It’s time to commit to running rugby again
Roar Guru
By Rickety Knees, 6 Aug 2009 Rickety Knees is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- All Blacks, goal kicking, IRB, Morne Steyne, Rugby Union, Springboks
More and more, rugby is competing with other sports for a slice of television’s revenue pie. Whether the dottering old fools of the IRB (who awarded New Zealand the next RWC because they hadn’t forgotten Japan’s involvement in WW2) care to admit that is an entirely different matter.
Our Northern Hemisphere cousins effectively killed the ELVs with a misinformation campaign that at times defied belief. But they got away with it and it delivered their desired result – the return to kickathon rugby.
The abandonment of ELVs has seen rugby become a goal-kicking spectacle once more.
Witness the last Test between the All Blacks and the Springboks, with Morne Steyne kicking goals from everywhere to single-handedly win the game.
Match results have returned once more to the whim of a referee and destroyed the game as a spectacle.
As a player, nothing irritated more than losing a match where we had scored more tries but our goal-kicker had left his boots at home. Somehow it felt as if an injustice had been done.
Conversely, winning by penalties when the opposition had scored more tries equally did not feel quite right.
It is time to think outside of the square.
To return to running rugby, I believe that it is time to stop kicks at goal from penalties. Couple this with field goals being reduced to one point, this will see a quick return to running rugby.
This can be achieved without changing the rules of the game, whilst minimising the referee’s impact on results.
Using this method will see the team scoring the most tries winning the game. Where tries are even, conversions will make the difference, and where tries and conversions are equal, it will then come down to a one point field goal to decide the game.
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? (198)
- Will South African rugby force a Super 21 by 2018? (172)
- Brumbies 2012: New coach, new players, new attitude (128)
- Dan Parks and the unsolved questions of expat rugby (61)
- Pocock set to be named new Force skipper (56)
- Can the ‘Tahs win the battle after losing the Waugh? (51)
- What does the future hold for the Six Nations (50)
- Wales show Southern Hemisphere how to play running rugby (28)
- What opening matches of Six Nations taught us (18)
- Will Super Rugby crowds continue their slide? (201)
- 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:
- All Blacks, goal kicking, IRB, Morne Steyne, Rugby Union, Springboks
pothale said | August 6th 2009 @ 4:26am | Report comment
if only SH teams would stop playing penalty kick-fests and play good ball in hand rugby like we do in the NH, things would be ok. Try stop being penalised so much and play by the rules – you’ll be surprised at the difference it makes.
Who Needs Melon said | August 6th 2009 @ 1:51pm | Report comment
Cheeky bugger. I’ll pay that.
Knives Out said | August 6th 2009 @ 4:34am | Report comment
What on earth is this article about? I think rugby is wasted on you Australians, Rickety. Read up on your history.
Who Needs Melon said | August 6th 2009 @ 1:59pm | Report comment
But I’m NOT going to pay this.
I assume it’s the dig at NH rugby you are objecting to? Are you going to explain that NH rugby teams have a much richer history of running rugby over the past few decades? Or have you just forgotten to take your cranky pills again?
Most of us here having been watching the game avidly for the past few decades at least and are well WELL aware of Australian rugby history over this period of time if not a lot longer.
Knives Out said | August 6th 2009 @ 9:50pm | Report comment
What I am objecting to is the entire article. It’s completely innacurate and verges on the silly. Rugby is a complicated, technical sport.
1. The ELVs were laughable from conception to their management.
2. There has never been a wonderful period of ‘running rugby’ that we can go back to.
3. SA has always kicked so why the current uproar?
‘Conversely, winning by penalties when the opposition had scored more tries equally did not feel quite right.’
Is this guy for real? Are you for real, Melon? This is knee-jerk nonsense.
Who Needs Melon said | August 7th 2009 @ 2:26pm | Report comment
KO,
With regards to the article being completely inaccurate, it’s not. I think too much of a causal relationship has been drawn betwen the ELVs and playing styles in recent times. So I can see a valid argument with statements like “The abandonment of ELVs has seen rugby become a goal-kicking spectacle once more”.
But this statement seems to be true, doesn’t it?
“Match results have returned once more to the whim of a referee and destroyed the game as a spectacle”.
And most of the rest of the article is opinion so how can you say ita is inaccurate. If RK says that, when he was a player, “winning by penalties when the opposition had scored more tries equally did not feel quite right”. How can you say that is inaccurate.
Simiarly if he feels teams would do better by going for tries more often and penalties less, how can you say this is “inaccurate”.
I can (with effort) respect your right to call another mans opinions “silly” but others may not agree and I can’t see how you can call the “entire article” “completely inaccurate”.
I do sympathise with your view that some might be looking back with rose-tinted glasses at halcyon days when Randwick rules club rugby, the early days of the Brumbies and when Australia did well with the like of the Ellas, Campese and co.
And I do agree that changing the number of points awarded for penalties, conversions or tries would be “knee-jerk nonsense”… but that’s not what RK was advocating.
Knives Out said | August 7th 2009 @ 10:45pm | Report comment
WNM,
“The abandonment of ELVs has seen rugby become a goal-kicking spectacle once more”.
Surely this is a casual-esque comment that you refer to. In any case, the ELVs did not negate the value of goal kicking, and it’s a fallacy to suggest that tries won matched. The rugby mentality did not change under the ELVs, the opposite occurred and NZ and Australia became more conservative.
“Match results have returned once more to the whim of a referee and destroyed the game as a spectacle”.
This has always been true. The ELVs did not ease the burden of the referee.
I do agree with your ‘opinion can’t be innacurate’ sentiment to an extent, but only to an extent – for example, I think it’s fair to say that rugby union has never really had an extended period of golden runnign rugby. Regardles, I should have been more explicit in what I considered innacurate.
hobart said | August 6th 2009 @ 7:44am | Report comment
Good post Rickety. All too often the team awarded a penalty figures they may as well have a shot because as long as the ball doesn’t fall short or bounce off the posts they get it back anyway at the restart. Or, of course, the team could elect to kick to touch with the odds high on winning their own throw. To promote more running rugby, a new rule might state that if the kick misses, the opposing team gets a scrum feed at the halfway line.
Does that mean that the sinned-against team might miss out on three points? Sure it does. But they had their chance to take it, or they took their chance and missed. It’s true that such a rule wouldn’t have affected the Boks last Saturday, but not all the major or minor teams in the world have kickers as good as Steyn.
But any rule change means a rule change, and we know how that’s regarded. Like a bad case of beri-beri.
hobart said | August 6th 2009 @ 7:48am | Report comment
(Cont’d) But any rule change means a rule change, and we know how that’s regarded.
Bill said | August 6th 2009 @ 12:53pm | Report comment
I don’t mind penalties being awarded especially for cynical plays by the defensive team trying to prevent tries being scored. However, I believe the point scoring needs to be looked at. League have got it right – penalties worth 2 points and field goals 1 point. Bump up tries to 6 points each.
Dogs Of War said | August 6th 2009 @ 1:11pm | Report comment
Just making penalties worth 2 points, would make enough difference. 7 points potentially for a try, would mean you need to kick 4 penalties, rather than 3, or even 2 converted tries, means 8 penalties, rather than 5, to highlight what a big change it would be.
Teams would then have a much bigger decision to make, kick for field position and go for the try, or just chip away and take the 2 points on offer.
Jameswm said | August 6th 2009 @ 1:08pm | Report comment
I’ve always said penalties should be worth less outside the 22. A dodgy scrum binding penalty 45m out and 3 points? That’s just silly.
ohtani's jacket, said | August 6th 2009 @ 1:14pm | Report comment
That is a great point. In fact, how about no kicks at goal outside the 22?
Jameswm said | August 6th 2009 @ 1:29pm | Report comment
No Dogs – making all penalties worth 2 points would only encourage cynical play close to your own line. When a team gives away a penalty in the red zone, it is more significant than a technical one further out. They were forced to give away a penalty under pressure.
Having said that penalties for foul play should always be worth 3.
And field goals should be worth 1, making them the deadlock breaker they should be.
And our coaches should focus more on catch pass skill from a younger age, though of course that’s for a different thread.
Dogs Of War said | August 6th 2009 @ 1:33pm | Report comment
“No Dogs – making all penalties worth 2 points would only encourage cynical play close to your own line.” – Thats what red and yellow cards are for!
Rickety Knees said | August 6th 2009 @ 1:42pm | Report comment
Sorry guys – that is what penalty tries are all about
TommyM said | August 6th 2009 @ 3:05pm | Report comment
I agree that penalties goals should be worth 2 points (I think perhaps 2 points for drop goals as well as this is still a significant drop).
The other thing I think should be considered to stop the endless pattern of mid-field bombs that has evolved is making kicks markable in a team’s own HALF instead of just the 22. This would make said bombs a high risk alternative to keeping the ball in hand.
AndyS said | August 6th 2009 @ 3:40pm | Report comment
For mine:
- Penalties remain 3 pts
- Drop goals reduced to two points (consistent with a conversion)
- In both cases, converted or not, the restart is from halfway…they were attempts at goal.
TommyM said | August 6th 2009 @ 3:44pm | Report comment
Don’t you think a restart on halfway is a bit harsh for a team that has been awarded a legitimate penalty and then missed it??
AndyS said | August 6th 2009 @ 3:48pm | Report comment
They didn’t have to choose the posts – if they aren’t confident, there is always the tap, scrum or line-out…