- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Roar Rookie
Joined April 2015
0
Views
0
Published
3.2k
Comments
Published
Comments
Let’s not get too technical- all that brings about is more whistle. I think at the moment the Refs are allowing too much time for the secondary shove to obtain the PK. Other than in position for a pushover try I think if the scrum is stationary – even briefly- the Ref should call use it and it should be used. They are doing this occasionally but the half back ignores the instruction with no consequences
WR's mooted law changes are great - but show there's a hell of a lot wrong with rugby in 2024, and that sucks
A lot of negativity about the “ product”. To me the blight on the game are delays caused by scrums plus too much box kicking. But there are plenty of high paced high skilled games. Recently there has been some good initiatives. TMO involvement has been refined, referees less pedantic at scrum time. A lot of criticism of the breakdown which is misplaced. Watch the Chiefs or the Reds when in form. Very quick ball . By the Laws still allow for a contest and skilled jacklers get rewarded. The maul is an integral part of the game, perhaps upsetting because of its use from lineout in the red zone. But some teams defend it well and what is the problem unless you believe that backline play is the end all be all.
WR's mooted law changes are great - but show there's a hell of a lot wrong with rugby in 2024, and that sucks
Well obviously then they are being coached in a manner which increases the possibility of head contact. And this is what has to change. You do not seem to grasp that players are employees and the employer and governing body has legal obligations. To continue with practices which can be changed to improve player safety is indefensible. You seem to care little for the long term health outcomes which is disturbing but I doubt either their families and eventually the Law courts will agree.
Game’s gone soft, huh? League's tough enough without dangerous incidents getting feather touch from judiciary
But Jacko he is the absolute darling of Rugby in NZ.
Razor's pursuit of 'hard bastard' Sam Whitelock reveals the ugly truth about the modern All Blacks
Brett are you Gus Gould in disguise.
Game’s gone soft, huh? League's tough enough without dangerous incidents getting feather touch from judiciary
“ Best practice protocols” maybe in theory but not in practice. It’s not an accident if tacklers approach the tackle zone upright resulting in head contact, that’s a decision made by the tackler.
Game’s gone soft, huh? League's tough enough without dangerous incidents getting feather touch from judiciary
They are employees, the NRL has a legal responsibility to minimise risk. Ask the NFL who have paid out billions in compensation. Obviously there is a risk factor but that does not excuse the NRL for not mitigating that risk by introducing rules to that end. Just because it’s sport does not exempt the NRL from taking action or being sued. And by the way the NRL have admitted they made a mistake in not charging May.
Game’s gone soft, huh? League's tough enough without dangerous incidents getting feather touch from judiciary
. You really miss the point. My comments are not about one incident, it’s about the game accepting approach to foul play has to change both for future mental health of players and avoiding litigation.
Game’s gone soft, huh? League's tough enough without dangerous incidents getting feather touch from judiciary
Great- pity about all the players past and present paying a huge price. Forgetting how incompetent governance would be ignoring the legal aspects and financial risk in not addressing the issue.
Game’s gone soft, huh? League's tough enough without dangerous incidents getting feather touch from judiciary
If you take for example the Reds this season. In previous seasons McDermott and McReight were outstanding in effort but not true of the team as a whole. This season, last weekend excepted, the effort has been outstanding. The difference, a new coach and Kiss does not appear to be one trick pony when it comes to managing players.. The modern generation is far more questioning than previous and to me the secret of being a successful coach is to get that commitment to effort from all. And I doubt one size fits all is the best approach when it comes to the individual management. We are all different and high performance people are not robots. It’s being able to analyse the individual and what’s required to bring out the best from that person. And effort does take talent, mental talent to drive yourself when fatigued. We have all played with individuals who had that as a natural gift in their make up but they were in the minority. It’s the ability to bring that aspect to the entire team that defines greatness in a coach.
More 'Scary Schmidt' than 'Sleepy Joe': Ireland tales that show the new Wallabies coach could be a polarising figure
Obviously it’s a high performance environment but player management is probably the key function of the head coach. Players are individuals emotionally and physically and one rule fits all is not that wise. There is certainly a need to change the mindset of the Wallabies and tough standards have to be set. Buts it’s the manner in which you communicate those standards that is equally important. Some like it upfront with no frills, others respond to more subtle guidance. Schmidt is an experienced coach who as we all should do would have learnt from mistakes. Interesting times ahead.
More 'Scary Schmidt' than 'Sleepy Joe': Ireland tales that show the new Wallabies coach could be a polarising figure
Or perhaps it’s about reducing brain damage that has seriously affected players. My point was rules ,be they current or in the future ,are about reduction not elimination. To suggest the rules are a failure or unnecessary as they will not bring about elimination is not valid. Obviously this incident is done and dusted. The NRL are years behind with their approach to foul play but to do nothing is just inviting huge lawsuits in the future , and that’s ignoring the moral aspect of not trying to protect players mental health.
Game’s gone soft, huh? League's tough enough without dangerous incidents getting feather touch from judiciary
Yes NZR has recently confirmed their previous policy but Robertson has publicly stated that he would like the option to select from overseas. NZR will probably stick with the policy at least in the near future.
Razor's pursuit of 'hard bastard' Sam Whitelock reveals the ugly truth about the modern All Blacks
We have road rules to mitigate against accidents. So should we abandon road rules as we still have accidents. It’s about introducing measures to mitigate and reduce the numbers not elimination. And there has been scientific evidence to confirm getting tackle height lower is helpful
Game’s gone soft, huh? League's tough enough without dangerous incidents getting feather touch from judiciary
There is obviously going to be a battle between Robertson and NZR to negate the long held policy of only picking from the NZ SR franchises. In recent times there has been a slight crack in the door with the use of so called sabbaticals so this would be another step down the road of changing the policy. There are arguments on both sides, one favouring the ABs picking the best and the other trying to ensure SR does not become a development tool for wealthy French and Japanese clubs to plunder. Australia had the Giteau rule of 3 overseas players which “ whatever he wants” Eddie was excused from. From an Aussie viewpoint I think an exception for 5 players- no more- would still be an incentive for some to remain in Aussie. It will be interesting to see what decision NZR takes. Robertson is clearly pushing hard to overturn the previous policy.
Razor's pursuit of 'hard bastard' Sam Whitelock reveals the ugly truth about the modern All Blacks
Unfortunately we have high profile commentators such as Gould who is bitterly opposed to the “ game going soft.” Some of his comments are laughable they are so out of touch when it comes to player safety but he is clearly a highly influential person who unfortunately is putting players long term health at issue by his attitude.
Game’s gone soft, huh? League's tough enough without dangerous incidents getting feather touch from judiciary
If you come in upright the chances of head contact such as this is greatly increased, it’s really very simple. “ Duty to bend” is merely a confirmation of what is basic commonsense. But for some reason people do not seem to really want to take a reasoned approach to reducing brain damage
Game’s gone soft, huh? League's tough enough without dangerous incidents getting feather touch from judiciary
Fair enough but that was not the impression I gained. Plus on that radio show he as always very negative about Rugby. I get it to a degree because most listeners were Leaguies but he did little to promote rugby.
Set up to fail: The gaping hole in Aussie Super Rugby coaching CVs - with one clear exception
Heard directly from the radio sports program with Graham Hughes. Very derogatory about NPC and basically admitted he thought it devalued SS.
Set up to fail: The gaping hole in Aussie Super Rugby coaching CVs - with one clear exception
When I heard him he was definite that the NRC was a waste of space and his big concern was that it devalued the SS. He was definite that it did nothing for player or coach development but for me it was all him about protecting his own patch.And that seemed to mirror the general attitude of the SS clubs.
Set up to fail: The gaping hole in Aussie Super Rugby coaching CVs - with one clear exception
Hmmm! Sort of proves the arrogance theory
Set up to fail: The gaping hole in Aussie Super Rugby coaching CVs - with one clear exception
Well said Mary. Unfortunately we have high profile commentators, Gus Gould being the leading protagonist, who have little regard for players safety, “ It’s a man’s game” syndrome is well entrenched in the NRL. Even the sad mental decline of former greats does little to wake them from their self induced foolishness.
NRL consistently inconsistent when it comes to punishments for head-high contact
FF and it was this Sydney Shute Shield arrogance and protecting their own patch rather than working for the overall good that held the NRC back. Most comments from players and coaches was that the NRC was a good development tool. I remember Brett Papworth who was President of Eastwood decrying the NRC but only because he feared it downgraded the importance of the SS and his club. Highly selfish, short sighted attitude.
Set up to fail: The gaping hole in Aussie Super Rugby coaching CVs - with one clear exception
Big Dave, perhaps mongrel but not work rate. Previously it was primarily McDermott and McReight basically carrying the Reds. The current speed of the ruck ball and the desperation in defence comes from commitment and work rate not mongrel. Thorn stayed on far too long as is evident from the dramatic improvement in the Reds. The team is obviously in a far happier place than under Thorn who I suspect had lost the playing group.
Set up to fail: The gaping hole in Aussie Super Rugby coaching CVs - with one clear exception
You are a happy man then.
WR's mooted law changes are great - but show there's a hell of a lot wrong with rugby in 2024, and that sucks