The Rugby Union Thread

tbm

eSully said:

@Gassage - Did O'Shea mention anything about where he's going next season, I've heard a rumour director of rugby at Munster?

I love the idea of world rugby exclusives on the Fretboard Rugby Union thread!

I him to Italy not all but a done deal?

eSully

tbm said:

eSully said:

@Gassage - Did O'Shea mention anything about where he's going next season, I've heard a rumour director of rugby at Munster?

I love the idea of world rugby exclusives on the Fretboard Rugby Union thread!

I him to Italy not all but a done deal?

Oh, now you mention it I think I had heard that somewhere, maybe the Munster link was just wishful thinking

@Lloyd I do see your point but at this stage the decision is made, on the verge of a yellow card at the time maybe but not enough in it for a citing.

lloyd

eSully said:

tbm said:

eSully said:

@Gassage - Did O'Shea mention anything about where he's going next season, I've heard a rumour director of rugby at Munster?

I love the idea of world rugby exclusives on the Fretboard Rugby Union thread!

I him to Italy not all but a done deal?

Oh, now you mention it I think I had heard that somewhere, maybe the Munster link was just wishful thinking

@Lloyd I do see your point but at this stage the decision is made, on the verge of a yellow card at the time maybe but not enough in it for a citing.

Yeah since re-watching (and learning the citing rules properly!) I've said there's no case to answer and they got it right.

I do think that things like this should be taken on board for future hearings and they could have come out and said it should have been xyz offence but they back the ref's (who got it wrong despite reviewing it) to the hilt on the decisions they made and by just saying nothing they defend their own terrible systems that are in place.

Forgetting this incident and moving on all we want is consitency across the board, from decisions on the pitch, through to the citing commission. As the system is now we have the most ludicrous decisions and the fans don;t know where they are from one day to the next. Tip tackles and neck rolls being a case in point-the difference in the reffing and reviewing of these offences has been night and day between the WC and the 6N.

Gassage

tbm said:

eSully said:

@Gassage - Did O'Shea mention anything about where he's going next season, I've heard a rumour director of rugby at Munster?

I love the idea of world rugby exclusives on the Fretboard Rugby Union thread!

I him to Italy not all but a done deal?

I have answered the question to @eScully by PM as I do know the answer, as I've been talking to him about a position when he takes up his new role.

Gassage

Enjoy this!

scrumhalf

^^^^

I can't believe how many infringements there were. Offsides, not releasing the tackled player, no arms in the tackle.

Gassage

scrumhalf said:

^^^^

I can't believe how many infringements there were. Offsides, not releasing the tackled player, no arms in the tackle.

Not to mention 'impersonating a Police Officer'.

kjdowd

eSully;990186" said:

FWIW I was screaming blue murder at the screen when I was watching the match but he does kick for the ball not the player. Irish players doing a terrible job of protecting Murray and securing the ball. 

I think there is an element of reminding Murray that if he holds onto the ball on the ground he will get shoeing for his troubles. Not entirely innocent, but prob not a citing.

koneguitarist

What about this daft notion of no tackles until senior in Rugby then? 

What a joke! Do these doctors have nothing better to do. 

tbm

koneguitarist said:

What about this daft notion of no tackles until senior in Rugby then? 

What a joke! Do these doctors have nothing better to do. 

I heard one of the authors on the radio last night. His argument was, and he used pretty much these words, that schools rugby players should not be forced to tackle against their will. I thought the wording was odd, but he seemed to be targeting schools where rugby was compulsory. He then cited some figures from schools rugby in Northern Ireland, where of 400 or so serious injuries, 80 were verified concussions.  He said the same rules shouldn't apply for club rugby as, as its a opt in scenario.

digitalscream

tbm said:

koneguitarist said:

What about this daft notion of no tackles until senior in Rugby then? 

What a joke! Do these doctors have nothing better to do. 

I heard one of the authors on the radio last night. His argument was, and he used pretty much these words, that schools rugby players should not be forced to tackle against their will. I thought the wording was odd, but he seemed to be targeting schools where rugby was compulsory. He then cited some figures from schools rugby in Northern Ireland, where of 400 or so serious injuries, 80 were verified concussions.  He said the same rules shouldn't apply for club rugby as, as its a opt in scenario.

Is rugby actually compulsory anywhere over the age of 12? Most state schools don't even have it as an option, and all the private schools I've come across have it as compulsory for a year or two and then it's an option.

The problem you'll hit is peer pressure - if they say "You can choose to play full-contact rugby or a non-contact version", anybody who chooses the lightweight version will be bullied to hell because...well, kids are assholes.

eSully

tbm said:

koneguitarist said:

What about this daft notion of no tackles until senior in Rugby then? 

What a joke! Do these doctors have nothing better to do. 

I heard one of the authors on the radio last night. His argument was, and he used pretty much these words, that schools rugby players should not be forced to tackle against their will. I thought the wording was odd, but he seemed to be targeting schools where rugby was compulsory. 

I didn't know there were schools where Rugby is compulsory!! That doesn't seem right, particularly for a contact sport.

lloyd

koneguitarist said:

What about this daft notion of no tackles until senior in Rugby then? 

What a joke! Do these doctors have nothing better to do. 

I don't mind things like this being discussed as long as its done sensibly. There does need to be constant review of what's going on IMO.

We need to keep kids safe (and interested) in the game but at the same time we need to be sensible about the risks, yes it is a physical game and there will be injuries but I don't think it's wildly more dangerous than many other sports (hockey/football).

Kids need to be taught from an early age how to tackle properly and safely and that training can come from school.

We can't sanitise kids lives too much and we seem to be wanting to do that, which is a shame. No conkers, no British Bulldog etc.

I'd like to see weight limits at age grade rugby, but more for player development than for safety-there was (and still is I think) a lot of "give it to the big kid" when I was at school which benefits no-one except the ego of PE teachers and coaches/parents wanting a win at any cost.

At my school the kids in the rugby team used to play against all the other kids in PE sometimes-would be 17/18 of us against 30 of them...We just destroyed them, ran through them, smashed them in tackles, killed the scrum etc, now for me looking back that's just fucking stupid. My PE teacher was (and still is) a very good local rugby player who was handy in a fight and would regularly have a punch up over weekends-old school. He was a twat to the fat kids, effeminate and artistic kids etc I think as he wanted to 'toughen them up' but did it all the wrong way.

I can't imagine that an of the ones that might have enjoyed rugby would be encouraged to play after those sessions. One lad who never played in school now plays for a local team back home  (we're 34/35 so that's one lost to these tactics.

Obviously any injuries to individual kids is tragic but to ban these things because of injury possibilities? Seems harsh. 

tbm

eSully said:

I didn't know there were schools where Rugby is compulsory!! That doesn't seem right, particularly for a contact sport.

Thats is what occurred to me. In our litigious age I wouldn't have imagined schools would expose themselves by making a contact sport compulsory. Like I said, the language he used seemed odd to me. 

tbm

Speaking of how to tackle properly:

5redlights

tbm said:

Speaking of how to tackle properly:

Technically, that's not tackling properly. 

crunchman

tbm said:

eSully said:

I didn't know there were schools where Rugby is compulsory!! That doesn't seem right, particularly for a contact sport.

Thats is what occurred to me. In our litigious age I wouldn't have imagined schools would expose themselves by making a contact sport compulsory. Like I said, the language he used seemed odd to me. 

I think the majority of private schools have it as a major sport and it is compulsory.  Winter term is Rugby term and everyone plays.  Ultimately the parents have signed up to it.

I would imagine that most state schools will do a few weeks of rugby in PE at some point.  Unless you want to send them doing endless runs around the playing fields then they will have to do a sport that involves some risk. People get injured playing football - my wife's younger sister broke her leg playing football as a kid.  You can get hit by a cricket ball - not that state schools play much cricket.

I agree they would be better off separating kids by weight though rather than age though, and at younger age groups a reasonable amount of touch rugby would be a good idea - for their skills as much as anything else.  Maybe if there is more of an emphasis on handling and passing then they would develop better skills.  As it is the big kids have a major advantage and just run over everyone and don't develop their skills.  You then wind up with the bash-fest that is the 6N. 

lloyd

5redlights said:

tbm said:

Speaking of how to tackle properly:

Technically, that's not tackling properly. 

Head on the right side, wrapped his arms round the man, nothing wrong with that?

5redlights

double post. 

5redlights

double post.