Rugby league vs rugby union is like checkers vs chess
Roar Pro
By Ian from NZ, 4 Jun 2008 The Crowd is a Roar Pro
Rugby union is like chess and rugby league is like checkers. Checkers is a game where the piece does the same thing. And rugby league is a game where all the players do the same thing.
They take the ball up. On the tackle, they put the ball through their legs and start again.
Rugby league scrums are golden oldie scrums, so that doesn’t count. There are no line-outs or malls.
Sure, running the ball up has a different degree on demand between the forward and backs, but not much.
To disallow one team having all the possession, there is a six tackle count, as the game does not allow more contests for possession to change hands.
Rugby league players, if put together in a police line-up, would all look the same physical design.
Chess, on the other hand, is a game where the piece does many different things.
The array of very different abilities of each chess piece allows the chess player to be very creative when it comes down to tactics. Chess has more structure than checkers, just as union has more structure than league.
And it should remain so.
Rugby union can be broken down into combinations: frontrow, backrow, loose forwards, the back of scrum, centre-field, back three.
These combinations perform as units within the structured game of rugby, performing specialised roles, with specific skills and body shape.
Fracturing the demand for a player with these specialised skills is a move away from the structured (chess) game and a move towards a more generic player (checkers). The generic player will be selected on his ability to multi-task rather than perform a specialised role (like having 15 loose forwards).
Rugby has been able to live within a fine balance of structured (scrums, malls, kick offs, 22 dropouts, full line-outs) and non-structured play (phase play, quick taps, quick lineouts).
The operative word is ‘balance’, and all rule changes should be measured on how they keep this very fine balance (see my comments on ELVs) .
Balance is critical, as it allows a fair chance for the rugby player’s specialised skill (prop, half back, 2nd 5/8, and so on) to be exercised within the game’s many contests (frontrow contests, mid-field contests, tall timber line-out contests, speedster wing contests, and back of the scrum contests).
Non-structured play reduces the fair chance of these type of contests occurring within a game as the play in a one-on-one contest is random and not structured.
If rugby administrators break the rule that ‘rugby is like chess’, they will have a hybrid game that is somewhere between checkers (union) and chess (league).
A hybrid game will see rugby lose its hard won identity, and the marketing boys will tell you that to have a good brand, you need a distinctive point of difference from the competition.
The honest intention to attract TV revenues from the temporary fan (those that watch rugby league, Australian Rules, American football, and football) is commendable, but not at the expense of the ‘true rugby fan’.
Rule changes and playing times suitable for TV viewing are not always in the best interest of the rugby fan. Administrators must protect the base that got the game from 1901 to 2008.
Forwards should be forwards, and backs should be backs. Rugby must remain game for fatties, skinnies, tall and short players!
Any thing else is not the rugby game that I fell for when I was a young fella watching the All Blacks win and lose. If I my views are in the minority, then I will be another number in the statistic titled ‘Declining attendance’.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby Union articles
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (201)
- Will South African rugby force a Super 21 by 2018? (173)
- The real story of how John O’Neill turned Manchester City down (70)
- Dan Parks and the unsolved questions of expat rugby (65)
- Australian teams at Super disadvantage (58)
- Pocock set to be named new Force skipper (56)
- Can the ‘Tahs win the battle after losing the Waugh? (51)
- France turns to Parra and Trinh-Duc
- Rebels look to lift for formidable Blues in rugby trial
- Mr Fix-It Lucas wants to nail down No.10
- Force roost loses ‘Mother Hen’ Sharpe
- Waratahs romp to 83-5 trial win over Samoa A (2)
- Quade Cooper’s return to the Reds goes up a gear
- Chiefs continue to wait for SBW (7)
- Wales show Southern Hemisphere how to play running rugby (29)
- What opening matches of Six Nations taught us (19)
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (202)
- Clinical Chiefs cost rusty Rebels in Corio (9)
- Six Nations shows rugby is a parochial game at heart (5)
- Goose’s Super Rugby up-and-comer XV for 2012 (29)
- What does the future hold for the Six Nations (50)
- Explore:
Treizistes said | June 4th 2008 @ 3:49am | Report comment
My god, that’s all, my god.
Shakes head.
swifty said | June 4th 2008 @ 4:58am | Report comment
Treizistes,
are there more than one of you? Why the plural?
sheek said | June 4th 2008 @ 7:12am | Report comment
Gee Ian, you’re going for the jugular!
This is going to be an interesting ride……….
Matt said | June 4th 2008 @ 8:55am | Report comment
As said before also Ian, mobile and skillful forwards are not a product of the ELV’s. They have been coming along over the last 10 years.
All you are seeing is more Queens on the cheesboard. Pieces that can go anywhere and do anything.
Do you have the same problem with Scrum Halves, 5/8ths and Midfield backs who are the size of forwards and who are like another loosie at ruck time? No one seemed to have a problem with Umaga making breakdown turnovers or with Carter being a rock on defense.
The game has evolved from the days of Grant Fox to Andrew Mehrtens to Dan Carter. Players are becoming more rounded on the field. Likewise prop forwards are becoming taller, more mobile and more skillful. Why should they remain slow and cumbersome, with limited skill sets for pushing in scrums and mauls. They are still better than other players at performing these tasks, these tasks are still important in the game, so these players are not going to go away.
Ian in NZ said | June 4th 2008 @ 9:24am | Report comment
..”All you are seeing is more Queens on the cheesboard. Pieces that can go anywhere and do anything.”..
I guess thats my point exactly, just like a checker piece, all players do the same thing. So the special skills of a lesser piece has been lost for ever, the ROOK for example, the queen cant do that move. So why select the piece ( or the player) for that special skill any more. As the utility skills are more important than the specialised skills. Thats sad for rugby union.
Mac said | June 4th 2008 @ 9:42am | Report comment
That is one of the funniest posts I have ever read in my entire life.
You must be a comedian right?
Peter K said | June 4th 2008 @ 9:43am | Report comment
Ian from NZ
IMO you are correct about a few things in your post.
Rugby is more complex and a lot more interering than league.
The variety of the game is very important, as is balance.
You are spot on that a vital ingredient of rugby is that it is a contest for the ball at all phases.
Where I see the balance is wrong in the current game is that it favours defence too much. Winning tactics revolve around kicking for territory, and kicking penalty / drop goals. Hence the current game actually lacks variety and balance, the one skill of kicking dominates far too much. The ELV’s are trying to address these issues IMO.
Remember rugby in the 70′s and 80′s was with a leather ball that was very hard to kick especially in the wet. There was actually more interesting, varied running than now where you can kick a penalty or drop goal from 60 metres out, where you kick for territory 70 metres plus. There is a lack of balance and a lack of a true contest for the ball when kicking dominates.
Part of your post is non sequitur i.e. does not follow. Rugby is a varied, multi-facted game. Hence the BEST players must be able to perform both their own specialised skils (scrumaging, lineouts, kicking, etc) really well AND the common shared tasks i.e. tackling, running, passing, clearing out of rucks etc. Unless you advocate that a tight forward should not be able to pass the ball, or offload, or even run the ball alah a strong pick and drive, or backs should not clear out at rucks or try and steal the ball instead wave their hands around calling for forwards to help alah Goerge Gregan.
So given given you have the innate qualities / skills for you specialist position what will raise a professional player above their contempories? In a lot of cases what they bring to these other skills. So you will see faster forwards being prefered, and bigger backs. A really fast back who weighs 100+ kg and tackles hard will be prefered over a small really fast back.
Ian in NZ said | June 4th 2008 @ 10:02am | Report comment
Peter K…”Winning tactics revolve around kicking for territory, and kicking penalty / drop goals. Hence the current game actually lacks variety and balance, the one skill of kicking dominates far too much. The ELV’s are trying to address these issues IMO.”…
EVL rugby has more kicking than ever, the minutes played relating to the kicking force back game must be double or triple what it was 5 years ago. ELV rugby is a friend to more kick and chase than ever before.
TembaVJ said | June 4th 2008 @ 10:16am | Report comment
I agree with Ian on many things, Rugby is more complex hence it is more complex to explain to friend who has not seen the game before, this is why I love it. Seeing as this is a rant about the ELV’s (which I have come round to since the start of the S14) I will add my cents.
I said from the start they should not implement all the rules at once, now they just have, this is not necessary, the game is not in trouble, this is a greedy “grab as much as you can” attempt. Some of the rule are great other not so great, the rugby world is very big and I think everyone should have a say.
WHY IN GODS NAME ARE YOU ALLOWED TO COLLAPSE THE MALL?!!!!!!
This does not help the game in anyway, pro ELV or not, please explain to me how this will add to the game without taking away?
The IRB is screwing this up big time and causing a massive divide in the rugby world and why?
Take your time introduce Laws over time, the world is not going to end in 2 years, this is not a revolution and the IRB does not represent the entire rugby community and there for not doing their job.
Peter K said | June 4th 2008 @ 10:29am | Report comment
Ian
Yes there may be more kick and chase under ELV’s. However there is no doubt that there is less penalty goals kicked whcih means teams have to try and score tries. Also whilst there is more kick and chase kicking there are less kicks out for a line-out, mainly due to the kicking out of the 22 change. I would rather a kick keeping it in play, or an attempt at running it back than a passing inside the 22 and kicking to touch which is so negative.
Remember a kick (in general play) is only as good as the chase, and the receiving team has choice to run it. I have more issue with penalty goals, drop goals and kicking out to avoid a confrontation / contest than I do a kick and chase.
Every change has some negatives along with pluses. With the ELV’s as played in S14 I believe the pluses easily outweigh the minuses.
The global rules are another matter entirely.
Being able to pull down a maul is dangerous and will eliminate the maul as being a useful attacking tool. This is a negative change and removes variety. The game is poorer for this. Not having mauls removes a significant point of difference, and removes a valid method to suck in forwards from the defensive line. Then we do shift to rugby lite (league) far far too much.