A couple of weeks ago, I wrote that it was my perception that NRC games were actually producing more scrum and lineout set pieces than Super Rugby.
I’d also written in comment posts since then that short of wearing out a TV remote and a mouse to pause and replay every NRC set piece, this perception was something that couldn’t be verified or quantified very easily.
Late last week, almost as if their ears where burning, the ARU released their Mid Competition Statistical Review, an analysis of scoring and game trends in the new competition up to the completion of Round 6.
A busy personal schedule coupled with The Roar launching the flash new mobile site meant that we weren’t able to do anything with this analysis on its release. However, the information included is still worth sharing, and I really don’t want to write another frustrated article about the Wallabies!
Unless I’ve stated otherwise, the figures and averages quoted do not include the four matches in Round 7, completed with NSW Country’s 26-24 win over the Sydney Stars at Leichhardt Oval.
Set piece
In the opening rounds of the NRC, and with it raining tries compared to what Australian rugby fans have become used to at this time of year, one of the criticisms of the new competition was that this wasn’t going to develop set-piece technicians within young Australian forwards.
The focus on attack prompted the belief that it would be difficult for forwards to make the transition from NRC to Super Rugby and beyond, because of the increased importance of the set piece at the higher levels.
Having watched more of the NRC than many of those making this suggestion – not necessarily their fault that they hadn’t seen as many games, to be fair – and knowing how set piece was already emerging as an important attacking element, this is where my perception of more lineouts and scrums stemmed from.
And it turns out I was right. The ARU’s report stated the following information around the set piece, to the end of Round 6:
The surprise in these figures is not that there have been more set pieces in the NRC, but that the increase on the Super Rugby average is as large as it is.
We’ve already seen that many a club rugby prop has been brought undone at scrum time at the hands of Super Rugby counterparts, and that the requirement for much improved scrummaging technique even at the NRC level is patently obvious.
The early criticism is right in one regard; the transition from NRC to Super Rugby certainly will be difficult for young props, but it’s actually because their scrummaging technique is being horribly exposed already at this level, not because there isn’t enough set piece play in NRC games.
The same applies for the lineout, too, where clean ball into rolling mauls has become the preferred method of attack from penalties. Defending teams also seem more willing to contest opposition throws in their own half, however, hoping to catch out an errant throw and receive an easy exit out of danger.
The increase in contests then places more importance on throwing accuracy and timing, as well as making the right calls, executing lifts, and clean reception. That sounds like actual lineout improvement to me.
The ARU report makes this very pertinent and accurate observation:
The high number of set piece occurrences ensures players at this important development level are practising set piece and appreciating the importance of set piece (technically and tactically) and developing a skill set so important at higher levels of the game (Super Rugby and Test matches). The competition-leading Melbourne Rising has displayed one of the dominant scrums and lineouts in the competition which has laid the foundation for their try scoring capability.
Penalties and yellow cards
The reduction in the value of penalty goals, from three points to two, has certainly had the desired effect, with only 12 penalty goals attempted in the seven rounds to date, and only eight of them successful.
My concern though, was that the reduction in the value of penalties might actually lead to more penalties. And this has proven to be the case, with the report stating:
The last dot point there is the important one, and happily, NRC referees are cracking down on teams operating on the wrong side of the laws.
In the three Round 7 games I was able to see, there were nine yellow cards handed out, with four of them coming from Angus Gardner in the Stars versus Country game alone, and all of them in the first half.
So teams are looking to score more tries, which we already knew, but defending teams looking to cynically stop them are being punished.
This might just be the biggest success of the competition, and teams and fans are being rewarded as a result, with ball-in-play times regularly pushing 40 minutes per game.
Other points and observations
Some other tidbits and stats updated from my own records, and including the four games in Round 7:
One piece of good news around the coverage of the new competition is that live streams are becoming more commonplace, along with last week’s announcement from Fox Sports that they will now cover the Brisbane City versus Canberra match on Saturday October 18, the curtain-raiser for the third Bledisloe Test.
Criticism of the NRC now has slowly wilted to the point where it’s really only about off-field issues, and mainly around marketing and promotion at the competition level; criticism that’s very hard to argue.
I had breakfast in Sydney on Saturday morning with friends who are fans of rugby, but they knew very little about the NRC.
Like many of us suspected from the outset, the product on the field has been very enjoyable, and it’s certainly filling the void of Australian rugby development. It’s just the bit that goes after fulltime and before kickoff that needs significant improvement.
Beaujolais
Guest
Either way, the stop / start nature of... 1 penalty awarded 2 kick for touch option is selected - and we wait for everyone to get back on side 3 kick for the touchline 4 wait for the lineout to form 5 throw the ball in at the lineout ...isn't that much different from: 1 penalty awarded 2 kick for a penalty goal is selected - and a delay in getting it set up 3 quick* penalty kick 4 (assuming the kick was successful, otherwise play on) wait for players to get back onside 5 restart game Either way, the game (the rugby phase play) is interrupted. The asterisk* for the "quick" penalty kick is why it makes sense to speed up the kicks. It shouldn't take a couple of minutes to kick a penalty, and the skill of kicking a goal is much the same, even if he has to kick it quicker. Ironically, we haven't seen much of this new rule because there's been so few penalty attempts. So changing this rule for the NRC speeds up the game (more rugby), without altering the substance of the rugby itself. Changing the point scores changes the substance of the game. IIRC, when these rule changes were being discussed prior to the NRC starting, the possibility of more infringements resulting from devalued penalties was raised. So yes, I believe it was a predicted outcome. I respect that you consider that this outcome is a good result. I personally don't think it is, because a situation where cards are normal in games (ie averaging a frequency greater than 1 per game) is a situation where 15v15 man rugby starts to be lost. I also fear that if these points values continue to devalue penalties, then players will increasingly be encouraged (directly or indirectly) to infringe more and more when under pressure. If so, while the extra rugby played in the NRC will be of benefit in helping club players step up to higher levels, not all this NRC practice they do will have a positive effect - when it comes to their decision-making it critical moments - when normal-value penalties and yellow cards might cost them and their team to a greater degree than these special NRC rules allow for.
Eddard
Roar Guru
It's not right to just say 'and the game continues.' In the first instance the game continues with an advantage to the team infringed against. Very little momentum in the game is lost and the interruption is short. In the 2nd instance the game stops for a couple of minutes and then resets in neutral territory with one team 3 points better for it. It's not an unintended consequence, it's a predicted one. The yellow card is being used for repeated infringements as it should. With teams taking less shots at goal, playing more rugby and getting into attacking positions more often there is naturally more infringements. But I don't think it's a crazy number. 25 penalties in a match is very common in rugby. And some of these NRC matches are getting 10 minutes or so of extra ball in play time compared to normal! It's just usually you'd end up with 10 shots at penalty goal that take up 1-2 minutes of game time each, while in the NRC you get a few more yellow cards instead. If you want the number of infringements to reduce you could simply use yellow cards earlier. Though I personally think they've got the balance about right.
Beaujolais
Guest
A team who wns a penalty and takes an attacking set piece option creates pressure, and the game continues.... A team who wins a penalty and takes 3 points creates scoreboard pressure, and the game continues.... It's a long bow to draw to suggest that this 3-point penalty value might have created the same sort of the overly defensive as the WC2007 in the NPC. The Shute Shield is played using the same laws as the World Cup, and isn't overly defensive. Quite the opposite. So why did the NPC fix something that wasn't broken? You've not noticed the prevalence of yellow cards? The number of penalties and cards being whistled-up in NRC games has been, for me, the most noticeable aspect of the NPC. It often disrupts play, making it harder for players to put more and more attacking phases together. Brett's stats show an average of 1.6 yellow cards PER MATCH. So it's now normal in the NRC for 1 or 2 players to get sent off every game. It's an unintended consequence.
Eddard
Roar Guru
Exactly, therefore teams must develop better attacking strategies to score points! It removes the 'kick it away and force penalties through defensive pressure' tactics that won the 2007 world cup and sent everyone to sleep. I think the change in point system has been a huge step forward. It was the most requested law change the ARU received from fans and it's been almost universally well received from people that watch the NRC. An increase in cynical play has not really been noticeable. I've never been convinced why a slight mistiming, like a guy coming in a little from the side or being an inch offside or whatever should be worth an uncontested, easy shot at 3 points. Especially as that shot at 3 points eats up significant game time and halts the momentum of the game, bringing it back to neutral territory afterwards like some kind of boring reset button. And most infringements are not overly cynical. They are just a result of players competing.
Brett McKay
Expert
A nice boost for NRC Rd 8, with the ARU just mentioning via Twitter that Benn Robinson & Ben Alexander (Rams), Nic White & Josh Mann-Rea (Eagles v Canberra, funnily enough), and Will Skelton (Stars) are available for selection this weekend..
cantab
Guest
Good stuff, thanks Brett.
Beaujolais
Guest
As the Wallabies have shown this year, you can get into all the attacking positions you like... and you can even find yourself a man up after Sir Rutchie gets carded (who saw that coming?)... but all that makes no difference to the outcome without converting that attacking pressure into points on the scoreboard. What's more, under NRC rules with devalued penalties, a team with a strong lineout and / or scrum could back itself to infringe, get penalised, and then win possession back at the next set piece contest. If teams are infringing in normal rugby games where penalties are worth 3 points, then devaluing penalties for the NRC only makes infringements cheaper. I agreed with In Brief that penalties are not what rugby is about. Neither are infringements. While the NRC may have fewer penalties, it clearly has more infringements. I don't watch a match hoping to see players not rolling away, players playing the ball off their feet, or players coming in from the side, etc... The NRC was 2 steps forwards, but these points changes (and lack of promotion etc...) were 1 step back. The comp is still heading in the right direction though, and it has great potential for improvement.
Brett McKay
Expert
They are Cantab. This Saturday there's three games, one at 2:30 and the other two at 3pm. Also, the following Saturday, Fox are showing the Brisbane City-Canberra game that is the curtain-raiser for Bledisloe 3...
Brett McKay
Expert
Worlds, someone like Sean McMahon would have to be a smokey for the EOYT, I'd reckon. Maybe Kyle Godwin, too, though he's obviously known. I'm not sure about Timani or Gray just yet, but I'd expect those guys to see more Super Rugby time next year..
Brett McKay
Expert
To be fair John, the ABC have been paid by the WAFL, VFL, Sydney rugby, etc to broadcast games for a number of years. Now it seems the budget cuts are hitting the production as well, which is a massive shame..
Brett McKay
Expert
Haha! Best explanation yet, Bakkies...
cantab
Guest
Re TV times. Post NRL/AFL it should switch to Saturday games.
Eddard
Roar Guru
One thing you're ignoring is that after a penalty goal the ball goes back to neutral territory from a kick off or 22 restart. The next several minutes may then be played between the 22's, where there is less pressure on whoever is defending and less incentive to infringe to slow down the ball etc. On the other hand, when a team kicks the ball for a lineout they're often putting themselves in a very attacking position, and thus the defence is more likely to give away more penalties under pressure. I don't think the change in point system has made players any more cynical. When you have the chance of conceding 3 rather than 7, players still look to concede the 3.. The difference IMO is that now the penalty goal is less valuable there is more rugby being played in the business ends of the field. And if you think teams would rather concede a yellow card than an attempt at 3 point penalty goal you're mistaken.
Johnno
Guest
agreed nos, some croissants after a big night yummy.
Beaujolais
Guest
Firstly I'm certainly not having a go at any refs, and apologies if it came out that way. Rather, it's more that a ref's threshold for what constitutes "repeated infringements" may well be different from ref to ref. So, for a player who is conciously playing the ball in the ruck while not being on his feet - and not for the first time that particular match - is gamboling that the ref may or may not card him. If it helps prevent a try scored against his team, why not gambol? I certainly agree that more rugby = more stats, and that penalty goals aren't the point of the game. The whole point of penalties is to discourage infringements. Lineout or scrum options aren't a great discouragement because there's no immediate point reward, and these contests can still be defended. A card is the same - it carries no scoreboard result, and 14 men can defend smartly for 10 minutes and emerge unscathed. Given that players attitudes in Shute Shield rugby show a strong desire to play rugby rather than just practise goal-kicking, I think the point changes for the NRC were a step to far. Other NRC rule changes that speed up the game without altering the substance of the game are good though. More rugby is good!
Mike
Guest
We might be "out of our league" but at least our strip doesn't look like a UNO card :P
bigbaz
Roar Guru
Yes, it is bizarre, Bizzarre. Our clubs' juniors spend a copious amount of time training on scrums and are clearly dominate in our comp. At times I am fearful of what we could do to opposing sides but no one else seems to want to put the time into this wonderful art. Our boys see their scrum as a point of pride.
Mike
Guest
Interesting point bigbaz
Mike
Guest
"Still think the NRC is a way off the intensity and skill of the ITM cup." I'd be very surprised if that wasn't the case, John. The gap between clubbies and S15 players is pretty apparent in the first season of NRC. I expect it will narrow as this comp gets established.
Mike
Guest
About the same as ITM and Currie Cups, going by your description... :)