Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 402

Try our Fantastic 5-Issue Bundle Offer! For just £18, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:
The Play-offs Issue - pictured (out 12 Sept) – Covering the climax of the Super League & Championship seasons
The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final excitement from both sides of the world plus Four Nations preview
The Four Nations Issue (out 21 Nov) – Fantastic coverage of the Four Nations tournament down under
The Golden Boot Issue (out 19 Dec) – A look back at the 2014 season plus the big reveal of the winner of the Golden Boot
The 2015 Season Preview Issue (out 23 Jan) – How will your team perform in 2015? We preview every club.


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

New Aussie RU comp changes points scoring system


  • Please log in to reply
57 replies to this topic

#1 DiH68

DiH68
  • Coach
  • 2,165 posts

Posted 13 August 2014 - 02:51 AM

Interesting to see if what affect this has, if any.

 

From AP:

 

Australia’s revamped National Rugby Championship will kick off next week under experimental rules and with a new scoring system designed to encourage try-scoring over kicking for points.

 

The Australian Rugby Union launched the nine-team interstate competition Wednesday, a week ahead of the tournament opener between Brisbane City and the Sydney Stars. Queensland Country, Macquarie University North Harbour, Greater Sydney Rams, NSW Country Eagles, University of Canberra Vikings, Melbourne Rising and Perth Spirit are the other teams.
 
Organizers sought feedback from fans for the tournament and the No. 1 change suggested was in the points system.
 
In experimental variations approved by the International Rugby Board, the points for a penalty goal and dropped goal will be reduced from three points to two, and try conversions will be increased from two to three points. The other changes involve speeding up the game, with time limits to be implemented for setting scrums and lineouts, and taking shots at goal.


#2 Middleton Bull

Middleton Bull
  • Coach
  • 2,286 posts

Posted 13 August 2014 - 06:14 AM

 

Interesting to see if what affect this has, if any.

 

From AP:

 

Australia’s revamped National Rugby Championship will kick off next week under experimental rules and with a new scoring system designed to encourage try-scoring over kicking for points.

 

The Australian Rugby Union launched the nine-team interstate competition Wednesday, a week ahead of the tournament opener between Brisbane City and the Sydney Stars. Queensland Country, Macquarie University North Harbour, Greater Sydney Rams, NSW Country Eagles, University of Canberra Vikings, Melbourne Rising and Perth Spirit are the other teams.
 
Organizers sought feedback from fans for the tournament and the No. 1 change suggested was in the points system.
 
In experimental variations approved by the International Rugby Board, the points for a penalty goal and dropped goal will be reduced from three points to two, and try conversions will be increased from two to three points. The other changes involve speeding up the game, with time limits to be implemented for setting scrums and lineouts, and taking shots at goal.

 

This must stop now.  It goes against everything union fans hold dear.  We are constantly reminded on this forum by our union guests that:

 

  • try's are unimportant
  • ball in play time is irrelevant
  • speed of play is irrelevant
  • penalties are extremely important and;
  • the set piece scrum / line out is paramount and essential to the game - providing orgasmic like enjoyment

Yet, all of the bullet points above are being explicitly attacked by these new experimental rules.  Either the fans are lieing, or the International union heirarchy is completely out of touch with what the fans want.  Which is it guys?



#3 kier

kier
  • Coach
  • 706 posts

Posted 13 August 2014 - 07:42 AM

I think it will have the opposite effect. A team with an eight point lead now has an incentive to commit penalty offences as four penalties will only bring teams level.

As bizarre as it sounds I think raising the points for penalties will actually see their reduction as teams will so anything rather than give away kickable penalty opportunities.

I'd go for
Try- 5
Con- 3
Pen- 5
DG-1

I think it would be one of those rule paradoxes that often crop up - raising the pen points would see a reduction of kicks given away.
www.fatalerror.co.nz - A Musical by Lattimer & McRae

#4 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,811 posts

Posted 13 August 2014 - 10:43 AM

It's already far too easy to cheat a penalty in the opposition half to increase PK points. Last time this was proposed it was also proposed to reduce referee tolerance for red zone offences with far faster yellow cards.

Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#5 C H Calthrop

C H Calthrop
  • Coach
  • 177 posts

Posted 13 August 2014 - 11:17 AM

I think it will have the opposite effect. A team with an eight point lead now has an incentive to commit penalty offences as four penalties will only bring teams level.

As bizarre as it sounds I think raising the points for penalties will actually see their reduction as teams will so anything rather than give away kickable penalty opportunities.

I'd go for
Try- 5
Con- 3
Pen- 5
DG-1

I think it would be one of those rule paradoxes that often crop up - raising the pen points would see a reduction of kicks given away.

I think there are 2 important issues here. 1) a national RU competition has reacted to fan ideas about what is "wrong" with the game  and 2) the solution mustn't reflect anything from RL too closely.

Real issue is though, forget points, how are tries to be encouraged in a game with such specific almost rigid player roles, plays which discourage isolating  players, and such scrutiny of the breakdown and ruck referee participation is ad nauseum. 

Is it not the case that outside of amateur games where the odd few players are shining examples and hectic internationals that weedle out 50 minute minor nations the route to more tries is beyond the rules. The whole philosophy of RU in the professional era discourages playing try scoring rugby. Money is on the outcome.



#6 Shadow

Shadow
  • Coach
  • 8,030 posts

Posted 13 August 2014 - 11:58 AM

I think there are 2 important issues here. 1) a national RU competition has reacted to fan ideas about what is "wrong" with the game  and 2) the solution mustn't reflect anything from RL too closely.

Real issue is though, forget points, how are tries to be encouraged in a game with such specific almost rigid player roles, plays which discourage isolating  players, and such scrutiny of the breakdown and ruck referee participation is ad nauseum. 

Is it not the case that outside of amateur games where the odd few players are shining examples and hectic internationals that weedle out 50 minute minor nations the route to more tries is beyond the rules. The whole philosophy of RU in the professional era discourages playing try scoring rugby. Money is on the outcome.

Have you actually watched any RU or are you just reading from the bumper book of RL fan cliches ?:


God Rides a Harley but the Devil rides a Ducati!

#7 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,811 posts

Posted 13 August 2014 - 01:27 PM

I think there are 2 important issues here. 1) a national RU competition has reacted to fan ideas about what is "wrong" with the game  and 2) the solution mustn't reflect anything from RL too closely.

Real issue is though, forget points, how are tries to be encouraged in a game with such specific almost rigid player roles, plays which discourage isolating  players, and such scrutiny of the breakdown and ruck referee participation is ad nauseum. 

Is it not the case that outside of amateur games where the odd few players are shining examples and hectic internationals that weedle out 50 minute minor nations the route to more tries is beyond the rules. The whole philosophy of RU in the professional era discourages playing try scoring rugby. Money is on the outcome.

A correction:  National RU competitions cannot change the laws of the game in any aspect without the permission of the IRB.  This is an official trial, not an Aussie experiment.


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#8 C H Calthrop

C H Calthrop
  • Coach
  • 177 posts

Posted 13 August 2014 - 02:25 PM

Have you actually watched any RU or are you just reading from the bumper book of RL fan cliches ?:

I was going to ask if you'd like me to quote for you the reduction of tries in the 6 Nations. But i'll just do it.

From 75 in 2001 to 37 in 2013, a steady decline the more professionalism took hold.

And the trend that further into the competition when results are getting tighter try scoring is reduced from 1 every 8 minutes that the ball is in play in round 1 to 1 every 24 minutes the ball is in play in the remaining rounds (2013 comp). The philosophy of the game to win rather than win with tries there to see. Points changes? I don't see reversing this sort of trend.

All from the IRB bumber book of official competition stats, no cliches need apply.


Edited by C H Calthrop, 13 August 2014 - 02:43 PM.


#9 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 10,038 posts

Posted 13 August 2014 - 02:55 PM

Have you actually watched any RU or are you just reading from the bumper book of RL fan cliches ?:

 

 

Of course he has ... but obviously only for the first ten minutes before he dropped off to sleep.

;)


Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police


#10 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,811 posts

Posted 13 August 2014 - 02:59 PM

Of course he has ... but obviously only for the first ten minutes before he dropped off to sleep.

;)

You get moved on by PCSOs for falling asleep in front of shop windows these days...


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#11 WelshpoolMarauder

WelshpoolMarauder
  • Coach
  • 502 posts

Posted 13 August 2014 - 04:48 PM

Increasing the value of conversions had never occurred to me. I'd given thoughts to changing everything else, but not that- possibly because it's the one part of scoring that is the same in both codes.

I always feel sorry for the poor old drop goal- 3 points seems about right to me for achieving something that is actually rather difficult to do (in union at least) yet everyone always wants to reduce how much it is worth.

I've often thought that restricting penalty kicks at goal to within the opposition 40 might be interesting to see- you can win a penalty 10 metres in your own half for a technical infringement and get points, if you've got a good kicker, without even making any attacking movement yourselves.

The reduction in tries at the top level is a concern for the sport, but what can they do? Anything that makes it easier to score for the best players will also make it easier for amateurs as well, and a lack of tries isn't really a problem down the pyramid, and would make the game less enjoyable for the people who play because they enjoy it rather than earn a living from it.

There is also the argument that tries evidently don't mean spectators, or else RL internationals would outdraw their RU equivalents. Not trying to make a dig at RL, but there seem to be a lot of league followers who assume that because they don't see enough tries for their liking that there aren't enough tries period, and that everyone agrees with them.

#12 Futtocks

Futtocks
  • Coach
  • 20,369 posts

Posted 13 August 2014 - 04:55 PM

Of course he has ... but obviously only for the first ten minutes before he dropped off to sleep.

;)

Thus proving that Rugby Union is at least twice as exciting as Formula 1. ;) 


A mind is like a parachute. It doesn’t work if it isn’t open. Frank Zappa (1940 - 1993)


#13 Middleton Bull

Middleton Bull
  • Coach
  • 2,286 posts

Posted 13 August 2014 - 05:19 PM

Increasing the value of conversions had never occurred to me. I'd given thoughts to changing everything else, but not that- possibly because it's the one part of scoring that is the same in both codes.

I always feel sorry for the poor old drop goal- 3 points seems about right to me for achieving something that is actually rather difficult to do (in union at least) yet everyone always wants to reduce how much it is worth.

I've often thought that restricting penalty kicks at goal to within the opposition 40 might be interesting to see- you can win a penalty 10 metres in your own half for a technical infringement and get points, if you've got a good kicker, without even making any attacking movement yourselves.

The reduction in tries at the top level is a concern for the sport, but what can they do? Anything that makes it easier to score for the best players will also make it easier for amateurs as well, and a lack of tries isn't really a problem down the pyramid, and would make the game less enjoyable for the people who play because they enjoy it rather than earn a living from it.

There is also the argument that tries evidently don't mean spectators, or else RL internationals would outdraw their RU equivalents. Not trying to make a dig at RL, but there seem to be a lot of league followers who assume that because they don't see enough tries for their liking that there aren't enough tries period, and that everyone agrees with them.

I understand what you are saying but it is the union hierarchy who are trying to encourage more tries by increasing the worth of the conversion.  This has nothing to do with the views of RL fans.



#14 WelshpoolMarauder

WelshpoolMarauder
  • Coach
  • 502 posts

Posted 13 August 2014 - 05:40 PM

I understand what you are saying but it is the union hierarchy who are trying to encourage more tries by increasing the worth of the conversion. This has nothing to do with the views of RL fans.

I appreciate that, but it's something that people always go on about on here, and it does get a bit tiresome! There are an awful lot of posts that seem to suggest that RL fans know what RU is doing wrong nowadays, when the game seems to be doing fine on it's own.

It is the IRB that have approved this trial, but it's the Aussies who have put the idea forward, the one country where professional rugby union is smaller than professional rugby league. They've pushed for this sort of thing before, and I have the feeling that it's more aimed at helping them domestically rather than helping the wider game.
Not that any Australian organisation concerned with a contact sport that uses an oval ball would ever put their own interests above that of the sport!

For what it's worth, I don't think it'll lead to more tries, just less penalty goals.

Edited by WelshpoolMarauder, 13 August 2014 - 05:42 PM.


#15 Severus

Severus
  • Coach
  • 12,852 posts

Posted 13 August 2014 - 06:41 PM

I do get the impression that Australian RU wants to be more like RL and given the popularity of RL in Australia I can see why.
Fides invicta triumphat

#16 Middleton Bull

Middleton Bull
  • Coach
  • 2,286 posts

Posted 13 August 2014 - 06:49 PM

I appreciate that, but it's something that people always go on about on here, and it does get a bit tiresome! There are an awful lot of posts that seem to suggest that RL fans know what RU is doing wrong nowadays, when the game seems to be doing fine on it's own.

It is the IRB that have approved this trial, but it's the Aussies who have put the idea forward, the one country where professional rugby union is smaller than professional rugby league. They've pushed for this sort of thing before, and I have the feeling that it's more aimed at helping them domestically rather than helping the wider game.
Not that any Australian organisation concerned with a contact sport that uses an oval ball would ever put their own interests above that of the sport!

For what it's worth, I don't think it'll lead to more tries, just less penalty goals.

That view does get aired on here, I agree, but there must be something in it when the IRB agree to sanction the experiment notwithstanding the Aussie origins of the request.



#17 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,811 posts

Posted 13 August 2014 - 07:11 PM

That view does get aired on here, I agree, but there must be something in it when the IRB agree to sanction the experiment notwithstanding the Aussie origins of the request.

It's a fairly unpublicised thing but the IRB are constantly running tests on law changes in the 2nd tier competitions in countries.  The English Premiership's 2nd team competition is often used as a guinea pig for law changes.  Law experiments range from simple timing changes for scrums to distance changes at set piece offsides.  Once the trial is complete, usually at one northern and southern hemisphere test-bed, then the IRB council as a whole votes on whether to incorporate it before it becomes law across the entire sport.

 

You'll not see a premier competition running trials or inconsistent laws between countries because they want consistency at the professional level to lead into the international money machine games.  It'd be nice if we could do the same in rugby league.


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#18 Railway End

Railway End
  • Coach
  • 537 posts

Posted 13 August 2014 - 07:16 PM

Why don't they just say you can only kick a penalty goal or drop goal in the last 5 minutes of a game.

For the first 75 minutes you can only score by touching down for a try and the subsequent conversion attempt.

It might just focus a few minds into considering attacking play as an option! ;)

"Rugby League is rugby in the simplest form in the sense that it's about great defence, great tackling technique, good handling, good passing, catching and great kicking."

 

 Stuart Lancaster - England Rugby Union Head Coach - October 2013


#19 Middleton Bull

Middleton Bull
  • Coach
  • 2,286 posts

Posted 13 August 2014 - 07:22 PM

It's a fairly unpublicised thing but the IRB are constantly running tests on law changes in the 2nd tier competitions in countries.  The English Premiership's 2nd team competition is often used as a guinea pig for law changes.  Law experiments range from simple timing changes for scrums to distance changes at set piece offsides.  Once the trial is complete, usually at one northern and southern hemisphere test-bed, then the IRB council as a whole votes on whether to incorporate it before it becomes law across the entire sport.

 

You'll not see a premier competition running trials or inconsistent laws between countries because they want consistency at the professional level to lead into the international money machine games.  It'd be nice if we could do the same in rugby league.

Obviously we don't do the same in RL because you can't improve on perfection ;)



#20 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,811 posts

Posted 13 August 2014 - 07:31 PM

Obviously we don't do the same in RL because you can't improve on perfection ;)

Here's a wikipedia link that shows the differences between northern and southern hemisphere rugby league laws.  I know no rugby league fan who thinks its sane that the NRL or SL can arbitrarily change the laws to suit themselves or their sponsors without at least discussing it with their counterparts.


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users