Rugby could become a high-scoring joke: Mitchell

[Rex Messup]

This guy needs his status changed to 'legend'.

At last a fan
You must be from the engine room old boy
Perhaps we should have 100 beers some time?

[CunnamullaFulla]

I can drink more p1ss than Rex

[pieter blackie]

The smote is for talking crap in a Western Force thread

[Burgs]

Andy, I agree it is early days, but with your point on the penalty count, do you have the break down on the count against the defender v the attacker?
It would seem to me that Coaches would be instructing their players to not give up the ball any time they run into contact as the odds are with them to gain a penalty.

[Ecky]

Here're some Round 2 stats from rugby365:

Highlanders vs Blues
Penalties conceded: 16
Highlanders: 7
Blues: 9
Reasons for the penalties:
Highlanders:
Tackle: 4 (Newland, Hayward, Bekhuis, Rutledge)
Offside: 1 (McIntosh)
Discipline: 2 (Newland - collapsing maul; Newland - obstruction)
Blues:
Tackle: 6 (Kaino 2, Haiu, Haiu & Ma'afu, Afoa, Ranger)
Offside: 2 (Woodcock, Haiu)
Scrum: 1 (Woodcock)
Each side missed two penalty kicks at goal.
Free kicks conceded
Highlanders: 1 (scrum)
Blues: 2(1 scrum, 1 line-out)

Reds vs Crusaders
Penalties conceded: 22
Reds: 10
Crusaders: 12
Reasons for the penalties:
Reds:
Tackle: 8 (Braid*, Ioane, Higginbotham* 3, Holmes, Byrnes, Daley)
Offside: 2 (Byrnes, Braid)
Crusaders:
Tackle: 8 (Thomas Waldrom, Read* 2, Fruean, Owen Franks* 2, Sam Whitelock*, Adam Whitelock)
Offside: 2 (Thomas Waldrom, Ross*)
Scrum: 1 (Ben Franks)
Discipline: 1 (Slade - high tackle)
Each side missed two penalty kicks at goal.
Free kicks conceded
Reds: 1 (scrum)
Crusaders: 1 (scrum)

Sharks vs Cheetahs
Penalties conceded: 25
Sharks: 10
Cheetahs: 15
Reasons for the penalties:
Sharks:
Tackle: 7 (Hargreaves, Pienaar*, Ndungane, Deysel*, Smit, Pietersen, Daniel*)
Offside: 1 (Sykes)
Scrums: 1 (Smit)
Discipline: 1 (Botes - air tackle)
Cheetahs:
Tackle: 8 (Breedt, Frans Viljoen 2, De Bruyn, Brüssow*, Smith, De Villiers, Pretorius)
Offside: 3 (Brüssow*, De Bruyn, Strauss)
Scrum: 2 (Strauss, Nel)
Discipline: 2 (Frans Viljoen - man without ball; De Villiers - +10)
The Sharks missed three penalty kicks at goal, the Cheetahs one.
Free kicks conceded
Sharks: 2 (scrums)
Cheetahs: 1 (scrum)

Lions vs Chiefs
Penalties conceded: 32
Lions: 11
Chiefs: 21
Reasons for the penalties:
Lions:
Tackle: 7 (Franco vs an der Merwe 2, Grobbelaar, Joubert*, Buys, Mjekevu , Minnie)
Offside: 2 (Heinke vs an der Merwe, Clever*)
Scrum: 1 (Heinke vs an der Merwe)
Discipline: 1 (Stoltz - elbow to the face)
Chiefs:
Tackle: 11 (De Malmanche, Messam 3, Retallick 2, Bruce, Willison, Latimer, Taumalolo 2)
Offside: 4 (Taumalolo*, Clarke, Kahui, Leonard)
Discipline: 6 (De Malmanche - collapsing maul; Retallick - obstruction; Lauaki - dangerous tackle; Kahui - dangerous tackle; Messam - diving on try-scorer; Lauaki -- man without ball) (Instead of Kahui, Nanai-Williams should have been sin-binned.)
The Lions missed a penalty kick at goal.
Free kicks conceded
Lions: 1 (scrum)
Chiefs: 1 (scrum)

Hurricanes vs Western Force
Penalties conceded: 19
Hurricanes: 12
Western Force: 7
Reasons for the penalties:
Hurricanes:
Tackle: 7 (Tialata* 2, Broadhurst, David Smith, Hore, Vito, Paterson)
Offside: 4 (Nonu, Tialata, Conrad Smith, Weepu)
Discipline: 1 (Nonu - not 10)
Western Force:
Tackle: 2 (Haylett-Petty, Sheehan)
Offside: 2 (Hockings, Hodgson)
Scrums: 1 (Fairbrother)
Discipline: 2 (Sare - man without the ball; Haylett-Petty - late tackle)
Western Force missed a penalty kick at goal.
Free kicks conceded
Hurricanes: 1 ( scrum)
Western Force: 4 (3 scrums, 1 +10)

Bulls vs Brumbies
Penalties conceded: 20
Bulls: 8
Brumbies: 12
Reasons for the penalties:
Bulls:
Tackle: 5 (Stegmann* 2, vs an der Merwe 2, Kuün*)
Offside: 1 (Botha*)
Discipline: 2 (Wannenburg - obstruction; Kirchner - high tackle)
Brumbies:
Tackle: 7 (Moore 2, Elsom, Lealiifano, Fainifo 2, George Smith)
Offside: 2 (Hoiles, vs Valentine)
Scrums: 2 (Alexander** 2)
Discipline: 1 (Ma'afu - obstruction)
The Bulls missed a kick at goal.
Free kicks conceded
Bulls: 1 (line-out)
Brumbies: 1 (line-out)

Stormers vs Waratahs
Penalties conceded: 24
Stormers: 12
Waratahs: 12
Reasons for the penalties:
Stormers:
Tackle: 10 (Bekker, Steenkamp*, vs Vermeulen*, Fourie 2, Steenkamp & François Louw, François Louw 3, Habana)
Scrums: 2 (Kritzinger)
Waratahs:
Tackle: 7 (Beale, Barnes 2, Palu, Waugh 2, Mowen)
Offside: 2 (Palu, Douglas)
Scrums: 2 (Baxter, Kefu)
Discipline: 1 (Caldwell - collapsing maul)
The Stormers missed a penalty kick at goal.
Free kicks conceded
Stormers: 4 (2 scrums, 2 line-outs)
Waratahs: 3 (scrums)

And some slightly interesting stats for both rounds:

Penalties conceded: per match
Western Force vs Brumbies: 9 + 10 = 19
Sharks vs Chiefs: 14 + 9 = 23
Crusaders vs Highlanders: 7 + 6 = 13
Cheetahs vs Bulls: 6 + 9 = 15
Blues vs Hurricanes: 13 + 12 = 25
Lions vs Stormers: 9 + 11 = 20
Reds vs Waratahs: 14 + 9 = 23
Bulls vs Brumbies: 8 + 12 = 20
Highlanders vs Blues: 7 + 9 = 16
Lions vs Chiefs: 11 + 21 = 32
Sharks vs Cheetahs: 10 + 15 = 25
Hurricanes vs Western Force: 12 + 7 = 19
Reds vs Crusaders: 10 + 12 = 22
Stormers vs Waratahs: 12 + 12 = 24

[mudskipper]

There's an major opportunity for the Force, note the Chiefs ran up 21 penalties last weekend...

[Burgs]

Where would not releasing the ball in the tackle be listed Ecky, just under Tackle or a seperate listing?
ie, how can you tell attacking v defending?

[AndyS]

The people who asked for a fuller application of the tackle law and the requirements of the tackler to comply were the Super 14 coaches. Now there has been some questioning of the application, at least by a coach in New Zealand.

Chiefs forwards coach Craig Stevenson, back from the 72-65 extravaganza in Johannesburg, said that there would be some adjustment to the application of the laws to allow the "second defender" more rights to contest for the ball at the tackle.

The refereeing authorities should in fact be happy about the way the tackler is being handled - requiring him to release and get away - both in player action, for the players seem keen to comply with the law, and in refereeing reaction to noncompliance. The results are obvious - quicker ball and fewer pile-ups and as a result less kicking and more ball in hand.

The tackler's treatment in law application needs to continue. The tackler must continue to allow daylight between his hands and arms and the tackled player and the ball, and he must get away. Everybody, it seems, acknowledges the rights of the tackled player to get rid of the ball.

What does need emphasis is the right of any player on his feet at the tackle to play the ball with confidence. He needs to be on his feet and approach the tackle correctly, that is from behind the width of the prone tackled player and not from the side.

In terms of the law there are also obligations on the tackled player to play the ball and get away from it, not remain foetally curled around the ball. If he fulfilled his obligation of immediate action, the second defender would be better able to exercise his rights, the tackle would be loess predictable and the excitement of turnovers would add spice to the game.

There is no intention to soften the law but merely to apply it more fully, which would also mean more equably.
http://www.sareferees.co.za/news/ref_news/2255200.htm

[Ecky]

Where would not releasing the ball in the tackle be listed Ecky, just under Tackle or a seperate listing?
ie, how can you tell attacking v defending?

Looks like it's just under the tackle. There's be both 'not releasing the ball' and 'tackler not releasing the player'.

I doubt there'd be statistics published to show the distinction.

[normie]

Norm and Gigs the happy couple

That is hilarious, rex.

Whilst I don't want to watch a low scoring joke, IMO "a very physical contest at the breakdown"... is damn entertaining... especially if it leads to tries!

[mudskipper]

well if you say it will be 36-24 it must be true.

I moved it to Bronski boys thread...

[jazza93]

ok