International Rugby

[tomd2103]

Please humour me as I know little about rugby and enjoy watching international tests.  I have always been led to believe that when the referee makes a decision it is accepted with respect and almost without question.  What I'm seeing now is almost every decision is being debated and not just by Owen Farrell.  Am I correct in my observations.

Yeah, it has got worse in recent times, but there is still a line there really.  Players will have a word, but refs will shut them down pretty quickly.  The likes of Owen Farrell, Johnny Sexton and Dan Biggar push it a bit further than others, but that's tens for you!!

[UK Redsox]

These days the Ref will only award one ten metre advance for dissent.

Back when I was playing, if the offender didn't shut up, the Ref would award multiple advances and march a team back fifty or sixty metres.
However, this is before there was the option of a yellow card.

[LeeB]

I agree, scrum penalties are terrible for the game at the highest level because they encourage a lot of negative play.

What I don't like about scrum penalties is that referees will generally call a penalty when a scrum is being dominated by one of the teams. Sometimes it just looks like dominance and the other team aren't actually infringing

Yep, then you have scrums that are stable and the ball could come out easily but the team keeps it in to try force a penalty because they think the ref is favouring them.

And of course props boring in or binding short (watch how often a scrum collapses and the prop on one side is bound on the shoulder or armpit).

There's plenty more as well and all combined they give teams too many options to "earn" cheap shots for 3 points. Even worse is that so many refs compound the problem with yellow cards.

I think it's this that's infuriates me watching rugby as an outsider really, it loses some of it's credibillity as a sport when games are won and lost by a man deciding someone's hips are pointing the wrong way.

[Gareth]

I agree, scrum penalties are terrible for the game at the highest level because they encourage a lot of negative play.

What I don't like about scrum penalties is that referees will generally call a penalty when a scrum is being dominated by one of the teams. Sometimes it just looks like dominance and the other team aren't actually infringing

Yep, then you have scrums that are stable and the ball could come out easily but the team keeps it in to try force a penalty because they think the ref is favouring them.

And of course props boring in or binding short (watch how often a scrum collapses and the prop on one side is bound on the shoulder or armpit).

There's plenty more as well and all combined they give teams too many options to "earn" cheap shots for 3 points. Even worse is that so many refs compound the problem with yellow cards.

I think it's this that's infuriates me watching rugby as an outsider really, it loses some of it's credibillity as a sport when games are won and lost by a man deciding someone's hips are pointing the wrong way.

And when the scrum half puts the ball in straight to the 2nd row….might as well rename hooker as middle prop

[paul_e]

Please humour me as I know little about rugby and enjoy watching international tests.  I have always been led to believe that when the referee makes a decision it is accepted with respect and almost without question.  What I'm seeing now is almost every decision is being debated and not just by Owen Farrell.  Am I correct in my observations.

It's certainly creeping into the game.

[paul_e]

I agree, scrum penalties are terrible for the game at the highest level because they encourage a lot of negative play.

What I don't like about scrum penalties is that referees will generally call a penalty when a scrum is being dominated by one of the teams. Sometimes it just looks like dominance and the other team aren't actually infringing

Yep, then you have scrums that are stable and the ball could come out easily but the team keeps it in to try force a penalty because they think the ref is favouring them.

And of course props boring in or binding short (watch how often a scrum collapses and the prop on one side is bound on the shoulder or armpit).

There's plenty more as well and all combined they give teams too many options to "earn" cheap shots for 3 points. Even worse is that so many refs compound the problem with yellow cards.

I think it's this that's infuriates me watching rugby as an outsider really, it loses some of it's credibillity as a sport when games are won and lost by a man deciding someone's hips are pointing the wrong way.

And when the scrum half puts the ball in straight to the 2nd row….might as well rename hooker as middle prop

I don't mind feeding (to an extent) as much, with the size and power professional scrums have it can be very difficult for the attacking team to hook against an opponent that are all pushing, it is a restart but there should be some advantage for the team putting in.

I honestly think the scrum is the only part of the sport that needs serious review by officials because it's not even inconsistency, it's outright lack of understanding from the refs that means whichever front row convinces him they're being cheated gets the calls and once they're on top there's loads of little tricks to make sure the ref sees what you want him to.

[tomd2103]

I agree, scrum penalties are terrible for the game at the highest level because they encourage a lot of negative play.

What I don't like about scrum penalties is that referees will generally call a penalty when a scrum is being dominated by one of the teams. Sometimes it just looks like dominance and the other team aren't actually infringing

Yep, then you have scrums that are stable and the ball could come out easily but the team keeps it in to try force a penalty because they think the ref is favouring them.

And of course props boring in or binding short (watch how often a scrum collapses and the prop on one side is bound on the shoulder or armpit).

There's plenty more as well and all combined they give teams too many options to "earn" cheap shots for 3 points. Even worse is that so many refs compound the problem with yellow cards.

I think it's this that's infuriates me watching rugby as an outsider really, it loses some of it's credibillity as a sport when games are won and lost by a man deciding someone's hips are pointing the wrong way.

And when the scrum half puts the ball in straight to the 2nd row….might as well rename hooker as middle prop

I don't mind feeding (to an extent) as much, with the size and power professional scrums have it can be very difficult for the attacking team to hook against an opponent that are all pushing, it is a restart but there should be some advantage for the team putting in.

I honestly think the scrum is the only part of the sport that needs serious review by officials because it's not even inconsistency, it's outright lack of understanding from the refs that means whichever front row convinces him they're being cheated gets the calls and once they're on top there's loads of little tricks to make sure the ref sees what you want him to.

The breakdown is the other area for me Paul, as against it seems that players are able to milk penalties without even really attempting to play the ball.  If you watch a game closely, nearly every breakdown had multiple infringements going on and Ireland and New Zealand in particular are masters of illegal breakdown play.

On the subject of the scrum, here's that last vital one from another angle

[

[paul_e]

The breakdown is the other area for me Paul, as against it seems that players are able to milk penalties without even really attempting to play the ball.  If you watch a game closely, nearly every breakdown had multiple infringements going on and Ireland and New Zealand in particular are masters of illegal breakdown play.

On the subject of the scrum, here's that last vital one from another angle

[

The breakdown is much more complicated for me, most of the time it's really well handled with refs giving players the benefit of the doubt and asking them to take a step back, etc but every now and then you get some inconsistency where certain players get away with more or less and it feels like a worse problem than it actually is.

I agree though NZ play it right on the edge and get the benefit of the doubt far too often but they're not alone. The team that actually piss me off the most around the breakdown right now are Wales because they've developed some terrible habits to slow the opposition down. The worst being how they intentionally make 'passive' tackles so the tackler is on the wrong side and then he always seems to roll clear in a way that slows things down without being obvious enough to give it as offside. Every now and then it's ok but they have whole defensive sets where every single tackle is the same and the fractions of time it creates add up to really upset the flow.

The one from Smith on Saturday (in the 80th minute) really pissed me off though, everyone except the ref knew what he was doing and it put us on the backfoot and meant they could be much more aggressive because we were outside kickable penalty range, which lead to the mistake that ended the game.

[UK Redsox]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/67206691

World Rugby has announced a new competition starting in 2026 as part of a "significant overhaul" of the men's international calendar.

The tournament will be made up of 24 teams, split into two divisions with 12 teams in each, with promotion and relegation starting from 2030.

The top division will include the 10 sides from the Six Nations and Rugby Championship, plus two unnamed others.

The World Cup will also be expanded to 24 teams from 2027.

The new competition - yet to be given an official name - will be played in July and November, replacing the current summer and autumn international windows.

It will take place in alternate years, excluding those which will include the World Cup and British and Irish Lions tours.

[nigel]

This is aimed at Paul e, who seems to be the oricle regarding up and coming players.

Given we’re losing Lawes, Marler, Cole, Care to retirement and a few others who certainly won’t be around much longer, Billy V, May, Watson, Tuilagi, Daly
Then we have the likes of Marchent and Arundel going to France
Who have we coming through that could make the step up?


For me
Forwards.
We need to look at the front row and back row.
Backs.
Scrum half, Michell is fine, but not convinced with Van Portvelt (?)
Fly half, I think we’re fine, but we need a centre partnership and wingers with a back up full back.

[PaulWinch again]

I think England need to be mega careful to ensure they don’t get into a mindset of essentially projecting forward too much to the next World Cup. Players who retire or who opt to play in France are out (although Arundell will be available), but other than that you need to evolve over time and don’t worry about 4 years time for now.

[nigel]

I think England need to be mega careful to ensure they don’t get into a mindset of essentially projecting forward too much to the next World Cup. Players who retire or who opt to play in France are out (although Arundell will be available), but other than that you need to evolve over time and don’t worry about 4 years time for now.

I agree.
Originally I was only looking at retiring players, but then Johnny May is 34, Tuilagi 33 and Anthony Watson seems to be forever injured as is Henry Slade.
Ollie Lawrence is the obvious choice to step into inside centre and partner Marchent, but that’s it.
There have been a few players who were selected, but seem to have disappeared

Unless we’re allowed to select players from outside England then I fear we could be in the sh*t.

[Gareth]

I think England need to be mega careful to ensure they don’t get into a mindset of essentially projecting forward too much to the next World Cup. Players who retire or who opt to play in France are out (although Arundell will be available), but other than that you need to evolve over time and don’t worry about 4 years time for now.

I agree.
Originally I was only looking at retiring players, but then Johnny May is 34, Tuilagi 33 and Anthony Watson seems to be forever injured as is Henry Slade.
Ollie Lawrence is the obvious choice to step into inside centre and partner Marchent, but that’s it.
There have been a few players who were selected, but seem to have disappeared

Unless we’re allowed to select players from outside England then I fear we could be in the sh*t.

Particularly if any more clubs go bump.  Quite conceivable that at the start of WC cycle that a few might head across the channel for the cash?

[PaulWinch again]

I think Marchant made the call when he was out of favour under Jones. I would be surprised if it ends up being a one year thing and then he’s back. That’d give him 3 years and he’ll probably be a better player for the experience.

[Exeter 77]

I've never really understood the refusal of the RFU to pick players who play outside England especially now three Premiership clubs have gone bust.