I see the problem, the difference between us is I played, hence I have an intimate understanding and appreciation of the game as opposed to sitting in the stands expecting to be entertained like it was a Harlem Globetrotters match.

Your condecending attitude also detracts from your posts…Repeat after me…childish!

Rugby, contrary to your assertion, is not about “running”, it’s about 15 men on either side competing for possession of the ball and attempting to score more points than the opposition.

On the scoring, my intention would be to use the yellow card for any repeat infringements to prevent the increase in such infringements. However, perhaps we have a 3 point conversion, leave the penalty at 3 points but reduce the FG to 2 points. I certainly wouldn’t be against reducing it to 1 as you have outlined. The fact that league do this does not mean union can’t follow suit. In any business, if there’s a good system being used by someone else, then you would be crazy not to adopt it if available.

At any rate, to see less shots for penalties or field goals would be a step in the right direction for my mind.

My main idea is to change the decision making process for a team to make it worth their while in chancing their arm and keeping the ball in hand more.

Your attempt at humour is it DP?

Perhaps just introducing the 8 point try and reducing field goals may have the desired effect. As I say, trial and error. At the moment, however, I think the vast majority would like to see more running rugby and less kicking for goal. Please yourself, of course your entitled to your opinion but once the problem of ‘increased infringing’ is effectively dealt with, you are left with a team making decisions based on scoring tries rather than kicking goals!

Interesting points and there were certainly a number of positives from individuals in the tour. In hindsight a draw against Ireland may actually be a notable result (they were undefeated in 2009!) However the facts remain we had enough chances to win that match…. And no comment about the Scotland game (except we’d win by 30 points 9/10 times…)

The scoring structure is always a fascinating discussion.
Your suggestion about increasing conversions and decreasing penalties has merit. However I’d remind everyone that the margin between a converted try (or goal as they traditionally called it) and a penalty is 7-3=4. In league is is the same – 6-2 =4. Yet the emphasis in league is almost always to go for the try, not take the kick. That’s probably partly due to the fact it is easier to score when you get in the red zone in league, or at least maintian the pressure by getting a line drop. There needs to be a major disincentive to give away penalties especially in the defensive areas – maybe you increase the penalty value to really discourage it. (10 points for a penalty might keep hands out of rucks and people onside! I’m being a little silly there…
Or preferably discourage miscreants by more regular use of the yellow card?

One scoring change I’d definitely suggest – stop field goals from ‘accumulating’ points to be a means of splitting a score – so 1 point not 3. I know it’s copying league but it would be better if they are only used to break a deadlock or establish a buffer.

Interested to read any thoughts on this..

JB

“I continue to be a critic of the scoring system and remain a strong advocate of a conversion being increased to 3 points whilst a penalty and field goal are reduced to 2.”
I don’t know how many times I have to point this out: Increasing the relative worth of a converted try will only mean that players will infringe MORE in an attempt to not give away seven eight points rather than three two. It will worsen the current situation. It’s called the law of unintended outcomes.