 |
|
|
#1
27-02-2006, 06:56
|
||||
|
||||
|
Rugby Point Scoring System
I would like to see the scoring system changed in Rugby to:
1 point each for a conversion and standard field goal (taken in the attacking half) 2 points for a field goal from inside yer own half 3 points for a penalty goal 7 points a try and a penalty try given by all referees at all times when a deliberate infringement is made against the attacking team to stop them from going over!! Should see some tries scored then!!!! Anyone else 
|
| Guest Info |
|
+:+:+ Forum Headquarter +:+:+ |
|
#2
27-02-2006, 16:28
|
||||
|
||||
I assume that you want to change to the points system so that you see a game with more emphasis on rewarding tries with big points and kicks with less. I tend to agree with this and so far my argument has been to reduce penalties to 2 points, i.e. a team need 4 penalties to class back the 7 points lost by a converted try. However, the down side to this is that sides might score a try and then feel that they can give away 3 penalties before it really costs them.
Another idea I have had, is to get rid of the open and blindside flankers, reducing teams to 13. This would open up the pitch more and you won't see as many instances with backs involved in the breakdown area being replaced by forwards in the "back line". The one thing that I feel is currently out of control, is the handling of the ball in a ruck situation. The part that says a player can play the ball only if he is on his feet, is so open to abuse that it has now got to the stage where it is starting to spoil the game. This was the case so much over the weekend in the SCO/ENG and IRE/WAL games. The ball was so slow coming back out of the rucks sometimes that it was almost embarrassingly obvious that players were up to no good and yet the ref can do nothing. Also, people "fringing" the rucks are not being penalised enough for being back far enough. I may be wrong, but aren't they supposed to be behind the last "limb" of the ruck ? There were far too many instances where this was so clearly not the case and again it resulted in "slow ball". Apparently there are trials in South Africa going on where the ruck simply "disappears" !! Well, that is my interpretation - what is actually being said is that players will be able to use their hands in a ruck situation, meaning now that the ruck goes and is replaced completely by the maul even when the player is on the floor. Supposedly, this new rule could be introduced in 2007. 
__________________
Only a woman can break his spell. Pure in heart who will offer herself
|
|
#3
28-02-2006, 03:22
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Yep Diz....I am sick of teams not going for tries and just accumulating points with a good kicker It is not unusual for a team to get 3 soft penalties inside their attacking half and score 9 points whilst the oposite team has all of the teritory and is playing for tries down the other end.........then the whole complexion of the game changes and it becomes a negative match as the team trying for tries goes back into its shell and tries to get points on the board by shooting for goal.......happpens too much and at the risk of sounding pro southern hemisphere rugby.....too much in the northern hemisphere..........a lot of this is because of the bonus point system for tries 4+ scored in both the Super14 + TriNations series.....and this then carries over to the rest of these teams rugby once it has been engendered in them I agree with you about the rucks.......they are a mess and a real problem for referees...........same as te offsied rule in soccer...you can tinker with it but it's still always going to be a problem area Mauls too these days seem to be unfairly weighted to the advantage of the team attacking with the ball......you can't get anywhere near the ball and you are responsible for the maul staying up whilst trying desperately to stop the attacking teams momentum................... Field Goals............I'm sick of soft field goals.......it should be harder to win a game than this..........and I really hate it when a team which has scored tries gets beaten on field goals by a team that hasn't...... I agree with your point about a team who scores atry having a large advantage and then giving away penalties when the oppostion is on attack.........that's why I have kept penalties at 3 points covered this with......"and a penalty try be given by all referees at all times when a deliberate infringement is made against the attacking team to stop them from going over!!" I am interested in the new trials you are talking about for rucks/mauls..........get get even uglier though??? I think Rugby should be all about scoring tries......that's why I watch it anyway.........
|
|
#4
28-02-2006, 03:59
|
||||
|
||||
|
Talbotman
AMAZING that we did not hear these concerns for more open rugby when england were winning grand slams on the strentgh of Rob Andrew and jonny wilkinsons kicking skills , the main reason there was not a more open game on saturday is because of the dreadful weather conditions i was at a football match near Stirling which is 15 miles from edinburgh and it was blowing a gale totally impossible to play expansive rugby when it comes to running the ball scotland have 2 good centres and pattaerson and the excellent lamont out wide so we are as competent as anyone in playing expansive rugby.
sorry diz totally against your idea of getting rid of two back row players why ? because scotland consistently produce class players in these positions so why do away with one of our strong points. I would keep the point scoring the same except maybe increase the points for a try to 7 points
__________________
ALFIE he would not give you a fright on a dark night !
|
|
#5
28-02-2006, 04:21
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Thats a bit harsh Talbotman. Sure Rob Andrew and JW scored lots of penalties,but during that time ,England have scored an awful lot of tries. Yes,in 91 through to the WC of 99,Englands game was based on forward power,getting good position and releasing the backs. Remember Jeremy Guscott and Rory Underwood? England did NOT plan to win their games with penalties. Whose fault is it if a penalty is conceded? The opposition have to play to the laws so its sounds a bit bitter to say that RA and JW kicked the Grand Slams. They just kicked the penalties awarded. As for running rugby, even today the Scots coach said that never again would Scotland win a game like that with the stats so against them. England were'nt that bad you know and they were the team trying to play all the rugby. Have another look at that game if you can, and see how much time Scotland spent in the English half. The game was played mostly in the Scotland half and were it not for knock-ons , turnovers and a great Scots defence England should have won the game. But its history now, just have to play better next match. Good luck in Ireland Big T 
__________________
I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my Granddad Not screaming in fear like his passengers
|
|
#6
28-02-2006, 04:24
|
||||
|
||||
|
I agree, and this is one of the reasons that I dont really like Rugby Union. Its bad enough that a goal is 2 points in Rugby League, places far too much emphasis on a single player in the team, and doesnt promote any team effort. I'm all for 1 point.
|
|
#7
28-02-2006, 04:30
|
||||
|
||||
|
Talbotman
I would love to keep this friendly argument going but i am too busy watching georglondon trying to extract himself from the brown stuff elsewhere on the board 5555555555
__________________
ALFIE he would not give you a fright on a dark night !
|
|
#8
28-02-2006, 05:03
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
sorry TM........this thread was not meant as a rant against Scotland.........or England...... or any team in particular It's just an idea I have been mulling over for quite sometime in my desire to see more tries (and more reward for tries) in every match...........and whilst I admit the Scotland vs England match bought it to the surface again in me I don't blame Scotland for their tactics......they won the match fair + square and good on them!!!! South Africa has also been guilty of doing this............several times they have gone out and shot for 3-4 field goals within 10-15 minutes of the openning whistle.........to me this is a more blatant attempt to take advantage of what I see as anomolies in the points system than what happenned last Saturday..........and when they are 9-0 up after having very little time in the oppositions half it really pisses me off.......... I like yer willingness to go to 7 points for a try............the right spirit son!!!!
|
|
#9
28-02-2006, 05:05
|
||||
|
||||
|
it wouldn't work in knockout competitions, but I liked the bonus point system they had in the last world cup. Basic premise was 4 points for a win and two for a draw. Then if any team scored four or more tries they were awarded a bonus point, and the losing team was awarded a bonus point if they lost by seven points or less.
IMHO it worked well in the pool stages of that tournament! 6 nations table under this system: England 11pts France 11pts Ireland 9 pts Scotland 8 pts Wales 4 pts Italy 0 pts
__________________
"管它黑貓白貓，會抓老鼠的就是好貓" Last edited by Coolhand : 28-02-2006 at 05:15.
|
|
#10
28-02-2006, 06:25
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Same system as Tri Nations and Super14 are played under Luke.........I like it too and it does promote scoring tries............just take a look at the amount scored in the current Super14........it is great watching guys really throwing the ball around.......and the skills levels are amazing and I don't think that too many people could argue with your adjusted 6 Nations Table on merit.............that's about how I would rate the teams on performance so far........maybe next year!
|
|
#11
28-02-2006, 20:45
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I don't think that there is any doubt that England have a good team and nearly all players are deserving of being called international class players, but I would like to see them play better rugby and actually show that they have a brain, rather than resort to the neanderthal approach of the 80's, which was "tuck it under your arm and run straight at them !!" Bring back decent flowing rugby !! I don't care who plays it !!
__________________
Only a woman can break his spell. Pure in heart who will offer herself
|
|
#12
28-02-2006, 21:05
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
IJ
__________________
one life.......live it.......tomorrow never comes......
|
|
#13
01-03-2006, 02:57
|
||||
|
||||
|
Agree wholeheartedly with bot IJ and Diz above.....and I like the subtle touch of green there IJ...........very nice!
How about a little more defining of a rule change I have proposed above............ If an attacking team is intentionally fouled within 5 meters of the line...........It's a penalty try......and a yellow card for the offender No more dragging down players in lineouts, collapsing scrums + mauls as they about to score a pushover try, deliberate offsides, hands in the rucks and all the other crap that teams get up to to stop great try scoring opportunities
|
|
#14
01-03-2006, 03:03
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I'd go with that idea nelsonone. Far too often this happens, and as long as only a penalty is awarded then it will keep happening. IMO penalty tries are not given often enough,and the defending team get away with it if the penalty comes to nothing.
__________________
I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my Granddad Not screaming in fear like his passengers
|
|
#15
01-03-2006, 03:09
|
||||
|
||||
|
problem is half the time cant even work out what penalty is for maybe have different grades of penalities where some you cant kick for goal.
or some worth only 2 points. the bonus system could be used more in series with more than 2 teams.
__________________
MAY THE BEER BE COLD AND ALL YOUR BETS WINNERS 
|
|
#16
01-03-2006, 03:38
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Sorry I don't agree with that one, for the following reasons. In a territorial position, the attacking team needn't make the effort to go to the try line, but just keep possession until the defenders foul, then voila penalty try. And what about the defenders? Would you rather concede the try rather than concede a penalty try and have a player sin binned? I like the great runs, but I also enjoy the times when you have concerted presure near the try line. Another point, is that if you increase the different points between a penalty and a try, you are, in effect negating the punishment for a penalty. Mightn't this lead to a greater number of infringements, and thus less flowing rugby?
__________________
"管它黑貓白貓，會抓老鼠的就是好貓"
|
|
#17
02-03-2006, 06:52
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Well......a couple of good points Luke however my thoughts are: On the attacking team waiting for a foul near the line............up2 the defending team not to foul...........if the atttacking team gets aimless they will almost certainly lose possession........however I am only talking about deliberate fouls to stop try scoring......seems to me like the law is almost already there at present with the penalty try..........it is just geting the refs to use the bloody thing......that would cut this out quicksmart On the penalty points differential..........if a team continually gives away penalties they will find themselves continually on the backfoot as it will be to the attacking teams advantage to kick for sideline regain possession and score points via tries?? ......... These ramblings are all just me dreaming aloud boys.........thanks for all of your input and feedback Last edited by nelsonone : 02-03-2006 at 06:55.
|
|
#18
03-03-2006, 16:38
|
||||
|
||||
|
I've kept out of this so far because I actually like the status quo. We don't see many penalty tries, seems like a last resort, so maybe that could be used a little more.
The other thing which springs to mind is that if you bugger about with rules all the time you ruin the overall spectacle as coaches find a way around them. I can't watch rugby league because the 'scrum' they use to re-start after a penalty makes me cringe. I would hate to see that sort of pantomime become part of Union.
__________________
Last edited by steve@thaib : 03-03-2006 at 20:22.
|
|
#19
03-03-2006, 18:43
|
||||
|
||||
|
Talbotman
EXACTLY MY POINT leave the rules alone look at the mess this stupid new offside rule is causing in football !
__________________
ALFIE he would not give you a fright on a dark night !
|
|
#20
03-03-2006, 18:46
|
||||
|
||||
|
Talbotman
Also look at the mess rugby referees are making already ie Scott Murrays sending off in Cardiff where one stupid decision finished the game as a contest after less than 10 minutes the refs dont need any other new laws to spoil the game
__________________
ALFIE he would not give you a fright on a dark night !
|
|
#21
03-03-2006, 20:24
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Sorry mate, you can't have that one. It was a shame to see him sent off but the ref had no choice. He had nowhere else to go, Murray kicked out. The Welsh player was good about it, got up and got on with it, but the only person to blame there was the player himself
__________________
|