Printable View
Would you be happy winning without scoring a try? Or is the kicking game too boring?
I say a win is a win and i dont care how it done... i will be more excited if we win than if we play extciting rugby but loose constantly
Just to see what everyone else thinks?
Mitchell has put together a very potent backline, young, but potent. We have the opportunity to make use of it and the wings and full back seemed to have pace top burn on Saturday. As such the Force don't need to rely quite as heavily on tactical kicking to keep them in the game, this is a good thing and will provide us lucky supporters with exciting rugby to watch. All the skills will need to be there for the Super 14 though, a pack to give the backs the platform to work off, good handling skills and pace in the backs (plus defensive work), and a good boot in the team for kicking, both for territory and between the sticks. This was the one thing that annoyed me at the weekend, we got a penalty in front of the sticks and kicked for the touch line and subsequent line out, I hope this was because it was a trial match, because at that point the Force threw 3 points away as they made nothing with that penalty....Quote:
Originally Posted by luke_the_pom
The more time I spend on my feet cheering at a game, the better the game. Sure I might stand up for the 5 - 10 seconds to score a drop goal or penalty kick, but when a try is scored, you can be guaranteed that veery supporter in the ground is on their feet cheering for a long time before, during and after the score!!
A kicking game is 100% definately more boring than a running - that doesn't mean that a game won on kicking alone is bad - it's just not as exciting. I'd still be happy to win without scoring a try, I just wouldn't be as cocky as if we had won by try count.
I reckon you'll know my position on this by now Luke however, I would say that in this life you are allowed mixed emotions.
If we were to score a win such as last years Six Nations France v England (France 6 Penalties to England 2 Tries, 2 Conversions and 1 Penalty), then I would relieved to have the points on the ladder but dissapointed that my team chose to play that way.
I doubt you watched that game and thought it to be a fair result Luke?
If it was an ongoing situation over a couple of seasons then I would start to question the investment I was making as for me the package includes travelling either 600 or 2000 kilometers, a couple of nights accomodation, a couple of nights on the grog and time away from my livelyhood, not just heading down to the match from 'burbs.
Rugby is and always will be a game of scoring tries, if it is not the case then we may as well start playing Gaelic football because that is way more interesting than watching teams playing a kicking game purely to win.
As Pontyboy says above, fortunately I don't think it will be an issue for the Force as it would appear that he has given license for a strong forward pack to create a good platform for fast a wide back play.
We also have the benefit of playing half of our matches on the superb surface of Subiaco which is condusive to fast skillful play. I doubt a single match will played in rain at Subi this season unlike the NZ fixtures or even the uncertainty of the Six Nations season.
Penlty kicks (and to a leaser extent drop goals) have their place for sure but for that is to win in the last seconds to put yourself one point up, not to base your entire game plan around it and to start the match looking to slot goals.
And I used to be the kicker in most of my teams that I played in so I'm not talking of something from afar.
Would be interested to know your rugby playing background Luke if you are happy to share it with us?
played for Steynning Grammer School in England for a few years.
Have not played over here.... i have been playing basketball since i was 8 and with 3 training sessions a week and one game i find it very hard to take up another sport.
i dont like the word 'fair' that you have used. Although England played the better rugby in that game the score is on the board, and not always will the best team win. I have seen England win many games (as you would all know) with more pentalties than anything else and to say thats not a fair result wouldnt be right. England just chose to use the boot more than the opposition. I am more of a believer of the score is on the board. That tells you who wins and i honestly dont mind how we win as long as we win.
it jsut again a diff of opinion
but i do admit i love to see them take the touch kick and go for teh try but as soon as it doesnt pay off i think 'we should have gone for goal'
heard a few people at the cheetahs game yelling out - 'long way to come for kicking practice' and as mentioned before 'how long does it take to score a try'
and to me i just sit there and think - well there winning!
The "How long does it take to score a try" quote was from a young girl wanting the Force to win in the closing minutes of the game, disappointed that her new team were losing, so wasn't aimed at the Cheetahs.Quote:
Originally Posted by luke_the_pom
I also believe that part of the Wallabies losing streak was due to the lack of a decent kicker this season, how many times in the SA away games did we see the wallabies opt for a tap or kick to touch after penalties as Giteau wasn't on song... So a good kicker can keep you in the game. As I said before it needs to be based on the teams skills and the opposition they are playing as to what the tactics will be, but the more strings to the bow the better.
Believe me I know what it's like to watch a team win on goals, I grew up watching Jenks slot them over, but there's nothing like a bit of flair, if you can get your hands on it have a look at the Gareth Edwards try in the 73 Baabaas game at the Arms Park.......
That's exactly it Pontyboy, it's not so much the way the winning score is structured, it's the intent of how to play the game.
To set out to play an eighty minute game of rugby with the sole intent to get within kicking distance and then play for a penalty is a joke.
If one comes your way then fair enough, but the modern game is swinging more towards a kickers shoot out than a 15 man effort to get over the opposition line the most times.
This was the reason that they changed the points system, unfortunately they should have also dropped the value of a penalty and drop goal as well as increasing the value of a try.
Tries (generally) are the reflection of a teams skill, penalty goals (generally) are a reflection of your goal kickers skill.
Re the Wallabies, yes I agree that we need a more consistent goal kicker to take the shots, if nothing else you need to take all the extra conversions that are going to come your way from playing running rugby ;)
With the modern ruling of keeping the throw in from a penalty touch kick there is little excuse for not scoring when deep in the attacking half, it is a skills and pressure area.
The high penalty shot debate is also influenced by policing the offside at scrums and lineouts as the modern player is much quicker (and fitter) to apply pressure to attacking backlines trying to make the gain line.
All in all, my position isn't "never take a penalty goal on offer", just don't make it the sole purpose to playing the game.
I'm glad I will be supporting the Force with the apparent style they are choosing and I hope whoever becomes the new Wallaby coach continues to develop Australia's running game.
Can't disagree with much that you have said Burgs though should warn you that with the likelihood of JC taking over the reigns of your national side running rugby will not be something you should expect to see to much off. He has given Bath alot in his two and a half seasons with us, took us from the bottom to the top in year one but left us back at the bottom when he left. He had been in charge of 10 Bath league games before leaving in December 2005 and we had not scored a single try at home! I also understand that if given the top job in Oz he would hope to bring Mike Foley back to help coach the forwards, once again another proven class coach but under their stewardship Bath have become reknowned as a side with a tough pack who rarely release free running backs (of which we have many).
My own view of the lack of tries being scored by the way isn't all to do with the propensity to take the penalties when on offer, I think it someway reflects the amount of time teams in the NH are placing on defence. Many Union Teams are using Rugby League coaching methods and with the rush defence it is little wonder the attack breaks down or as you say offside is awarded. Sometimes a team can bash away for so long and in the end need to take the reward of 3 points and re-group. I think I still know how to appreciate a try-fest but accept there are sometimes more than one way to skin a cat!
Being one of the fat boys heres the first rules all backs should be instructed in by their forward pack.
1. If we are in range, we take the points on offer.
2. If we are down by 8+ points and theres 5 minutes on the clock, we take the points.
3. If we are down by 7 or less points and there is absolutely no time, we have a crack.
The worst rugby team in the world for having a kicking 1st Five, contrary to popular belief Burgs, is not England with young Johnny. Close, but not quite. The 81 Springboks to NZ with Naas Botha ("The Golden Boy") would kick for field position, use their massive forward pack to bash until they got a penalty and then Naas would kick it. Effective but it would kill rugby support these days.
But at the end of the day the rule in our changing room is "winners are grinners" and nothing tastes as good as winning p*ss.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redbull
Here, Here
Exactly what i am talking about!
love the comment ' nothing tastes as good as winning p*ss'
have to use it from now on :)