OT - Rugby World Cup

oleg · #1 November 20th, 2003, 04:42 PM

Sure, the one and the only objective is to win the game. Nobody argues with it. But may be we should consider some changes to the rules to make game more exciting ? I have nothing against drop-goals, it is a pleuforia of penalties I don't like. Scoring points should be something more challenging than kikick the ball after some minor infringement in the scrum !! Why not move the scrum 5 yards forward, something akin to American football rules ? Or award more free kicks ? It is just a profanity of the game when all the scoring is due to referee desisions and not by teams. Just MHO.

Growltigger · #2 November 21st, 2003, 11:07 AM

I dont disagree with you Oleg but I think penalty decisions like moving the scrum forward 5 yards will favour those teams with powerful scrums.

My personal view is that you need the penalty kick in order to incentivise teams not to foul, but what you should do, IMHO, is make tries worth a lot more than 5 points, maybe 8 or 9 points and conVersion worth 3.

Tries then become paramount, and you would need an awful lot of infringements to make it match.

I think drop goals should be worth 4 points as having played the game for years, I know how damn hard they are to do, when the opposing team is doing its best to slam you down. Kicking straight under that sort of pressure is TOUGH with a capital OUCH

oleg · #3 November 21st, 2003, 03:34 PM

Well, but decreasing the penalty or increasing try score will have exactly the opposite effect - bigger insentive to foul to stop the try ! But if the foul will NOT remove the possiblity of try but make it even more likely, that may work. That why I like the idea of moving the ball.

Growltigger · #4 November 21st, 2003, 05:21 PM

Oleg, that is actually not a bad idea. If you say that within the 22 line, any penalty gives the attacking side the option of the penalty or a scrum 5 yards forward from where the penalty occurred, then you probably would find more teams going for the try and the bigger points.

Nice idea, has anyone got Clive Woodward's email address?

oleg · #5 November 22nd, 2003, 06:12 PM

What a game !!!!
I eat my words about England being boring.

In fact been adventurios almost cost a title ! 3 points up, 3 minutes to go, why not keep the ball and kill the time ? By no, Johny does for glory

It turns up well in the end though

gravey101 · #6 November 22nd, 2003, 07:05 PM

yes, it was a good game. England let the Aussies back in in the second half through mistakes rather than poor play in general. I still can;t work out what that penalty was for at the end of normal time...

oleg · #7 November 22nd, 2003, 07:17 PM

I am even more puzzled why referee took the ball out the hand of Wallabies just before that ! Sure, the guy was down but Jessus Christ !!! how could anyone think this way - "I was pushed to the ground and instead of pushing up I must play dead and release the ball" That ruling was against the very human nature and as such should promote SOME change in the rules. If I was Aussie, I would justifiably complain of Referee bias. It might be right according to rules but IMHO a blow to the very concept of sport.

All being said, England was far better team. Just MHO again