Nuove regole in Super 14 che ve ne sembra?

[ATHLONE]

Insisto: ci saranno meno mischie. Adesso le squadre non sanno ancora bene come interpretare le regole quindi nelle situazioni di indecisione qualche mischia in più ci può stare. Ma poi, quando avranno messo a punto i giusti meccanismi, ne' vedremo solo nei casi di passaggio involontario in avanti.

Sottolineo poi che la mischia, nei confronti di un calcio di seconda, rappresenta COMUNQUE una ridiscussione del possesso della palla che può cambiare in caso di: mischia girata altre 90°, crollo volontario della prima linea, inserimento della palla in seconda e tallonaggio rubato.
A meno di non avere una supermischi-ultr-dominante mi pare non ci sia alcuna ragione per rischiare di perdere la palla.

Prevedo poi che i piloni, come 'forma', spariranno. Daltronde lo sono già. Basta vedere Hyman o Sheridan che razza di 'piloni' che sono.

Mi sembra che tu sia in contraddizione: se hai dei piloni molto forti hai una supermischia... se gli avversari abbandonano la formazione dei piloni non hanno una supermischia... e quindi mischia e non cl!

[numme]

a mio avviso se si riesce a far rispettare la regola che prevede che le terze stiano legate fino al termine della mischia, una squadra in attacco ha interesse a giocare la mischia in quanto ha la possibilità di portare la palla al largo in velocità e uomo contro uomo, mentre giocando la chiusa può riuscire a creare un vantaggio numerico. questo porta ad aumentare l'importanza della mischia come scelta di gioco e secondo me saranno sfruttate molto più dei cl

[diddi]

La squadra superiore in mischia chiederà le mischie.
La squadra inferiore in mischia chiederà il calcio libero.
In ogni caso, sarà privilegiata la squadra che è stata danneggiata, e questo è in linea con lo spirito del gioco.

[Ale_86]

Al di là di elucubrazioni su mischie, breakdown etc, regole viste in maniera asettica e singolare e via dicendo (importanti di per sè, ma secondo me non adatte a stabilire la validità di queste regole), per quanto riguarda le poche partite che ho visto non mi sono piaciute, prendendo il gioco così come modificato dalle regole prese nell'insieme.

Sono tendenzialmente d'accordo con Habana, insomma. Mi sembra un'altro sport, a vederlo, e non nascondo che se il fine di queste regole è quello di incrementare lo spettacolo, io mi sono annoiato parecchio. Le partite mi son parse monotone, a dire la verità.


Però è anche vero quel che dice Deans, prendendo come spunti gli articoli postati da Pakeha (quello di McCaw non l'ho ancora letto, un poco alla volta ).
Diamo tempo al tempo. Magari poi le squadre si assesteranno e i risultati positivi si vedranno.

Io però, senza tuttavia poter dare per manifesta incompetenza specifica pareri tecnici, resto un pelo deluso e preoccupato..

[stewie]

A me l'idea di privilegiare il calcio libero rispetto alla mischia non dispiacerebbe a condizione però che venisse eleiminato il vantaggio del lancio in touch sul calcio diretto. In questo modo, quando il gioco deve riprendere nei 22 avversari non si vedrebbero più, forse, i calci in touch ma azioni alla mano giocate con gli avanti, come avveniva una volta. In caso contrario si rischia di abolire di fatto il ruolo degli avanti ed allora, a mio parere, tanto vale giocare solo al rugby a sette.

[Tanu]

Dal sito degli arbitri Sudafricani: statistiche dopo la terza giornata

COMPARISON BETWEEN 2008 & 2007 S14 – AFTER ROUNDS 1, 2 & 3

Number of scrums
2008: 523
2007: 510

Difference: +13 (+4,4%)
Per game 2008: 24,9
Per game 2007: 24,3
difference per game: +0,6

Comment: No difference

Line-outs
2008: 502
2007: 641

Difference: -139 (-21,7%)
Per game 2008: 23,9
Per game 2007: 30,5
difference per game: -6,6

Comment: Fewer kicks for touch because of new law

Tackle/Ruck/Maul
2008: 3401
2007: 3021

Difference: +380 (+12,5%)
Per game 2008: 162
Per game 2007: 144
difference per game: +18

Comment: Much more activity by all players

Penalties & free kicks
2008: 615
2007: 437

Difference: +178 (+40%)
Per game 2008: 29,3
Per game 2007: 21
difference per game: +8.3

Comment: Because of free kicks in lieu of penalties

Ball in play time
Per match 2008: 35 minutes
Per match 2007: 31 minutes
difference per game: 4 minutes
Difference +12%

Comment: Great improvement

Kicks in general play

Per match 2008: 54
Per match 2007: 51
difference per game: 3

Comment: No difference.

[Pakeha_70]

Dal sito degli arbitri Sudafricani: statistiche dopo la terza giornata

COMPARISON BETWEEN 2008 & 2007 S14 – AFTER ROUNDS 1, 2 & 3

Number of scrums
2008: 523
2007: 510

Difference: +13 (+4,4%)
Per game 2008: 24,9
Per game 2007: 24,3
difference per game: +0,6

Comment: No difference

Line-outs
2008: 502
2007: 641

Difference: -139 (-21,7%)
Per game 2008: 23,9
Per game 2007: 30,5
difference per game: -6,6

Comment: Fewer kicks for touch because of new law

Tackle/Ruck/Maul
2008: 3401
2007: 3021

Difference: +380 (+12,5%)
Per game 2008: 162
Per game 2007: 144
difference per game: +18

Comment: Much more activity by all players

Penalties & free kicks
2008: 615
2007: 437

Difference: +178 (+40%)
Per game 2008: 29,3
Per game 2007: 21
difference per game: +8.3

Comment: Because of free kicks in lieu of penalties

Ball in play time
Per match 2008: 35 minutes
Per match 2007: 31 minutes
difference per game: 4 minutes
Difference +12%

Comment: Great improvement

Kicks in general play

Per match 2008: 54
Per match 2007: 51
difference per game: 3

Comment: No difference.

Grazie mille.
Molto interessante.

Mi potresti dare l'indirizzo web del sito da cui hai preso le informazioni?

[gcruta]

Dovrebbe essere a disposizione sulle discussioni sulle regole di Planet Rugby, tipo sareferees.za.com o qlc. del genere. Se lo cerchi con google lo trovi di certo.

[Pakeha_70]

Crusaders-Force great advert for the ELVs
By SPIRO ZAVOS

The experimental law variations (ELVs) are working. That is the good news. The bad news is that the Western Force seem to be the only Australian side that understands how to exploit them.

The essential point about the ELVs is that they do not impose radical changes. They make the game easier to understand and play and, essentially, provide some scope for sides to exploit their skills, fitness and pace. Despite the nonsense spouted by northern hemisphere critics, the ELVs allow for attritional scrumming play, if teams want to play this game.

The pulsating Force-Crusaders match turned with about 20 minutes left and the Force holding a handy lead when the Crusaders won a series of scrums, some of them on Force put-ins.

This scrum dominance enabled the Crusaders to set up a series of attacks down the blindside. Tries were scored in quick succession and a game that was seemingly lost was snatched back from the locals. Earlier in the match, too, a strong Crusaders scrum and the five-metre gap enabled Daniel Carter to run at and through Matt Giteau to score his side's first try.

The ELVs also allow for expansive play that exploits the full width of the field. And this is the point about the ELVs. Sides have to be accurate in the contest for possession at the rucks and mauls. If they make mistakes a turnover, either through a steal or a short-arm penalty, allows the opposition to set up a quick and often lethal passing attack.

The Force scored a memorable try through No 8 Richard Brown after a breakout from a turnover and strong running and skilful off-loading by Scott Staniforth and Ryan Cross. The Cheetahs, Hurricanes, Blues, Chiefs, Stormers and, of course, the Crusaders all scored breakout tries where the ball was moved at pace to set up the sort of crowd-pleasing tries that are virtually never seen in the Six Nations, except by Shane Williams for Wales.

Critics of the ELVs complain that they bring union closer to league. This is a woeful misreading of the variations. If you want to look for a similar football code to ELVs-rugby, that code is Australian football. Like AFL, ELVs-rugby features a continual contest for possession of the ball. Turnovers are frequent. Play can move frenetically up and down the field. Teams that can exploit the turnovers are able to score points quite rapidly. Five of the seven matches this round featured teams desperately trying to win the game at the end, and sides just as desperately trying to hang on.

It was all tremendously exciting. Breakouts can happen at any time. But only if teams are prepared to play for them. A missed touch finder by the Brumbies, for instance, provided the chance for Kurtley Beale to make a sizzling break that led to Tom Carter scoring the Waratahs' first try.

Unfortunately, this was a rarity for the Waratahs. Admittedly, rain started falling at the SFS virtually with the kickoff. The Waratahs gained their third win by kicking the ball away nearly every time they had it. It was NSW's 500th win since their first – against Queensland in 1882.

NSW lost the return match of that series. The game was played in the rain. The Queensland captain told his players: "The ball is wet, boys. Don't pass it."

The Waratahs got their win on Saturday by playing the Queensland 1882 game. They are in the top four on points difference. But in the era of ELVs, the Waratahs need to play more like the Force if they want to win the tournament.

Playing like the 1882 Queensland side is probably setting up the Waratahs for yet another Wara-wobblies season.

[supermax]

In effetti, Western Force-Crusaders è stata una delle partite più avvincenti che mi è capitato di vedere negli ultimi anni ed un vero e proprio spot per l'efficacia delle nuove regole. Ma il giudizio finale si potrà dare solo alla fine del Super 14. Fra le cose negative, mi sembra di notare un'eccesso di frenesia dovuto ai tanti calci di seconda fischiati, oltre che una maggiore "propensione" a fischiare da parte degli arbitri, tanto la monore gravità della punizione rende il fischio meno decisivo.....

[supermax]

oooops un'eccesso......

[Pakeha_70]

John Drake: ELVs are fine, but what about the refs?

Like an old-fashioned movie the start of the 2008 Super 14 has given us the good, the bad and the ugly.

The good has been the Crusaders and the Blues using superior fitness, skill, muscle and smarts to lead the way. While the Blues literally threw the game away against the Sharks and the Crusaders left it late to get out of jail against the Force, both sides have shown the standards required to win the competition. I have no doubt the Crusaders will be there at the end.

The Blues faded last season and it will be interesting to see if coach David Nucifora starts to manage his players against fatigue in the later rounds.

My television duties have dictated that I have been watching more of the other NZ teams than should be allowed - if only for health reasons.

The Chiefs have lost a fair share of experience from last year and it shows. Not only do they have new players but the coaching staff has lost Warren Gatland and co. The new guys, Keith Robinson and assistant coach Craig Stevenson, are very raw at this level. I wonder if Ian Forster may have felt threatened by Gatland and has now tipped too far the other way.

Of the players, I think some of the senior pros still available may be in a comfort zone and perhaps not ready to die for the cause as in past seasons. Unless things change it will be another season of what-ifs for the supporters.

The Hurricanes are flashy, physical, flighty, brutal, slack, cocky, smart, dull, sloppy, superb and crazy - all in 80 minutes. Who would know how they will go - certainly Colin Cooper must wake up every game day wondering which team will turn up. They have too many All Blacks to be so unpredictable.

The Highlanders look like they will accumulate points every game but not many wins. They are a solid bunch of triers who don't seem to miss the likes of Carl Hayman, Anton Oliver and Josh Blackie - but they would sell Carisbrook to get Nick Evans back. They have some exciting backs but seem to believe tries are scored across the sidelines rather than the goal line.

The Aussie teams are struggling with injuries and a lack of depth. Mitchell's Force have done well in South Africa and are maturing into play-off contenders providing their key guys stay fit. The Brumbies and Reds are finding the pace too tough and the Waratahs are a motor missing a couple of spark plugs at the moment.

The structure of the competition is quite unfair on the South African teams with travel and away matches making it tough to survive through to the finals. Despite this they continue to churn out interesting new players.

We tend to knock them for their lack of inventiveness and skill but the likes of the Cheetahs, Sharks and Stormers have scored tries this season that the Crusaders would be proud of. And what about their crowds - absolutely fantastic. It just shows what winning a Rugby World Cup can do for morale.

Our crowds are creeping back slowly. The franchises are doing lots of things to make it a better entertainment experience but it will take more quality rugby, better services and hospitality to regain the public's trust. It's hard spending time and money watching rugby when there's a great cricket season still on and rowing steals your attention.

No early season review would be complete without noting the ELVs.

It's early days but the experimental laws have added more good than bad. But what about the promise the referees would stop talking non-stop at the breakdown? What about the promise to be tough on the offside line? Why are touch judges called assistant referees when they don't do much different (let them help the referees get the cheats on side)? What's going on with the TMOs - shouldn't these guys be more experienced and not get mauled by the game referees?

The breakdown phase is still a shambles and until repaired will remain a major blight on the game progressing to be spectator friendly. Apart from that, the ELVs are great.

[Pakeha_70]

Rugby: Rules favour New Zealand, says Jones

Rugby's new laws being trialled in the Super 14 are set up for New Zealand, says former Wallaby coach Eddie Jones.

The format likely to be further trialled in the northern hemisphere starting this September will benefit New Zealand more than anyone else, Jones believes.

"They set it up for New Zealand to become even stronger in the game," he said. "They have dominated rugby for the last seven years despite not winning the big tournament, the World Cup. But under the new laws they will be even tougher to beat."

Jones fears the potential power and quality of the New Zealanders because he insists they have the best combination of individual power, speed, athleticism and ball carrying ability of any country playing the game.

"It makes them a very dangerous side. There is no doubt in my mind that these laws will therefore help New Zealand the most. Look how naturally the players of teams like the Crusaders and Blues have adapted to them. It looks like they have been playing under them all their lives. The South African and Australian players don't give that impression.

"In most of the New Zealand teams, about 12 of the 15 players are good ball carriers and, under these rules, that sets it up for them to dominate."

Jones, who takes over as director of rugby at London club Saracens at the end of the season, says he likes certain aspects of the laws. "Not being able to kick out on the full if you pass back into your 22 is eminently sensible.

"There is still a question mark over the breakdown because sides are deliberately giving away free kicks. Therefore, I believe you still need the facility of conceding three points through a full penalty for such offences.

"The other thing is that if teams are very good defensively, as they are these days, it will be very hard to score against them. The higher level you get in the game the harder it is to score because most teams have 11 to 12 very good defenders. At test level, you can make that 15."

One solution was for the IRB to endorse a major crackdown by referees on those deliberately cheating when defending difficult positions.

He likes the extra five metres for backs at scrum time but says it again comes down to tough refereeing sanctions against players not binding properly. "If they are not binding correctly, that negates so much of the intention behind the law."

He accepts the breakdown will always be something of a mess as long as it remains a contest for the ball. "If you want just a fast game, remove the contest element from the breakdown. But personally I wouldn't do that. We still need a contest there in my view."

[supermax]

Non sono completamente d'accordo con Jones. Le nuove regole potrebbero favorire anche gli australiani, se ritrovano una generazione di 3/4 come quella mitica dei rogers, Latham, Larkham, ecc.. ed il loro modo tipico di giocare. Più calci liberi significa velocizzare il gioco anche perché ci sono meno touche ed allora, forse, sono solo i sudafricani che avranno necessità di adattarsi con maggiore difficoltà. Il fatto invece che i neozelandesi siano quelli più avvantaggiati mi trova d'accordo. D'altra parte certe situazioni di gioco che si sono venute a creare nel S14 finora mi hanno ricordato per certi versi il rugby a 7, per gli spazi aperti su giocate veloci del calcio di seconda. E comunque i neozelandesi non hanno situazioni di gioco in cui sono veramente deboli.....

[Pakeha_70]

Stats show set-pieces still rule under ELVs

The scrum has emerged as the most deadly try-scoring weapon under the experimental law variations in this year's Super 14, something that will shock and please sceptics in the north.

Australian Rugby Union figures released after the first four rounds of the championship may shock critics of the ELVs in the northern hemisphere, who suspected the International Rugby Board initiative on trial in the Super 14 would prove the laws degrade the importance of the scrum.

However, the ARU statistics show the opposite, with the scrum moving up from being the third most effective catalyst to tries, overtaking turnovers and the lineout to become the paramount source of tries for teams.

Whereas last year after 14 rounds, 19 per cent of tries came from scrums, after the first four rounds this year, 25 per cent of five-pointers have been scored off them, 21 per cent off turnovers and 20 per cent off lineouts.

It is a reversal on last season when ELVs were not used, and statistics revealed that the best platform for scoring tries was the lineout with a 31 per cent rate, against turnovers (29 per cent) and the scrum (19 per cent).

Other statistics after four rounds this year show 17 per cent of tries came from quick taps - against 8 per cent last year, 13 per cent from a kick (against 12 per cent) and 4 per cent from restarts (against 1 per cent).

ARU high performance manager Pat Howard yesterday urged the Six Nations unions to examine the latest figures before meeting with the IRB's ELV project group in London on March 27 and 28 to discuss them.

"I understand the northern hemisphere aspect on this, but they have to go and have a look at the laws and go, 'Righto, there are more scrums and less lineouts.' That is the pure fact," he said.

The increase in tries from scrums is linked to the ELVs requiring all backs - except the No.9 - to remain five metres behind the hindmost foot of the scrum base, and their rise in number from an average of 20 per game to 21. Meanwhile, the number of lineouts has dropped from 31 a game after 14 rounds last year to 26 after four rounds.

So, sides with a powerful scrum who use the laws well will be rewarded rather than hindered as critics feared.

"Scrums [in Super 14] are up slightly, and coupled with that is the 5m of extra space. The number of tries being scored off-scrum is particularly significant," Howard said.

"But I am not overly surprised. We thought the 5m [law] would give you that extra space, real momentum off first phase. If you have a good scrum, it is being rewarded if it is moving forward. You get real momentum."

Wallabies and Waratahs hooker Adam Freier believes the northern hemisphere outlook on the ELVs is unfounded - especially the view that they are aimed at helping the often maligned Australian scrum perform better.

"I can't see what the merit is in the northern hemisphere sides thinking that. The scrum is still such a huge contest, and one that is so important we can get right in Australian rugby," Freier said.

"If anything, each scrum counts even more, the contest is even more intense."

If the ELVs had been on trial in the Six Nations, Howard believes England, who pride themselves on their scrum, would have beaten Scotland rather than lost 15-9 as they did in their game at Murrayfield last weekend.

"England has a good scrum. But they would actually like these laws. They have the players who would be suited to them," Howard said.

"The game was decided on penalties. Under these laws, it wouldn't have been."

Despite the ELVs having heightened the importance of the scrum, sped up match play and encouraged counter-attack and greater use of the turnover ball out wide, Howard believes the game itself is ostensibly the same.

"There is not a vast difference or massive leap away, just a significant shift [in] positiveness of the game," he said.

Other statistics show minimal change that should not make adaptation difficult for the northern hemisphere sides. Rucks and mauls have risen from 137 a game to only 141 after four rounds, as have turnovers at the ruck from 11 to 14. In general play, free kicks have increased from two a game to 16, and penalties are down from 19 to 12.

Passes averaged 228 a game last year, against 223 so far; while kicks compare from 51 to 53 this year. Time for ball in play is almost the same - 33 minutes last year compared with 34 minutes. But some teams are extending that to 39 minutes.

It has been noticed as match fitness increased in rounds three and four, so too did skill levels and tries scored.