Anarchy at the breakdown

[Dickie E]

I am lucky enough to be able to watch in both hemispheres and I think a lot of the comments on this thread are relating to the new laws in the NH this year and the way that they are affecting the game.

Which laws specifically and in what ways are they affecting the game?

 

[Dickie E]

But that is the trouble. By allowing the attacking side to get away with murder at the breakdown the contest is removed and the game is not entertaining.

as a rule of thumb I see current laws designed for the ball carrying team to maintain possession at the breakdown about 90% of the time.

That is a good thing because much less than that and the ball carrying team will be disinclined to take the ball into contact and we end with aerial ping pong ... which would be a bad thing (IMO of course).

 

[damo]

as a rule of thumb I see current laws designed for the ball carrying team to maintain possession at the breakdown about 90% of the time.

That is a good thing because much less than that and the ball carrying team will be disinclined to take the ball into contact and we end with aerial ping pong ... which would be a bad thing (IMO of course).

I agree with that in general.

I'd also add that teams with well organised and skillful defences can reduce that 90% figure markedly, but more importantly can reduce the quality of the ball that the attacking team can maintain.

Holding onto the ball for multiple phase after phase is hugely overrated as an attacking strategy.

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

So which of those is the real "entertainment" ?

Lights going out and a kick in the balls?

 

[didds]

In Scotland and Wales, the introduction of regions did nothing for crowds.

... except maybe take them away from the existing and historical clubs to watch the regional side...

didds

 

[Pegleg]

... except maybe take them away from the existing and historical clubs to watch the regional side...

didds

It has not achieve that either. It has just dissolusioned thousands and created division.

 

[Camquin]

I do not have good figures for attendance in scottish or welsh club competitions before and after the introduction of the pro-regions.
But the impression is numbers aresignificantly down in the clubs.



Glasgow seem to get 7,000 per game - limited by the ground size.
Edinburgh averaged 5,000 - but 21,000 watched the Boxing Day derby with Glasgow, and the average for other games was around 3,000.

In Wales Ospreys do best with a low of 6,500 and Dragons worst with a high of 6,700 in the Pro14 and just over 7,000 in Europe.

 

[Camquin]

This article
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/business/business-news/welsh-sport-rich-list-biggest-13827089
makes interesting reading.

 

[Jolly Roger]

Reagarding the Pro game in Scotland:

Glasgow have created a real identity for themselves and turned Scotstoun into a fortress with outstanding atmosphere. This has been fantastic for developing interest in the game in the West which has traditionally been football heartland.
Sadly, Edinburgh struggled to generate a loyal following whilst playing at Murrayfield Stadium less than 10% full. However, a lot of work has been done in the past 18 months and the move to Myreside seems to be working in so far as crowds are up and greater atmosphere generated. The arrival of Richard Cockerell as head coach has also done much to enhance the sense of optimism in the Capital.

I don’t have stats relating to club attendance but my own experience is that both spectator and player numbers are down in the adult game but increased in the minis. Youth rugby isn’t very much club dependent, although the creation of leagues covering all youth age groups has generated a focus for clubs.

A lot of emphasis is being placed by the SRU on the women’s game. Success is very much club dependent with some allocating significant effort and resource to the girls and ladies, whilst others seem to be more challenged in growing the women’s game. As an aside, I referred a couple of women’s matches at the end of last season as well as a 7s tournament. I was very impressed by the handling skills, commitment and sportsmanship, finding it a very enjoyable experience - yes I was surprised but recommend anyone who has not yet got involved with the girls game as there were some wonderful moments of good humour and banter.

That is my impression, anyway.

 

[Jolly Roger]

In reply to Dickie E, You asked “Which laws in particular?”

The OP was in relation to the new law trials in NH as from 01 Aug 17 see link: http://laws.worldrugby.org/?domain=20

In particular those affecting the breakdown: tackler having to move round to his own side of the tackle before challenging for the ball, also the ruck being formed as soon as one person from either side arrive. Specifically the way these laws are affecting the game and the way these and other breakdown laws are being refereed (or not).

They will be in force in SH from 01 Jan 18.

 

[Phil E]

https://www.premiershiprugby.com/ne...emiership-rugby-attendances-and-tv-audiences/

 

[Jolly Roger]

Interesting article Phil E but it is dated 4 January 2017 so relates to last season i.e. before the set of new laws affecting breakdown were introduced.

 

[Phil E]

Interesting article Phil E but it is dated 4 January 2017 so relates to last season i.e. before the set of new laws affecting breakdown were introduced.

You can use the drop down menu top left to change seasons here.

http://rd.premiershiprugby.com/stats/attendance.php#3jiOBFiwXieJ9pd7.97

 

[thepercy]

I don;t perceive so - not in England at least. Grass roots participation is at risk however.

Meanwhile... attendances at Basketball matches in the States is high I believe. proof that there is a demographic that will pay to watch anything.

didds

Interestingly, Basketball does not have an issue in using different rule books between grassroots, US Professional, and International. Different 3 point arcs, different number of allowed fouls, different shaped lanes, length and number of periods, different shot clocks, continuation (their version of advantage), and number of steps that can be taken without dribbling.

And no one cares about the differences.

 

[Pegleg]

as a rule of thumb I see current laws designed for the ball carrying team to maintain possession at the breakdown about 90% of the time.

That is a good thing because much less than that and the ball carrying team will be disinclined to take the ball into contact and we end with aerial ping pong ... which would be a bad thing (IMO of course).

Alternatively sides could look for spaces rather than contact.

 

[oddshapedball]

I was watching Falcons v Tigers on Sunday. Tigers fully deserved the win but the number of times Mr Cole went off his feet at the breakdown was ridculous. I counted 3 times where he was basically in a press up position over the ball.

It's okay to keep the game open but last time I checked Contest for Possession was still a Principle of Play.

 

[Dickie E]

In reply to Dickie E, You asked “Which laws in particular?”

The OP was in relation to the new law trials in NH as from 01 Aug 17 see link: http://laws.worldrugby.org/?domain=20

In particular those affecting the breakdown: tackler having to move round to his own side of the tackle before challenging for the ball, also the ruck being formed as soon as one person from either side arrive. Specifically the way these laws are affecting the game and the way these and other breakdown laws are being refereed (or not).

They will be in force in SH from 01 Jan 18.

OK & thanks for heads up. I'm quite surprised that what I expected to be minor law tweaks have had a more profound effect.

 

[Dickie E]

Alternatively sides could look for spaces rather than contact.

Yes, that's the counter argument. Make it easier for defenders to win the breakdown => more defenders competing at breakdown => more space out wide

 

[Jolly Roger]

Dickie E - I agree entirely, also keep the forwards competing and running rather than standing and blocking results in different physical needs, perhaps reducing the obsession with size and strength resulting in a more fluid game, or perhaps I have rose tinted memory of yesteryear...

 

[ChrisR]

Teams were already not committing to rucks well before the law changes. The math is simple: Team in possession at a tackle will have BC on the ground, one or two players forming the mono-ruck and a SH to serve it. Throw in a couple of pillars and they are playing 10 vs. 15.

So . . . the problem is this: The monoruck is a fine base for ball retention but it's a crap platform for attacking. What guarantees a stupifyingly (Google says that's not a word) booooring game is not endless phases on attack but endless phases of pick-n-goes and other forward crashes that end at the gain line. If these efforts actually accomplished something like committing defenders to create space elsewhere then I'd see the point. But they don't. They simply don't alter the balance of power.

Professional rugby is entertainment, and it's the entertainer that has to see the problem and create the solution. There is nothing in the laws that prevents that from happening.