can't be fixed it would be better to do without scrums & just award a free kick instead. scrums are not meant to be like penalties, they're for lesser offences, those which don't yeild the offending team an advantage.
Another great vid uggy, outside the law changes content creation seems such an obvious and easy way to grow the game, especially with new and younger fans. World Rugby chucking copyright on content creators during the World Cup was a massive own goal as most people engage with the sport through youtube/social media. The success of podcasts (GBR, GBRA, rugby pod) and content like therugbyguy shows there is a big demand for quick and easy content, something they be capitalising on
Part and Parcel of the game has always been its incomprehensibility, take that out of the game and you reduce the need for informed refferees and they just become clock watchers adorning the field. If people wanted simplicity they'd play soccer.
I think all these changes are aimed at making it harder for the boks to play their physical forward heavy game and making it easier for teams such as ireland and nz.
I really don't get the Boks fans concerns here. Boks won rwc in 95 and 07 under more free flowing rugby rules. And England in 03. It's only the last 10 years that clock management has become a major tactic. The Bulls had success in SR before that time too. I do agree we should be worried about ppl wanting to remove strong set pieces and mauling from the game, but just getting rid of the stoppages that have crept into the game has to be healthy for participation
I agree with utjiuatjavara , the game which was once dominated by physicality is now dominated by penalties and that physical aggression stops teams like SA, England, Samoa, Tonga , Argentina playing physical rugby and favours teams like NZ which relies on penalties and speed to win games and Im a Kiwi bring back rucking and the biff @@ChrisBrown-or8ky
@@philll9868 NZ wants fewer penalties. NZ is probably the least disciplined top nation in history and wants as little whistle as possible. A chaotic game suits NZ. I do agree that over the past few years NZ rugby has devolved as they've thrown out the direct forward play in favour of spreading the ball, but NZ rugby that I grew up watching in the 80s and 90s was extremely tough and direct. IMO, our tight 5 in rwc23 was excellent so hopefully we're turning a corner there
Attendees: Unions (CEOs, High Performance Directors and head coaches): Argentina, Australia, England, Fiji, France, Georgia, Ireland, Italy, New Zealand, Scotland, South Africa, USA, Wales Organisations: World Rugby, The Six Nations, The Rugby Championship Players: International Rugby Players Match officials: Members of the Emirates World Rugby Match Officials
Yippee! Let’s ruin rugby, Kiwi style. If the ball’s playable, carry on with the scrum. So pick loose forwards at prop and collapse the scrum. Rugby League, baby!!!
if it collapses with the ball trapped inside then it's not playable. if it's bobbling around at the back when the collapse happens then the collapse is no more relevant than the fullback tripping over his shoelaces when the ball comes out
@@kungfutzu3779 If it collapses while the ball is bobbing at the back then the team getting their heads shoved up their arses (if it’s their ball) gets cleaner ball than they deserve, not tripping over themselves in retreat, and (if it’s the dominant team’s ball) the looses detach and is in a vastly superior defensive position instead of pushing for their lives as they would have been if they weren’t cheating, which they are, by collapsing. Do you think scrums are collapsed for the lols?
If a fair catch is called in the 22 the player must have a choice between a free kick or a scrum from where the ball was kicked. this will eliminate all the senseless kicking.. to simplify the game is a great idea and they must ask the players to what rules they want to play, not the out of touch not the IRB "executives"
I think the whole push for better "flow" and "ball in play time" is actually completely missing the point. The NFL is a much more stop start sport with much less happening, lots of soccer games end in 0-0 ties and have large parts of the game where people are just passing to each other and nothing happens. If every game had 10 tries it would remove the excitement around a try being scored. In basketball people are more excited about steals and turnovers than 2 and 3 pointers because they are rarer, and the sports popularity has declined in the last two years as offensive records are being broken. All three those sports are bigger and more profitable than Rugby Union, but instead of looking at those sports to see what works everyone wants to copy Rugby League, which is a smaller and less profitable sport in most of the world. The countries where Rugby union is doing well, France and URC countries, are playing a much "slower" but harder version of Rugby than for example Super Rugby, we should be focussing on what makes Rugby a spectacle, it's basically a modern day colosseum, and we want to see the gladiators. Just my two cents
except i wouldn't say focus on what makes it a spectacle, just on what makes it a great game. sports are for players first & foremost. something good to watch probably flows from getting that right
@@kungfutzu3779 agree 100%, but you also attract certain types of athletes with how sports are perceived, think about the personality of the average MMA fighter. I think rugby's greatest asset is probably the current athletes. With thousands of professionals across the world you have very few scandals and, with a few exceptions, they all seem like people you can look up to. They are exceptionally talented, but also quite down to earth, they should let the current players play a much bigger role in where the sport is going and pay less attention to the old guard and the pundits.
@@tappie34 i'd agree with giving the "current players" a big say as long as you're including all levels. to the extent that top rugby players are comparatively respectable this might be a hangover from the amateur days which ironically might disappear if the game changes much
I agree strongly with the need to 'simplify' the game. By that I understand making it intuative for the layman who never played. Rugby as a spectator sport has two fundamental problems. 1) Much of the time is spent waiting while players set up scrums and line-outs 2) Much of the game (rucks, mails and scrums) happens out of sight to the audience so they only know what happened after the referee awars somebody a penalty. I'm a forward so I know what can happen in a scrum but I don't know what happened until after the referee blows as a spectator. Rucks, scrums and mauls are the most potentially dangerous part of hte game so they need propoer rules focused on safety .However, the objective needs to be to get the referee out of the way as much as possible and that means that pro-rugby might need significant rules changes to these elements. My personal view is to have uncontested scrums betweent the 22s and only have contested ones in attacking positions.
I like watching forward power Rugby, so Union definitely shouldn't change to league, but there are definitely law changes that can help the game. I personally think the defending team shouldn't be able to move past a ruck, or scrum, untill the ball has been caught off the throw by the person removing the the ball from the ruck / scrum. Or they try advance the ball themselves.
Some resistance in the comments section here, and i get it. From a nz perspective, i think the game was changed to slow it down to suit other countries. NZ did ok for a while when we had players like DC, McCaw and prime Whitelock. They're all gone now and the game is in serious decline here for several reasons, and not all of them onfield. Firstly, the game has definitely moved on from nz tactics of old. Defence has lapsed and ruck speed is horrid in SR and NPC. The game here needs ppl playing and watching simply yo survive. Off field, rugby is about to have a civil war between the provinces (NPC) and NZRU who want to end the NPC. It'll divide rugby fans even further. I don't expect ppl overseas to care about nz rugby in general, but fwiw, i watch urc, Heineken cup,. Gallagher prem and top 14, and I'm watching 6n as i type this. I love rugby. I don't want it to change much at all. I just want it to survive here
It's all papering over major problems in the game design that are coming to stark light under the visibility of professionalism driving the game now. That's INEVITABLE if Union becomes ever more professionalized = Min-Maxing aka Percentages everywhere to boost margins between winning and losing or profit and loss. Look at Union today it's got 2 aspects to it: 1. More rules and tactics taken from Rugby League because League was professionalized decades ago and so went down this same road already. IE "Streamlining" or "Optimizing". 2. More like NFL with "blockers" and "targetting the ball not the player in the tackle", "subs like specialist teams coming on for 30mins or kicker specialists to win via the boot". Then the rules are impossible to stick together along with safety of contact engagement being to prone to risk of injury with bodies in motion at odd angles and incidents. There's one very very simple measure to keep the game of Union as Union and avoid the issues of the above NFL-ization or League-ification: * MAKE THE PITCH SIZE BIGGER It's better than reducing numbers of players which is the other alternative realistic solution that League ended up choosing. But if you have 15s and that's x4 more players on the pitch along with bigger players in the forwards and backs who are as big as forwards in some cases and grinding plays with contact in heavier collisions and specialist even larger players, there's only one other simple solution that takes a ROOT FIRST approach before pruning the rules around the edges above. If you think through the implication of larger pitches the benefits are immediately obvious in solving or reducing multiple problems without any single rule change or before such is needed. Of course it won't be done, due to infrastructure sunk costs but that would be the optimal approach. No one in leadership of Union has the balls to step-back and assess the game afresh. At it's current rate you can see exactly why League stripped Union down over time: 1. Jackalling? Kills attacks, is excessively technical and inconsistent and in turn kills the spectacle at the break-down 2. Defence up by No8 foot again kills ball in hand in the backs. 3. Bigger faster players means less space and less ability for running into and creating space. Leads to more kicking and grinding... 4. Complex rules and collisions above leads to more referee requirement input and interruption of game ie stopping.
all the problems started when professionalism began & the administrators decided to make the game more like league. reason: in the age of professionalism they came to see it as a business instead of a sport, & in business it's always savest for duopolists to emulate one another
@@kungfutzu3779 I don't believe they intentionally thought: We must turn Union into League: I think with pressures of Professionalism and analysis and streamlining and then seeing League ALREADY solved many of these problems, they ended up making Union more like League as a by-product eg tactics: Spread players across channels across the entire pitch in defence with minimal breakdown players - it used to be Forwards go and do Forwards stuff and Backs stay out and run the ball !! Spirit and tradition are always out the window in professionalism looking to optimize advantage and minimize disadvantage. I've given the alternative solution to the above: BIGGER PICTURES. Even the distance players can kick the ball and accuracy is enormous today compared to the amateur days of Union. With more space kicking only achieves turn over of possession and into the hands of faster players who can recover territory in broken play as more of an option. It obviates the kicking-tennis as optimal strategy. Forwards have to be slimmed down for stamina and movement and not grinding 3m pile-driving at the 5m line specialism also. The good thing about bigger pitch: You still retain need for forwards to be good at set-piece eg scrum, maul, line-out and also line-breakers while more space for backs means more exciting dynamic differences between forwards and backs exactly what Campese said is the core of Union.
TMO just needs to be put on a leash. Cannot call plays missed by the on field ref, other than dangerous foul play. Should be an advisory role only, able to display additional angles, with the referee then making their final call. When going to the TMO, the ref should have a “no verdict” decision, as well as a positive and negative verdict on an event, so for example try, no try, or no verdict if they can’t make a reasonable decision. The positive and negative decisions implement a “strong evidence, but not necessarily conclusive” standard which any evidence the TMO provides would need to overcome. If no verdict, then it’s simply based on the balance of probabilities, what was more likely what happened As an example, a maul try is scored, and called no try on the field. The ref reviews it to the tmo, who has an angle showing the ball at ground level, but not definitely on the ground. The ref would then overturn the decision, as it’s strongly indicating a try has been scored, but doesn’t need to be conclusive. If there had been a knock on or forward pass in the run up, which the referee had missed, the TMO would not be able to reference it until the referee asks them to check it
I'm sorry, I don't agree, I like interventionist TMOs. I like TMOs better when they're former Refs. I'm not sold on Non-Ref TMOs, feels a bit odd to me,but maybe certain individuals have an argument for being a TMO having not refereed the Code.
@@owainmorgan3897 a lot of times the TMO un-necessarily stops play. sometimes they would do better to sort out transgressions which didn't alter the run of the game, after the game.
@@kungfutzu3779 If someone has broken the laws of the Code they need to be dealt with in real time, especially if they have gained an unfair advantage. Let the TMO do their job and penalise foul play and send out the message, that cheaters never prosper!
It's like they don't understand their own Content, Kicks and Big Hits give the most views on social media, also this trying to kill the scrum I've spoke about it before, the scrum is the most iconic movement in our sport and also keeps Props Props resulting in more space and Huge Humans which grab attention.
I agree they should focus more on the men's sports first because that's where the market is at. I'm just being honest you know the NBA is a good example why😮
"Simplifying the game" always sounds like spin for making Rugby Union more like Rugby league. FTR I don't like Rugby League, it just seems like a bunch of headless chickens running round a field to me. I love Rugby Union it has lineouts, contested scrums, tactical kicking, mauls, and my favourite thing of all, rucks 😊 I love the breakdown and I deteste when there is any attempt to speed it up or stop it from happening entirely, with the clear exception of improving safety for player's health. If you want a purely running game, go and watch Rugby League and leave the rest of us to our Code.
but rugby league isn't a pure running game. 5 times out of six they just run the ball up a few metres straight into the defensive line. it's a very constipated game
@@kungfutzu3779 I don't know what it is, I just don't like watching it. It has no depth from what I can see. I enjoy watching the breakdown in Rugby Union. The passing the ball back under foot in Rugby League just seems boring and pointless to me. They ripped the most important part of Rugby out of their Code.
@@owainmorgan3897 agree, league was created by people who didn't agree that rugby should be amateur so they changed a few rules to make a game distinct from rugby. when rugby went professional i naively imagined that league could be discontinued now that the point of disagreement was conceded, & all the grateful league players could finally play proper rugby, as they must long to do. i guess i was mistaken :(
Only allow 5 subs from 8 and apply the Laws properly, eg feeding, lineouts... also, try referring all teams the sMe, not deciding who "should " win then reffing accordingly (see any game with the Islands against a bigger side).
Sorry, but why give the SH more space and protection at the base of the scrum? WR really trying to protect their golden child Dupont from making game losing mistakes like in the QF?
After all is said and done - i reckon there won't be any major changes ... And the game won't significantly grow in popularity, unlike other sports. Rugby will probably become more of a 'boutique' sport over time?
the focus on making the game more accessible to newcomers is wrong & comes at the expense of died-in-the-wool fans, the current stakeholders. it is tantamount to commercialism
For new ideas, take a look at how the different teams played at the last RWC. England played a bore-fest. This style should be penalized. Wallabies was horrific, playing League at a RWC. The administrators killed rugby union in Australia. These type of teams need to be banned. Springboks were excellent - displayed power, speed and clever tactics. Best was the Springbok camaraderie and team work. This must be pushed. Minimize the emphasis on individual brilliance. France played a great game. Up with French style, speed and power. All Blacks played well, but is following Australia down the drain. Infighting between incompetent administrations are costing the All Blacks. Incompetent administrators that fail to uphold the good name of rugby union, must be disciplined by World Rugby. Why does World Rugby discipline players, coaches and referees, but inept administrators do what they want? This needs to change.
Rugby has become softer over the decades. I'm almost ready to let the game go and spend my time doing better things and saving money on unnecessary channels. It's almost like wokeness is within sports too, and it's turned to poo. Remember when covid was around and everything became irrelevant. We spent our time doing things we enjoyed, and it did all of us a lot of good in so many ways.
The biggest change should be trying to keep all players on the field so as not to ruin games. Rugby is the only sport in history where someone getting sent off is virtually guaranteed in every game. In rugby league and american football, yellow cards are very rare let alone red.
I'm sorry!? You want organised violence without consequences then? If you carrying out a dangerous tackle you're going in the bin! Try encouraging better tackling techniques instead of complaining about needed discipline in the game. If a player cheats or in any way fails to follow the laws of the Code they disciplined. If you want a bare knuckle fight, go and watch some MMA in an octagon. Good grief!! 🙄
@@JaemanEdwardsYou want more players getting early on set dementia as a result of concussion syndromes by the sound of things. Former Wales International Alix Popham is in his early Forties and yet he has the memory and brain capacity of a man in his Eighties. I want Rugby players to enjoy their retirement into actual old age, not die in constant pain not knowing who they are like so many American Footballers have. "A man's game" 🙄 Sounds like players bashing each other into an early grave. Wake up will you!? Dangerous tackles cause concussions and broken limbs. We know this and understand it more than ever. There is no excuse for not improving player safety!!
@@kungfutzu3779 What proportion of the problems we're discussing does that actually represent? I have no problem with the TMO analysing that and advising the Referee to change a red card to a yellow or just a warning, but a message needs to be sent out that tackling technique must change and improve. Low and controlled tackles are the answer. We have group class actions from dozens, if not hundreds, of permanently concust former players, how many more generations of ex-sportsmen and women do we have to go through before fans and others realise there is no excuse for causing permanent injuries, especially to people's brains!
storytelling , you mean bullshit. i watch rugby because im to old to play it, if i want to watch actors, ill big up my tarantino collection. for me rigby and everything else is mutually exclusive
I knew the evil of rugby leaque were coming to destroy our beautiful game, I warned the guys in 2023, some guys from that useless game without proper scrums infiltrate the real game to destroy it, TANKS FOR THE CONFIRMATION.
Ban cards its spoiling the game people pay a lot for a game give a fine for player they are being payed for games you punish a team three times when receiving a card it's old farts who make rules
Make sure you consult Bill Beaumont, Wayne Barnes and Tom Foley....after all those are the people who have slowed the game down, so the Northern hemisphere can keep up....?
The game could be improved markedly by applying some of the existing laws. What’s happened to scrums, especially the feeds?
The croc roll could be removed from the game by applying the laws too. You’re supposed to join from behind the last feet and push. Where is the push in a croc roll?
And a favourite of mine. Collapse the maul near the line and concede a penalty try, fair enough. But why yellow card the player? The non-offending team just got 7 points. Depending on the source, about 5 points will be scored during the carded player’s absence. So a penalty try is worth about 12 points and can ruin the game as a spectacle owing to the 12-point deficit.
good points.
Well said 🫡
Very true. Just be consistent on the interpretation of the current law's.
I agree that the game should apply its current laws more rigorously, but the whole point of compound punishment for teams collapsing the maul is to eradicate the desire to cheat. If you don't want to concede 12 points, stay on your feet and just concede 7.
@@NeoN07hc that's working out well
Nothing fails like success. This desire to push rugby, basically for more and more money, could well lead to its doom. Rugby does not have to be the worlds’s most popular sport. If it tries to do this then it will morph into a shadow of its former self and simply become a spectacle with no substance and by that I mean no culture. Are we going to morph into league? Will all the players be the same size because we think we can get more spectators by getting rid of the scrum and line outs? Don’t think it won’t happen. Money is doing the talking now and making the decisions not the men who made the game and the players that understand the profound respect that resides in playing alongside a giant second rower, a fearless beast of a prop, a maverick outside-half cool under pressure and a lightning winger,?whose skills around everyone. Those are the elements we know in our heart of hearts makes rugby Union unique but the game could easily disappear in the mad rush for ever increasing popularity.
agreed
Changing to Rugby league won't get more fans.
Exactly boet they keep on changing rules to suit who; the Du pont one I understand but it's until that underdog exploits that rules than slowly were moving to nfl. Let's just get rugby back
Exactly, because people don't want to watch a fast free-flowing game with 13 extremely fit athletes they would prefer to watch start-and-stop games riddled with kicks, penalty goal kicks and a bunch of overweight slow forwards that pick and go for 1 meter at a time.🤣😴😴😴😴
@@monk4258 yup the whole world loves a 6 tackle rinse and repeat simulator for 80 minutes don't they buddy??
@@monk4258 Rugby league is a but repetitive and that makes it boring, for me. If you have nuance, the line breaks are more interesting. Rugby league is a bit cookie cutter. We already have rugby 7s for new fans.
@@monk4258Union has tactics that don't just involve running and throwing the ball around. Feel free to go and watch Rugby League if that's what you want. Leave the rest of us to our Code
I think also to help every penalty called should then come up written on the screen, and there should be a special scrum ref who is a ex-scrumager, that comes on only to ref the scrum as most refs are clueless. If a scrum penalty is called then it can also come up on screen, and the broadcaster can do quick highlights using markers to explain what just happened.
From someone who’s basically played every possible position except front row in 15s and having reffed scrums it’s never going to be consistent and it comes to interpretation. Basically 90% of the time you see the ball not coming out or the scrum collapsing and getting reset someone in there should be penalised but the ref doesn’t know who it is so it’s a reset. It can be extremely hard to see see who’s at fault and be sure enough to penalise that team so unless it’s obvious the safe decision is to let it play on or reset. Won’t matter if you put an « expert scrummager » because they still only have two eyes. Your only valid choice to catch any and all infringements is TMO but then you’d stop the time every scrum so they can look over and over again who did what and nobody wants that. Actually their rule of letting it play if it’s available should fix that because a scrum penalty is usually awarded to reward a team for their legal effort force a foul from their opponents not necessarily to punish the opponent otherwise every ruck and every scrum could be a penalty if you u stick religiously to the words in the law and you’d essentially have as much flow as NFL which is exactly none
Thats an absolutely ridiculous take, if sticking to the law means there's 'no flow' then the laws aren't fit for purpose and need to be changed.
Maybe at amateur level fine, but at pro level, there are massive investments, huge amounts of money riding on winning and loosing and massive massive betting industry. There cannot be selective application of the laws, but refs. That would also make Rugby massively open to corruption.
Laws need to be applied consistently and fairly, like all pro games. And Rugby is finally after 30 or so years realising it is pro game and this has to happen.
As for scrums, again a questionable take on your behalf. If you can't draw penalty, and it it is play on, and the feed is not straight, literally what is the point? No contest, just boring theatre at this point to justify 8 forwards existing in the game, might as well take them out of the game. Scrums need to be contested and penalties need have a clearer set of rules.
Personally I think they need to invent a new style of rugby involving 12 people. (6Fs, 6Bs) 30 minute halfs. and new rules to make it exciting.
@@mysteryhombre81 If you think that’s ridiculous then you don’t understand rugby union. « Your idea » already exists its called rugby’ league perhaps that’s for you.
Understand rugby was not initially designed to be a professional sport like most sports and it’s seen it’s fair share of changes. The scrum is important because it gives you an attacking platform same as a line out. It’s a place where your backs and forwards can excite moves to try a break a hole in the defence, they make the game more exciting.
I mean if you look at the scrum back in the day it was more a maule than anything just 8 dudes ramming into each other head first. Then they changed that because well brain damage isn’t that entertaining so now no more running into it props started from a certain distance and just rammed into each other. Still incredibly dangerous but a bit better and as time went on and the sport was more popular you ought to make it safer because well you don’t want everyone to end up with brain damage. Slowly and surely the scrum became less about raw power but more about skill. As rugby went pro players became bigger and better so the differentiating factor today isn’t your size but your technique, your ability to get an edge and scrum effectively. Now South Africa took that a step further and decided rather than just push o retain the ball and stability why don’t we try and just hammer them every single time.
See penalties in the scrum are about punishment, basically it is the props responsibility to keep the scrum up and stable so if you don’t you get penalised. This is great because if your opponent can best you and force you to take a knee or scrum sideways you’ve basically broken the law to avoid getting dominated and the other team is rewarded. Now that’s up to the refs interpretation, if the ref went to the book every single time SA would get a penalty every scrum and that’s unplayable, the other team can literally do nothing about it. So now a ref will award it if he deems it worthy, if the ball is available but you keep it in for no other reason than try milk it then the ref will tell you to play it and won’t award the penalty so that you don’t do that. Now if you scrumming on the five and do this then the ref will let you cause he deems then you have a chance of crossing the line and if you do try and if you do but they collapse it or do anything illegal to stop it then penalty try.
Worse with rucks because if you went by the book every second ruck would be a penalty and you have no flow whatsoever because someone is off their feet or someone dived a bit or whatever it is. Now refs in practice don’t just do whatever they feel they have their standard, for example the law says as tackler you have to roll and it’s your responsibility if you are stuck that’s your problem so penalty and it used to be a lot more like that but it made it boring because team would purposely keep you there. So now if you watch some rugby you may notice if a player didn’t roll in time but the ball is available and he’s not affecting the attack then play on. If you interfere and the ref deems you’ve slowed down play on pour se or foul play then penalty. The same way look at line outs technically it has to be straight but I know many refs my self included that won’t really care if the other team doesn’t jump or even if there’s crazy wind they’ll let it slide unless as Nigel outs it the ref feels straighter than that one 😂 gotta love him
Changing these rules to keep flow is basically doing another sport and it exist it’s called rugby league or American football if it’s more for you then go watch those. End of the day rugby wasn’t designed for billion dollar sponsors it was designed to be fun to play and it very much is. There’s no point in killing the fun to make it more marketable that’s exactly what the NFL does, they have stoppage at every play and every time the ball drops. There’s no flow and they want it that way because then they can shove adds in every time time stops. It’s designed for that purpose and that how they like it nothing wrong with that, I feel it’s more fun to play rugby and they may disagree that’s perfectly fine but buddy instead of trying to turn rugby into other existing sports why not just go watch those sports if you like their way of doing things better? It’s good I have diverse sports
@@dreammaker9642 Intresting points but learn to paraphrase it's a lot for a youtube comment.
I grew up playing Rugby union in it heartlands in the UK, and I don't want it to turn to league, quite the opposite, what I am trying to say is that Rugby needs to keep the scrum and all the things that seperate from league, but keep them intresting competitive and become more spectator friendly or is it going to die out. Club rugby is already in a dire state over here, and less and less young people are intrested. And it's mainly due to the product.
I hear what you are saying about the laws, but in professional capacity if a law cannot be consistently enforced, or laws are selectively enforced because they are so confusing, then thats not a very good law and needs changing or the refs are no going a very good job. Obviously there is going to be degree of interpretation to any sport law, but current state of Rugby laws is face palming. And I'm far from the only dude who thinks this.
the state of the scrum at the moment is that it's just become a mechanism for determining who gets a penalty. if it can't be fixed it would be better to do without scrums & just award a free kick instead. scrums are not meant to be like penalties, they're for lesser offences, those which don't yeild the offending team an advantage.
Another great vid uggy, outside the law changes content creation seems such an obvious and easy way to grow the game, especially with new and younger fans. World Rugby chucking copyright on content creators during the World Cup was a massive own goal as most people engage with the sport through youtube/social media. The success of podcasts (GBR, GBRA, rugby pod) and content like therugbyguy shows there is a big demand for quick and easy content, something they be capitalising on
Part and Parcel of the game has always been its incomprehensibility, take that out of the game and you reduce the need for informed refferees and they just become clock watchers adorning the field. If people wanted simplicity they'd play soccer.
Yep the NFL has a complicated law set and people love it. They just need to communicate what's happened because sometimes it's a bit unclear
Did they think about enforcing the current laws? 😅
A simplified version of rugby is called rugby league isn’t it?
How about 10s and 7s maybe 9s that will confuse the yanks!
Rugby is a smarter game.
Exactly
As a league fan, I totally agree. Rugby is a good escape to our horrible tunneled one-sided scrums.
Breakdown?
I think all these changes are aimed at making it harder for the boks to play their physical forward heavy game and making it easier for teams such as ireland and nz.
I really don't get the Boks fans concerns here. Boks won rwc in 95 and 07 under more free flowing rugby rules. And England in 03. It's only the last 10 years that clock management has become a major tactic. The Bulls had success in SR before that time too. I do agree we should be worried about ppl wanting to remove strong set pieces and mauling from the game, but just getting rid of the stoppages that have crept into the game has to be healthy for participation
I agree with utjiuatjavara , the game which was once dominated by physicality is now dominated by penalties and that physical aggression stops teams like SA, England, Samoa, Tonga , Argentina playing physical rugby and favours teams like NZ which relies on penalties and speed to win games and Im a Kiwi bring back rucking and the biff @@ChrisBrown-or8ky
@@philll9868 NZ wants fewer penalties. NZ is probably the least disciplined top nation in history and wants as little whistle as possible. A chaotic game suits NZ. I do agree that over the past few years NZ rugby has devolved as they've thrown out the direct forward play in favour of spreading the ball, but NZ rugby that I grew up watching in the 80s and 90s was extremely tough and direct. IMO, our tight 5 in rwc23 was excellent so hopefully we're turning a corner there
Wait until they get strict on the steroids.
@@urbanegorilla6005 who do you reckon takes them?
get rid of the Dupont law
It’s going for sure!
Keen to hear how many fans or current players were consulted by "the brains trust"
Attendees:
Unions (CEOs, High Performance Directors and head coaches): Argentina, Australia, England, Fiji, France, Georgia, Ireland, Italy, New Zealand, Scotland, South Africa, USA, Wales
Organisations: World Rugby, The Six Nations, The Rugby Championship
Players: International Rugby Players
Match officials: Members of the Emirates World Rugby Match Officials
@@uggy exactly .. so no bother asking the players who actually put their bodies on the line nor the fans who pay for the privilege .
Yippee!
Let’s ruin rugby, Kiwi style. If the ball’s playable, carry on with the scrum. So pick loose forwards at prop and collapse the scrum.
Rugby League, baby!!!
Hahaha. True imagine the number of collapses we could be about to see.
if it collapses with the ball trapped inside then it's not playable. if it's bobbling around at the back when the collapse happens then the collapse is no more relevant than the fullback tripping over his shoelaces when the ball comes out
@@kungfutzu3779 If it collapses while the ball is bobbing at the back then the team getting their heads shoved up their arses (if it’s their ball) gets cleaner ball than they deserve, not tripping over themselves in retreat, and (if it’s the dominant team’s ball) the looses detach and is in a vastly superior defensive position instead of pushing for their lives as they would have been if they weren’t cheating, which they are, by collapsing.
Do you think scrums are collapsed for the lols?
@@jacqloock i assumed maintaining such an unnatural posture under the pressure of 1.6 tonnes of heaving flesh was a parlous endeavour
If a fair catch is called in the 22 the player must have a choice between a free kick or a scrum from where the ball was kicked. this will eliminate all the senseless kicking.. to simplify the game is a great idea and they must ask the players to what rules they want to play, not the out of touch not the IRB "executives"
not sure about the scrum idea but anyway do away with the kicking team getting the put-in when they kick for touch on a penalty
I think the whole push for better "flow" and "ball in play time" is actually completely missing the point. The NFL is a much more stop start sport with much less happening, lots of soccer games end in 0-0 ties and have large parts of the game where people are just passing to each other and nothing happens. If every game had 10 tries it would remove the excitement around a try being scored. In basketball people are more excited about steals and turnovers than 2 and 3 pointers because they are rarer, and the sports popularity has declined in the last two years as offensive records are being broken. All three those sports are bigger and more profitable than Rugby Union, but instead of looking at those sports to see what works everyone wants to copy Rugby League, which is a smaller and less profitable sport in most of the world. The countries where Rugby union is doing well, France and URC countries, are playing a much "slower" but harder version of Rugby than for example Super Rugby, we should be focussing on what makes Rugby a spectacle, it's basically a modern day colosseum, and we want to see the gladiators. Just my two cents
well said
except i wouldn't say focus on what makes it a spectacle, just on what makes it a great game. sports are for players first & foremost. something good to watch probably flows from getting that right
@@kungfutzu3779 agree 100%, but you also attract certain types of athletes with how sports are perceived, think about the personality of the average MMA fighter. I think rugby's greatest asset is probably the current athletes. With thousands of professionals across the world you have very few scandals and, with a few exceptions, they all seem like people you can look up to. They are exceptionally talented, but also quite down to earth, they should let the current players play a much bigger role in where the sport is going and pay less attention to the old guard and the pundits.
Love this perspective, given me a lot to think about!
@@tappie34 i'd agree with giving the "current players" a big say as long as you're including all levels. to the extent that top rugby players are comparatively respectable this might be a hangover from the amateur days which ironically might disappear if the game changes much
I agree strongly with the need to 'simplify' the game. By that I understand making it intuative for the layman who never played. Rugby as a spectator sport has two fundamental problems.
1) Much of the time is spent waiting while players set up scrums and line-outs
2) Much of the game (rucks, mails and scrums) happens out of sight to the audience so they only know what happened after the referee awars somebody a penalty.
I'm a forward so I know what can happen in a scrum but I don't know what happened until after the referee blows as a spectator.
Rucks, scrums and mauls are the most potentially dangerous part of hte game so they need propoer rules focused on safety .However, the objective needs to be to get the referee out of the way as much as possible and that means that pro-rugby might need significant rules changes to these elements. My personal view is to have uncontested scrums betweent the 22s and only have contested ones in attacking positions.
I like watching forward power Rugby, so Union definitely shouldn't change to league, but there are definitely law changes that can help the game. I personally think the defending team shouldn't be able to move past a ruck, or scrum, untill the ball has been caught off the throw by the person removing the the ball from the ruck / scrum. Or they try advance the ball themselves.
& should not be able to defend from a position off-side of the person passing the ball
Only Super games I watch are the Landers
Some resistance in the comments section here, and i get it. From a nz perspective, i think the game was changed to slow it down to suit other countries. NZ did ok for a while when we had players like DC, McCaw and prime Whitelock. They're all gone now and the game is in serious decline here for several reasons, and not all of them onfield. Firstly, the game has definitely moved on from nz tactics of old. Defence has lapsed and ruck speed is horrid in SR and NPC. The game here needs ppl playing and watching simply yo survive.
Off field, rugby is about to have a civil war between the provinces (NPC) and NZRU who want to end the NPC. It'll divide rugby fans even further.
I don't expect ppl overseas to care about nz rugby in general, but fwiw, i watch urc, Heineken cup,. Gallagher prem and top 14, and I'm watching 6n as i type this. I love rugby. I don't want it to change much at all. I just want it to survive here
the employment contracts act 1991 is what killed it off, that's when we lost the great kiwi weekend
Definitely in a state of survival across the ditch too…
It's all papering over major problems in the game design that are coming to stark light under the visibility of professionalism driving the game now. That's INEVITABLE if Union becomes ever more professionalized = Min-Maxing aka Percentages everywhere to boost margins between winning and losing or profit and loss.
Look at Union today it's got 2 aspects to it:
1. More rules and tactics taken from Rugby League because League was professionalized decades ago and so went down this same road already. IE "Streamlining" or "Optimizing".
2. More like NFL with "blockers" and "targetting the ball not the player in the tackle", "subs like specialist teams coming on for 30mins or kicker specialists to win via the boot".
Then the rules are impossible to stick together along with safety of contact engagement being to prone to risk of injury with bodies in motion at odd angles and incidents.
There's one very very simple measure to keep the game of Union as Union and avoid the issues of the above NFL-ization or League-ification:
* MAKE THE PITCH SIZE BIGGER
It's better than reducing numbers of players which is the other alternative realistic solution that League ended up choosing. But if you have 15s and that's x4 more players on the pitch along with bigger players in the forwards and backs who are as big as forwards in some cases and grinding plays with contact in heavier collisions and specialist even larger players, there's only one other simple solution that takes a ROOT FIRST approach before pruning the rules around the edges above.
If you think through the implication of larger pitches the benefits are immediately obvious in solving or reducing multiple problems without any single rule change or before such is needed.
Of course it won't be done, due to infrastructure sunk costs but that would be the optimal approach. No one in leadership of Union has the balls to step-back and assess the game afresh. At it's current rate you can see exactly why League stripped Union down over time:
1. Jackalling? Kills attacks, is excessively technical and inconsistent and in turn kills the spectacle at the break-down
2. Defence up by No8 foot again kills ball in hand in the backs.
3. Bigger faster players means less space and less ability for running into and creating space. Leads to more kicking and grinding...
4. Complex rules and collisions above leads to more referee requirement input and interruption of game ie stopping.
Ridiculous idea and extremely unworkable to make fields bigger. Obviously logistics is not your strong suit. Go back to bed.
all the problems started when professionalism began & the administrators decided to make the game more like league. reason: in the age of professionalism they came to see it as a business instead of a sport, & in business it's always savest for duopolists to emulate one another
@@kungfutzu3779 I don't believe they intentionally thought: We must turn Union into League: I think with pressures of Professionalism and analysis and streamlining and then seeing League ALREADY solved many of these problems, they ended up making Union more like League as a by-product eg tactics: Spread players across channels across the entire pitch in defence with minimal breakdown players - it used to be Forwards go and do Forwards stuff and Backs stay out and run the ball !! Spirit and tradition are always out the window in professionalism looking to optimize advantage and minimize disadvantage.
I've given the alternative solution to the above: BIGGER PICTURES. Even the distance players can kick the ball and accuracy is enormous today compared to the amateur days of Union. With more space kicking only achieves turn over of possession and into the hands of faster players who can recover territory in broken play as more of an option. It obviates the kicking-tennis as optimal strategy. Forwards have to be slimmed down for stamina and movement and not grinding 3m pile-driving at the 5m line specialism also.
The good thing about bigger pitch: You still retain need for forwards to be good at set-piece eg scrum, maul, line-out and also line-breakers while more space for backs means more exciting dynamic differences between forwards and backs exactly what Campese said is the core of Union.
Kirwan must be cleaning his pipe at this news.
TMO just needs to be put on a leash. Cannot call plays missed by the on field ref, other than dangerous foul play. Should be an advisory role only, able to display additional angles, with the referee then making their final call. When going to the TMO, the ref should have a “no verdict” decision, as well as a positive and negative verdict on an event, so for example try, no try, or no verdict if they can’t make a reasonable decision. The positive and negative decisions implement a “strong evidence, but not necessarily conclusive” standard which any evidence the TMO provides would need to overcome. If no verdict, then it’s simply based on the balance of probabilities, what was more likely what happened
As an example, a maul try is scored, and called no try on the field. The ref reviews it to the tmo, who has an angle showing the ball at ground level, but not definitely on the ground. The ref would then overturn the decision, as it’s strongly indicating a try has been scored, but doesn’t need to be conclusive. If there had been a knock on or forward pass in the run up, which the referee had missed, the TMO would not be able to reference it until the referee asks them to check it
Well said 🔥
The current TMO is trash for sure
I'm sorry, I don't agree, I like interventionist TMOs. I like TMOs better when they're former Refs. I'm not sold on Non-Ref TMOs, feels a bit odd to me,but maybe certain individuals have an argument for being a TMO having not refereed the Code.
@@owainmorgan3897 a lot of times the TMO un-necessarily stops play. sometimes they would do better to sort out transgressions which didn't alter the run of the game, after the game.
@@kungfutzu3779 If someone has broken the laws of the Code they need to be dealt with in real time, especially if they have gained an unfair advantage. Let the TMO do their job and penalise foul play and send out the message, that cheaters never prosper!
Make a knock on a knock on even if the ball goes backwards. End the ludicrous Penalty for a deliberate knock on- or even make it not a crime
Why is it ludicrous to penalise someone for deliberately knocking on?
It's like they don't understand their own Content, Kicks and Big Hits give the most views on social media, also this trying to kill the scrum I've spoke about it before, the scrum is the most iconic movement in our sport and also keeps Props Props resulting in more space and Huge Humans which grab attention.
Bring back rucking
I agree they should focus more on the men's sports first because that's where the market is at. I'm just being honest you know the NBA is a good example why😮
What a simpleton you are.
Love the Celtics basketball tshirt on a Rugby channel 😂😅
The more rules they have brought in over 30 years, the more problems they have created and the less of a spectacle rugby has become.
"Simplifying the game" always sounds like spin for making Rugby Union more like Rugby league. FTR I don't like Rugby League, it just seems like a bunch of headless chickens running round a field to me. I love Rugby Union it has lineouts, contested scrums, tactical kicking, mauls, and my favourite thing of all, rucks 😊 I love the breakdown and I deteste when there is any attempt to speed it up or stop it from happening entirely, with the clear exception of improving safety for player's health. If you want a purely running game, go and watch Rugby League and leave the rest of us to our Code.
but rugby league isn't a pure running game. 5 times out of six they just run the ball up a few metres straight into the defensive line. it's a very constipated game
sevens on the other hand. with so few players on the field they just sprint right past each other
@@kungfutzu3779 I don't know what it is, I just don't like watching it. It has no depth from what I can see. I enjoy watching the breakdown in Rugby Union. The passing the ball back under foot in Rugby League just seems boring and pointless to me. They ripped the most important part of Rugby out of their Code.
@@owainmorgan3897 agree, league was created by people who didn't agree that rugby should be amateur so they changed a few rules to make a game distinct from rugby. when rugby went professional i naively imagined that league could be discontinued now that the point of disagreement was conceded, & all the grateful league players could finally play proper rugby, as they must long to do. i guess i was mistaken :(
It's called BEND THE RULES toss the book OWT the window
Only allow 5 subs from 8 and apply the Laws properly, eg feeding, lineouts... also, try referring all teams the sMe, not deciding who "should " win then reffing accordingly (see any game with the Islands against a bigger side).
no subs except for injury
Sorry, but why give the SH more space and protection at the base of the scrum? WR really trying to protect their golden child Dupont from making game losing mistakes like in the QF?
bring back rucking
🤣🤣 the good old days
After all is said and done - i reckon there won't be any major changes ... And the game won't significantly grow in popularity, unlike other sports. Rugby will probably become more of a 'boutique' sport over time?
A yaay for fast food rugby!
the focus on making the game more accessible to newcomers is wrong & comes at the expense of died-in-the-wool fans, the current stakeholders. it is tantamount to commercialism
Anything to hamstring the Springboks. The boks win too much, you guaranteed a rule change will follow. Law of the land.
For new ideas, take a look at how the different teams played at the last RWC. England played a bore-fest. This style should be penalized. Wallabies was horrific, playing League at a RWC. The administrators killed rugby union in Australia. These type of teams need to be banned. Springboks were excellent - displayed power, speed and clever tactics. Best was the Springbok camaraderie and team work. This must be pushed. Minimize the emphasis on individual brilliance. France played a great game. Up with French style, speed and power. All Blacks played well, but is following Australia down the drain. Infighting between incompetent administrations are costing the All Blacks. Incompetent administrators that fail to uphold the good name of rugby union, must be disciplined by World Rugby. Why does World Rugby discipline players, coaches and referees, but inept administrators do what they want? This needs to change.
Rugby Union slowly becoming a simpler game
Sounds like Rugby League to me 🙄
great vid.
Thanks legend
10 more subs needed for 8k subs!
🥳 can’t believe it
@@uggy *There you go* - 8k subs! 🥳
@@JOATMOFA 🥳 let’s goooo, motivated for 10k
I hope World Rugby will at least try to stop the abuse of steroids by the Springboks....
Rugby has become softer over the decades. I'm almost ready to let the game go and spend my time doing better things and saving money on unnecessary channels. It's almost like wokeness is within sports too, and it's turned to poo.
Remember when covid was around and everything became irrelevant. We spent our time doing things we enjoyed, and it did all of us a lot of good in so many ways.
STOP TAMPERING
The biggest change should be trying to keep all players on the field so as not to ruin games. Rugby is the only sport in history where someone getting sent off is virtually guaranteed in every game. In rugby league and american football, yellow cards are very rare let alone red.
I'm sorry!? You want organised violence without consequences then? If you carrying out a dangerous tackle you're going in the bin! Try encouraging better tackling techniques instead of complaining about needed discipline in the game. If a player cheats or in any way fails to follow the laws of the Code they disciplined. If you want a bare knuckle fight, go and watch some MMA in an octagon. Good grief!! 🙄
@@owainmorgan3897 I want a man's game
@@owainmorgan3897 they're red-carding for unavoidable accidents
@@JaemanEdwardsYou want more players getting early on set dementia as a result of concussion syndromes by the sound of things. Former Wales International Alix Popham is in his early Forties and yet he has the memory and brain capacity of a man in his Eighties. I want Rugby players to enjoy their retirement into actual old age, not die in constant pain not knowing who they are like so many American Footballers have. "A man's game" 🙄 Sounds like players bashing each other into an early grave. Wake up will you!? Dangerous tackles cause concussions and broken limbs. We know this and understand it more than ever. There is no excuse for not improving player safety!!
@@kungfutzu3779 What proportion of the problems we're discussing does that actually represent? I have no problem with the TMO analysing that and advising the Referee to change a red card to a yellow or just a warning, but a message needs to be sent out that tackling technique must change and improve. Low and controlled tackles are the answer. We have group class actions from dozens, if not hundreds, of permanently concust former players, how many more generations of ex-sportsmen and women do we have to go through before fans and others realise there is no excuse for causing permanent injuries, especially to people's brains!
storytelling , you mean bullshit. i watch rugby because im to old to play it, if i want to watch actors, ill big up my tarantino collection. for me rigby and everything else is mutually exclusive
He means the players stories and hyping up the rivalry. Won't have any game to watch if the commercial side collapses
@@jestersage8700hyping up the rivalry, im welsh, the english stole my the scotts and irish homelands, Why the F does that need hyping up.
@@jestersage8700 i don't want the players stories & hypying rivalry
@@jukeseyable because it's a game not a war. the two teams show up for each others' mutual benefit, not to fight
Story telling / marketing… boxing and ufc are the perfect examples.
You look like curwin bosch
Thanks brother I’ll take it 🔥
😅
I knew the evil of rugby leaque were coming to destroy our beautiful game, I warned the guys in 2023, some guys from that useless game without proper scrums infiltrate the real game to destroy it, TANKS FOR THE CONFIRMATION.
I couldn't have put it better myself. Thanks for that 👍🏻
Limit the bench!!
preferably to zero, except for injury
Law changes gotta stop Super Rugby is trash
🤣 how you been bro? What’s up with the Aussie sides competing at the moment
@@uggy only watching the mighty Landers g we winning the final 80-0
Ban cards its spoiling the game people pay a lot for a game give a fine for player they are being payed for games you punish a team three times when receiving a card it's old farts who make rules
Old games was better with this all this rubbish cards if a ref do not like a team he give a card
Make sure you consult Bill Beaumont, Wayne Barnes and Tom Foley....after all those are the people who have slowed the game down, so the Northern hemisphere can keep up....?
The World Rugby Mafia
Rugby is a man's sport
As opposed to Football or women playing Rugby?
@owainmorgan3897 is still a man sport
@@owainmorgan3897 man sports are better
@@juanayala4560 So, you're sexist then?
@owainmorgan3897 nope, I'm realistic