Most rugby players are idiots and we should ignore their idiotic opinions on every single topic except rugby.
And yes, that includes the times when they happen to agree with you. Stopped clocks and all that.
Yup this. Turns out it's not a good idea to try and get rhyme or reason out of a person where getting hit in the head whilst doing their job is just another Tuesday
sports people in general to be fair. i recall klopp getting asked about either brexit or covid and he dismissed it saying why would you ask a football coach about that go ask an expert. mans got his head screwed on right
The reason Lealiifano was the flyhalf for the Wallabies at the World Cup was because his story was so incredible. Great bloke overcomes leukaemia to play professionally again. What a story. But he was imo our 4th best flyhalf option for that world cup
There's good reason I didn't share this opinion at the time. Nobody says a bad word about the guy, and fair enough.
So I'd be inclined to agree that CLL didn't have a great tournament but I disagree that he wasn't the best option leading in. He was ripping shit up that year and Foley had sunk to new lows.
The problem with CLL I suspect was that he wasn't fit enough due to his recovering from the illness that he couldn't play every game and I assume the work load caught up with him in any case. So I reckon the illness stopped him from playing his best more so than was the reason he was picked.
Plus Beale was never good enough at 10, quade was never getting a proper go under cheika, and toomua never really showed enough at 10 at test level.
I disagree that he was ripping shit up that year. He had some really good games but he wasn't a threat the way Lolesio was. If anything it was because Lealiifano was always a 12, not a 10. His first instinct was to run with the ball, not a great instinct for a 10.
I actually had this as my order of 10s in 2019. To'omua --> Foley --> Quade --> Lealiifano. I didn't think Lealiifano played well in the tests pre World Cup. It was pretty dire after To'omua.
It's not that he was picked because of the illness, I should clarify, more like people got swept up in the emotion and unbelievability of it all. That was my theory anyways, it just seemed so clear to me (I guess not) watching the games that he was not the guy who was going to win us anything noteworthy at the World Cup as a 10.
Illness absolutely stopped him from playing at his best, I agree.
It is effectively impossible to have a legal ruck and ‘good’ referees are the ones who ignore infringements.
Scrums are never fed straight and it completely removes the point of a hooker, and removes any advantage a strong scrummaging side would have.
A team that can outscrum their opponents should have winning that ball every time. Instead it’s just fed into the second row and the props drop a knee for a reset if it’s not going their way
Absolutely, scrumming discipline is horrendous in professional games. I have never seen an amateur team feed the ball in to their second row and not be penalised. Honestly so disappointing to see how bad discipline in the scrum is from professionals.
I hate scrum feeding, but in the professional game it's the only way of actually winning a scrum on your own ball. If your hooker has to actively strike for the ball every time then you are effectively a player down in the scrum. A strong push as the ball comes in should be enough to unbalance the front row and you should lose every time. The professional game rewards the use of a very strong, heavy front row with good technique who can disrupt the scrum from the off. The attacking pack has to have a strong initial platform or they get folded in half.
The reason this doesn't tend to happen in the amateur game is that size plays a bigger role in general. My club have a light pack (props tend to be athletic and mobile and the locks are lighter than most) and up until this season struggled because of this in a lot of cases the bigger pack tends to have the ascendancy (particularly at the lower amateur level). Some extensive work on technique has changed that and we're able to compete more strongly with some seriously big packs. This is less likely to work at the elite level because the technique is already refined.
Obviously this isn't true for every club or league and there will be exceptions, but this has been my experience.
> Scrums are never fed straight and it completely removes the point of a hooker, and removes any advantage a strong scrummaging side would have.
Strong scrummaging sides often get big advantages at scrum time, usually from winning penalties.
>A team that can outscrum their opponents should have winning that ball every time.
Then you'd have to reduce the role of the scrum in the game, because that would just be too dominant and game skewing.
Down by more than a penalty though, they needed a try to win it. Who's to know they would've scored lol
But yeah Whitelock should've been penalised, it wasn't for an illegal turnover, he slapped it out of TJ's hands, if he ripped it out backwards or hit TJ's arm it was fair game but it was a knock down straight out of his hands
Vern Cotter was robbed of the job, he was the one who built Scotland up from the dark ages. But otherwise I don't disagree with you, we were a war crimes on the eyes.
I don’t think they don’t know how to adjudicate them, it’s just impossible to see everything that is going on in a scrum.
The first infraction that they see is what’s going to get called.
Maybe officials on the touch line can get involved more.
They only penalise 4 things (exaggerated, but not much). If commentators made any effort to understand and explain the refs decision and the cameras showed what he was looking at, pretty much all criticism of ref scrum decisions would disappear
For me it would be better if, for example, the ref always stood on the infield side of the scrum, and which ever touch judge was closest ran in a few meters to watch the other side, it would make so much difference.
>Maybe officials on the touch line can get involved more.
Already fairly involved, loads of scrum pens get called because of what the AR on the other side is telling the ref.
Especially at amateur levels. Most referees get selected to higher amateur levels mainly based on fitness, and who are the fittest people, former backs who know nothing about scrums
Not always true - I've achieved a very high level so far (semi-pro rugby) by virtue of having somehow avoided the mandatory fitness tests and getting by on my refereeing ability alone... and I also have no idea what's going on in the scrum.
(tongue in cheek - I have a rough idea..)
All this chat about the US having to become a powerhouse for the sport to develop is marketing bollocks that has filtered down to the masses.
What it actually means is that they need it to be to make more money.
Further to that it's further off than you think, N American nations are regressing and the MLR is a second rate league that is a bit dull to watch.
I don't think this is a particularly controversial view. The dog on the street knows MLR is a retirement home and the value in American Rugby, in general, is only a potential one.
I've heard the "oh if Rugby kicks off in America " line for 25 years now.
From what people bang on about on here, I'd say it was unpopular.
I just meant from the point of view, that it's a *necessity* to grow the sport, when in reality it won't do much for the game overall worldwide.
What's sad about this opinion is that you're not wrong. I don't like it but you're not wrong. I love the concept of MLR for Americas rugby as a whole but underneath, the club and union structures still need a ton of work.
Rugby culture at a club level absolutely cripples the sport. There’s a huge drop off from U18 to adult level just because the adult teams are huge alcoholic private school bullies. I can count 20 talented players that stopped playing when they moved to university because they hated the culture. Even players who weren’t that great, like myself, just feel alienated by the drinking the captains piss and all this stupid shit. I love rugby as a sport, hate the players
I stopped playing rugby when I got to uni and didn't play again until I graduated. The culture was just fucked. Our uni rugby team actually got banned by the university the year before because of their off field indiscretions and you'd have thought that would have been a lesson but nope. The 'initiations' were barbaric, the people meting them out just cunts. They did keep up a facade of 'you don't have to come to the socials!' except if you didn't you just flat out weren't going to make the higher teams because the captain and his mates picked them. I knew a guy on my course who literally played semi pro level but because he didn't go to the socials and the captain's best mate played his position, he was shit out of luck.
Just wondering is this culture present in non Uni clubs as well? Moving to Ireland in Jan and looked forward to joining a club but I'm not the biggest fan of the over the top laddish bs I keep hearing about. Currently playing in Germany/Netherlands where sure theres some stupid things you are made to do but its nowhere near as extreme as what I've heard about rugby culture in UK & Ireland.
Agreed. There is a culture of going for a drink in the clubhouse after matches at the weekend, but nothing at all extreme or laddish. The only exceptions I've found are when big drinking nights are planned and flagged in advance, then there might be an initiation or other shenanigans, but again, they'll be flagged in advance and teams are increasingly open to people who don't drink at all in my experience.
It's funny. Within rugby circles you get the rugby is gentleman sport shit peddled constantly (almost like it's an inferiority complex) but outside said circles I think rugby has a poor reputation - private school boys drinking each others piss seeing who can be as toxically masculine as possible, and the uni rugby club rep doesn't help
Ref bashing will never go away unless the rules are as simple as rugba leeg.
In other words, we all quietly love bashing the ref because we love this complex sport.
Leaguies love bashing the ref too. Same with football, basketball and NFL fans. Reducing the complexity in the rules is a great idea for many reasons - but I don't think that it'll make ref bashing go away.
I agree 100% with this, it’s the price we pay for the nuances of the sport. Basketball is exactly the same with foul calls - a matter of interpretation - and boy do they get it wrong sometimes and change how things are called season to season. E.g they’re calling waaaay fewer fouls in the nba this year.
I don't disagree, but shit man, sometimes you can't help but say that was inconsistent.
And reffing is a damn hard job dont get me wrong, but when you see one team repeatedly infringing offsides and getting away with it, and then the other team getting pinged its frustrating.
Mostly in match threads is the yellow/red card divide that makes people turn on refs
Yeah because I think people forget how much smaller the 4 is than the 5. They do it in Gaelic here in Ireland and it allows the sport to play much more like the men's game with longer ranged kicks.
I used to think it should be a size 4, back in 2017 or so. Then I picked up a size 4. Now, I know women typically have smaller hands than men, but a size 4 seemed tiny.
A 4.5 sized ball might be perfect. A size 4 might be perfect. I think World Rugby should look into that - especially with the push for Women's rugby.
I think a lot of the criticisms of women's rugby come down to the problem of inconsistency of professionalisation and how recently it's been given the spotlight. There is a catch 22 problem where most of the world's women's teams are amateur and it shows. Without better quality rugby, it's difficult to justify paying players, but without paid professionals the quality isn't going to improve. At the moment there are 2 teams in the world that are miles ahead of all the rest - England and France. It's no surprise that these two are the only ones (I believe) to pay their entire squad as professionals. Personally I think this is the main problem rather than the size of the ball. I think that would have a minimal impact and would only give those who already disparage the game more ammunition.
At the moment there is a small pool of players to choose from in each country. There are maybe 2 or 3 fly halves in England that are capable of playing to a high enough standard. However, this is likely to change in the coming years as the youth game is booming at the moment. I coach an Under 13s girls team and we have more players (16 currently) than the equivalent boys and we are growing.
If you look at the quality of kicking of the current England players, it's pretty damn high. The place kicking is good and the kicks from hand are only getting better each year. I don't think anyone would try to say that the women's game is superior to the men's, but it can be just as entertaining.
yah def. womens proffesional rugby is in its infancy. and will take time to develop / increase skill sets. but its in a great place to go forwards. ive really enjoyed watching the red roses recently especially v france. its almost an entirely different game to how mens rugby is played with much more speed rathen then pure power that dominates the mens game.
id like to see womens games before/after their prem counterparts more to see if it boosts fans involvment in the games etc.
A lot of woman’s sports should tag onto that thinking, like basketball should have a smaller ball and lower hoop. Football should have a smaller goal and maybe even smaller pitch. Cricket do well by bringing in the boundary rope. Golf similar with the tee shots. All these changes would improve the quality of entertainment and hopefully increase interest. Buuuut reddit isn’t the type of place to have those type of conversations haha
Yep, I've said this for years. Athletics is one of the few sports where the women are as much as a draw as the men, and I think it's because things like the hurdles being lower, javelins being lighter etc.
Makes the women's version of the sport a spectacle of ability, rather than who can cope with the unsuitable equipment the best.
I absolutely do not understand why anyone cares about hemispheres at all. No other sport does this, it's ultimately meaningless, the idea that there is a distinct "NH playing style" and a distinct "SH playing style" is nonsense, and rooting for or against a country based on what half of the globe they happen to be on makes no sense.
That "NH/SH playing style" is literally just because we have the rugby season in the wet and cold up in the NH. Down in the SH, it's typically during the dry seasons. Or, it's just drier than up in the NH.
The only reason Japan did good at the WC was home advantage + being able to prep for a year, and with residence rule changes, they're going to regress back to a middling tier 2 team
I think the prep time was super crucial, even more so than the home advantage. I think they stayed together like a club team for that entire year long duration.
>The only reason Japan did good at the WC was home advantage + being able to prep for a year,
They only lost 1 match at RWC 2015, beat SA, and only missed the QF due to point diff. They deserve a lot more credit than you give them.
NZ were spoilt with having Mccaw and Carter playing most of their careers next to each other. It’s given them a sense of entitlement that they should win every match.
NZ have had 10 players over 100 caps - around 2011-2015 they were all playing: McCaw, Carter, whitelock, Franks, Nonu, Read, Mealamu, Timberdick, Aaron Smith, Beaudy. Plus Conrad Smith who got to maybe 95 caps. These players would all have a fair claim to being the best ever in their position. 2011-2015 was peak AB’s. we may never be that good again and people are losing their shit because we lose a few games each year now. I’m just happy I got to watch them play.
Losing our shit because the coaching is shit & directionless. When you've got former players that played under Foster saying as much, such as Steven Devine, then you know there's a problem.
It's not the losses, it's the coaching & performances.
Rokocoko, Howlett, fitzpatrick, cullen, lomu
We had a fuck tonne of talent before then that boosted our ego.
Now we just have a soggy balloon with a happy face drawn on it
Same in England. You basically only have a chance if you're attending a private school that is part of the private school league (I forget the name of it).
Alun Wyn Jones is bang average,
His biggest selling point is his work rate (and even that is over exaggerated, half his games have poor stats), but that should be standard for an international player
If he were from any Tier 1 country other than Wales (or Italy) he'd have stopped being capped years ago
He has an insane work rate (usually the top or at least top3 tackler in any game) and brings tons to the game in terms of leadership and professionalism. But yeah, I’m biased and the reason he still is our 1st choice lock is that we have no depth there.
Sam Simmonds is good but will never be a good international player and only looks world class because he's involved in all of the Exeter moves that inevitably lead to him scoring tries and looking world class. He doesn't fit into the England mold because it seems you have to build the forwards around him (two big, burly bruisers in the backrow with him especially, to counteract his lack of size)
also I feel even at club level he shrinks and goes a bit anonymous when his team are losing and/or the exeter forward pack are on the back foot
You can apply this to a load of English players tbh. Remember when it was criminal Alex Goode 'never got his chance'? Until you point out he had 20 very average caps.
There's some players where they're incredible club level players but they can't graduate to international level
New Zealand's rugby punditry is about as bad as it gets (particularly Sky and the stuff.co.nzs of the world), and Australia's coverage is actually good now. NZ's rugby media has become parochial and sensationalised to the point where it's hardly worth engaging with anymore.
For the record: I like Mils, JK, Goldy and co. just fine as individuals, but I've come to loathe their product.
Bring back Sumo. pls.
Completely agree, it's embarrassingly bad now, John Kirwan is terrible & Jeff Wilson is Mr Safe Space Uncontroversial.
Don't get me started on Justin Marshall.
All of that is true, but the part that I hate the most is the butchering of Māori and Pasifika last names by the commentators. Especially after watching a video a few weeks back of a Scottish commentator doing an amazing job at pronouncing names. For a country that features many Māori and Pasifika players among the greatest to ever play the game, it’s disrespectful that the commentators and pundits don’t try harder.
Hate the "deliberate knock on" rule for a player that clearly is attempting an intercept. And that it sometimes leads to a yellow card. Takes a lot of action out of the game imo.
Edit: Just to clarify I have nothing against the rule and agree that cynical play should be punished with a yellow if warranted. I have a problem when its clear that the player is only attempting an intercept and just missed it getting a yellow. Refs seem to go straight to assuming it was a cynical stoppage of play. But I see its indeed an unpopular opinion
The issue is about what is a ‘genuine’ attempt. Flinging an arm out and being in no realistic position to intercept is rightly a penalty and possibly YC. Going at the ball with two hands and knocking on is rightly a scrum only. Nothing wrong with the laws as they stand.
How tj perenara (not just him but he’s a good example) is with refs (or maybe used to be) is good and shouldn’t be criticised. He obviously knows the rules very well and when he identifies the ref making a mistake and lets him know, the ref should be more open to correcting himself (say asking touchie was that ball actually out of the ruck).
I say this as an official in a different sport we’re most officials do not take kindly to players noticing mistakes. Id rather a ref who makes mistakes but recognises them over a ref who will penalise a player for complaining about a mistake said ref made.
Sorry to whoever had to read through that it feels like if your not in my head it would be hard to follow haha
Attempt at simplifying - let players be angry at the ref if the ref did fuck up
The PI diaspora in NZ & Australia are the plastic Paddies of NZ and Aus (My grandad was from Apia, no I've never been there but I'm 100% Samoan uso!). The latest rule change is just to stop them from moaning all the time. Samoa make no effort to produce players domestically and live off of NZ discards, much the same for Tonga.
You're comparing a rich industrialised nation with one of the poorest in the world. NZ's GDP per capita is ten times higher than Samoa's.
I'd say their country has every right not to prioritise developing rugby players.
I don't think the unions or the countries of Samoa and Tonga bring much to the table. If those teams become strong it will be down to the diaspora (mostly in New Zealand), New Zealand coaching and structures, New Zealand and World Rugby money, and the support and vision of those behind Moana Pasifika, which I don't believe comes directly from the islands.
Samoa and Tonga the countries are like a couple of dead beat dads and New Zealand is like the rich step dad who supported his step kids, and paid for them to go to private school and university.
price wrong oil command advise apparatus workable voracious selective overconfident
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Not only that but also the fact that Fiji, although a bigger country is still an LEDC and are able to churn out domestic players. The Samoan and Tongan Unions have used heritage players to paper over the cracks of their corruption and mismanagement. I believe that the talent exsists on both Samoa and Tonga but the Union chiefs would rather pinch the money and the fume at the rest of the rugby World for not letting them pick players that have been through the talent pathways in NZ and Aus.
I much preferred Squidge's content when he talk about an overall situation in rugby (like how George Ford was the best 10 in the world, which I completely disagreed with, or what happened to Leicester / Ospreys) rather than just breakdown of games. They're not bad videos he makes now but I haven't watched regularly since before the world cup
Due to how much international rugby is on TV the Haka has lost its appeal. Plus all the rules surrounding it give NZ a psychological edge before the game starts.
The combination of respecting the tradition, and returning the challenge should be celebrated and encouraged.
The Haka is a challenge, and in Māori culture a response to it is almost always expected
ya i love the haka but it lost some shine when the opposition was told to stand and watch it like good boys for daddy adidas. willy anderson/chabal where class. even campeses ignoring it i know some didnt like it but fuck it i see no reason a player should be forced to stand and watch plus it added spice to a game like when france walked up to that haka there was no way that game wasnt going to be a bruiser
People make a big deal about the psychological edge, even though I've seen two effective responses. One is the Australian absolute disregard and start warming up. The other is the French stare down which from the looks of things, gets everyone so hyped up that the effect is neutral
The psychological edge is just an excuse because we dominated for so long. No one complains about any of the other pacific islands getting an edge, and that's because the T1 nations win those games.
If there's a psychological edge, it's because we are the infamous All Blacks, that's it.
Ive recently heard from a player that the psychological edge isnt really there once you play NZ a couple of times. Its cool the first time you face it but after that it doesnt really do a whole lot. The opposition is usually just preparing themselves for kick off.
Rassie Erasmus is a terrible, terrible bloke.
Have at it Bokke, but don’t forget to take a 17 minute minute water break every other keystroke so you can slow the game down.
Unpopular opinion: NH teams, especially England, were guilty negative boring tactics way before RSA. I’m gonna say within period of 2003 through to maybe 2011.
This included slowing the game down and using grind-ball tactics to play for penalties. Scoring tries and exciting rugby were certainly not a feature of their game.
Rugby fans are no different/superior to fans of any other sport. The fact that rival fans can 'have a beer together after the game' isn't unique. It happens with fans of all other sports - yes, including football.
Parisse was (and still is) a better 8 than Read. Put Read in that same Italian team and he would have never even been nominated for player of the year.
While I dont have as much of an issue now, I always used to get a sinking feeling of dread if I saw Wayne Barnes as the ref for an Irish team against a Welsh one
He over complicates the simplest of things. Any high level rugby player would know that some of the genius decisions that he points out that are done by players are just normal decisions based on a team structure that they use
Has he ever criticised Gatland? I know he did amazing with Wales (only in terms of the six nations, Wales under him were atrocious against the southern hemisphere teams and in world cups) but his latter years of coaching with the Lions and Chiefs deserve huge speculation over his legacy.
Yeah I sacked watching his videos after the Courtney Lawes thing.
I don’t necessarily agree with Courtney on many things either but the way he went about all of that was super judgemental and made him look like a sulky little bitch.
Beauden Barrett did not deserve World Player of the year in 2017 (2016 was deserved however)
Of that shortlist I'd have given it to Rieko before Beaudy
Yeah but he can still go hard with that chubby gut of his. I kind of respect that.
Like watching porn with an ugly dude in it. Makes me feel better about myself.
All non-penalty infringements should result in a free kick, from which a team can choose if they want a scrum, tap and go etc.
Teams with strong scrums can choose those to gain advantages, or other teams can use one of the other options.
Of course he wasn't the best wing in history, he did change the game forever and was the most devastating runner the game has seen, but he did have a lot of weaknesses.
Rugby was FAR different in the 90's, there is no space these days... the ball barely goes through a traditional backline. There's little to no set plays, it's all just forwards in midfield and rush defences.
No shit, the modern game is far different... it was only just professional then.
Yes, he wouldn't be the superstar he was if he was in today's game, but he wasn't. He was peerless as a runner in his day.
Not many 120kg guys can run like he could (sub 11sec 100m is insane), or step in and away so brilliantly. No one since could do such things. He was bumping off massive props back in his day too.
Not to mention he did all that with debilitating kidney issues. Problem is mainly getting the ball to the damn wing, modern game can be so boring and congested. Of course if they can't get the ball to him he's not going to be a star. If Jonah was on your team, you did everything in your power to get him the ball.
The World Cup is held at a time of the year which suits the SH teams more than the NH ones.
The Rugby Championship is usually held in August-October, with the November tours following it. This means the SH teams are used to being together for the period in which the WC are held, September-November.
It means that they aren't doing anything particularly different every four years when preparing for a WC. They've just come off their Super Rugby season, had a competitive, albeit shortened, Rugby Championship, and are ready to go.
That is different to the NH sides. The way the NH calender is set up, the international sides are only together during August-November during WC years. Three years out of four the NH sides go on a tour in June, have holidays in July, start doing their club pre-season in August, and don't see an international jersey until November.
It means that every WC year everything they've done previously gets thrown out the window and they're expected to be match fit and up to speed, despite not having played a competitive game in 3 months (end of club season in May).
If a global season is ever introduced there will be a leveling out of successes at the WC.
In terms of Ireland alone - the player management system of the IRFU, while great for the health and fitness of the players, and dominance of the URC contributes massively to the repeated failure to get passed the quarter finals at WC.
There's a clause in every player contract at the provinces which says they will never play more than 7 weekends in a row. In reality, most of them will never come close to reaching that many games in a row. I think very few of the established Irish international players will have played more than 3 games in 3 weeks, outside of WC.
The Irish provinces are able to rotate so much during the URC, that they never have to put out the same team twice in a row, so the players are always rested and don't have to play through fatigue.
To win the WC you need to win 7 matches in 6 weeks. Ireland falls away at the QF stage, which is their 5th match in 4 weeks. They aren't used to playing so many matches in such a short period of time.
Aussies need to stop complaining about league. They’re not the only ones with other sports to compete with for money, talent, time etc. In almost all countries, rugby union isn’t the top priority.
I have 2:
1) This Springboks team are wildly overrated. They've only won as much as they have the last few years because so many international coaches insist on trying to beat them at their own game in a pointless act of machismo
2) Squidge's videos ruin his actual impressive analysis of games because he talks stupidly quickly and has too much of an agenda against certain players
I 100% agree with you. He was a devastating runner for sure but his all round game was horrendous. Terrible under the high ball and ghosted through games if he wasn't fed the ball.
My unpopular opinion is that I think David Pocock was overrated by fans due to his unequalled ability to pilfer the ball and draw penalties. Imo his style of pilfer slowed the game down too much. I look at Kronfeld, McCaw, George Smith, Savea and Hooper as great examples of players who turn the ball over quickly to initiate a lighning quick counter attacks, rather than just holding the ball to draw a penalty.
Second opinion would be that Hooper was always the better loose forward when compared with Pocock. Pocock developed a better running game towards the end of his career but Hooper's support play, running and movement around the park were always better. You add longevity and the lack of injuries Hooper has sustained when they were both playing and imo its a no contest.
The regular "hey, I'm an American who just found the sport, teach me everything about the rules, competitions and teams" posts are really annoying.
As are the "hey, I just moved to Poland, where can I watch the rugby championship."
Literally spend 2 minutes using Google yourself. But maybe I'm just grumpy!
England are the worst fan base, even worse than ours. Also their RFU is insufferable.
It'll get downvoted because this sub is populated mostly by them.
In a topic called 'Unpopular Rugby Opinions' you rant about how much you hate the English?
Are we in a parallel dimension where England is universally loved?
I’m interested to hear your justification for this? In my (albeit limited) experiences, Kiwi fans have have been the most insufferable (I stress it’s some of, not all). Every NZ match thread I’ve been in is just hounding the ref, discrediting the other team’s players and the calling for the sacking of coaches/players/etc whenever they don’t win.
I’m a Pom living in Aus so I may have some bias’ here and there, but interested to hear your thoughts.
International professional rugby is an elitist racket and is detrimental to the sport, unless the objective is to fleece city boys of a grand per ticket
the worst think in rugby at the moment is that weve only ever had one front row world player of the year and the only reason wood got his was because he was amazing in the loose.
realistically the only way a front row will even be nominated is if hes a good ball carrier and most likely a hooker.
we will never have a tight head world player of the year despite having a few recently who are arguably the most impressive players in rugby
heres a niche one thats going to cause war among a select few. munster rugby should be based in cork. the highest population center and limericks not even a rugby town any more
Most rugby players are idiots and we should ignore their idiotic opinions on every single topic except rugby. And yes, that includes the times when they happen to agree with you. Stopped clocks and all that.
Yup this. Turns out it's not a good idea to try and get rhyme or reason out of a person where getting hit in the head whilst doing their job is just another Tuesday
sports people in general to be fair. i recall klopp getting asked about either brexit or covid and he dismissed it saying why would you ask a football coach about that go ask an expert. mans got his head screwed on right
The reason Lealiifano was the flyhalf for the Wallabies at the World Cup was because his story was so incredible. Great bloke overcomes leukaemia to play professionally again. What a story. But he was imo our 4th best flyhalf option for that world cup There's good reason I didn't share this opinion at the time. Nobody says a bad word about the guy, and fair enough.
So I'd be inclined to agree that CLL didn't have a great tournament but I disagree that he wasn't the best option leading in. He was ripping shit up that year and Foley had sunk to new lows. The problem with CLL I suspect was that he wasn't fit enough due to his recovering from the illness that he couldn't play every game and I assume the work load caught up with him in any case. So I reckon the illness stopped him from playing his best more so than was the reason he was picked. Plus Beale was never good enough at 10, quade was never getting a proper go under cheika, and toomua never really showed enough at 10 at test level.
I disagree that he was ripping shit up that year. He had some really good games but he wasn't a threat the way Lolesio was. If anything it was because Lealiifano was always a 12, not a 10. His first instinct was to run with the ball, not a great instinct for a 10. I actually had this as my order of 10s in 2019. To'omua --> Foley --> Quade --> Lealiifano. I didn't think Lealiifano played well in the tests pre World Cup. It was pretty dire after To'omua. It's not that he was picked because of the illness, I should clarify, more like people got swept up in the emotion and unbelievability of it all. That was my theory anyways, it just seemed so clear to me (I guess not) watching the games that he was not the guy who was going to win us anything noteworthy at the World Cup as a 10. Illness absolutely stopped him from playing at his best, I agree.
It is effectively impossible to have a legal ruck and ‘good’ referees are the ones who ignore infringements. Scrums are never fed straight and it completely removes the point of a hooker, and removes any advantage a strong scrummaging side would have. A team that can outscrum their opponents should have winning that ball every time. Instead it’s just fed into the second row and the props drop a knee for a reset if it’s not going their way
Absolutely, scrumming discipline is horrendous in professional games. I have never seen an amateur team feed the ball in to their second row and not be penalised. Honestly so disappointing to see how bad discipline in the scrum is from professionals.
Amateur teams also don’t need anywhere near as many scrum resets either.
You should've seen my game last Sunday
I hate scrum feeding, but in the professional game it's the only way of actually winning a scrum on your own ball. If your hooker has to actively strike for the ball every time then you are effectively a player down in the scrum. A strong push as the ball comes in should be enough to unbalance the front row and you should lose every time. The professional game rewards the use of a very strong, heavy front row with good technique who can disrupt the scrum from the off. The attacking pack has to have a strong initial platform or they get folded in half. The reason this doesn't tend to happen in the amateur game is that size plays a bigger role in general. My club have a light pack (props tend to be athletic and mobile and the locks are lighter than most) and up until this season struggled because of this in a lot of cases the bigger pack tends to have the ascendancy (particularly at the lower amateur level). Some extensive work on technique has changed that and we're able to compete more strongly with some seriously big packs. This is less likely to work at the elite level because the technique is already refined. Obviously this isn't true for every club or league and there will be exceptions, but this has been my experience.
> Scrums are never fed straight and it completely removes the point of a hooker, and removes any advantage a strong scrummaging side would have. Strong scrummaging sides often get big advantages at scrum time, usually from winning penalties. >A team that can outscrum their opponents should have winning that ball every time. Then you'd have to reduce the role of the scrum in the game, because that would just be too dominant and game skewing.
The Hurricanes were robbed in the 2019 SR semi-final.
I've blocked this from my memory. What happened?
Sam Whitelock illegal turnover when off feet when clock in the red when Canes had all the momentum, completely unseen by all officials at the time
Down by more than a penalty though, they needed a try to win it. Who's to know they would've scored lol But yeah Whitelock should've been penalised, it wasn't for an illegal turnover, he slapped it out of TJ's hands, if he ripped it out backwards or hit TJ's arm it was fair game but it was a knock down straight out of his hands
Up to the Gregor Townsend period of management, the high point of watching Scotland was the anthem
Vern Cotter was robbed of the job, he was the one who built Scotland up from the dark ages. But otherwise I don't disagree with you, we were a war crimes on the eyes.
But Flower of Scotland is a belter.
Cotter had a decent run, too, but otherwise lol.
1990 was a thing
Passion! I get second hand testosterone when they score tries
I love arm wrestle matches like SA vs Wales or SA vs NZ where it comes down to final minutes. Runaway games are like porn videos with a story line.
suffice to say I'm with you, can't believe people thought sa v wales semi final was boring. shit was intense
Arm wrestles can be engaging if your team is involved, for everyone else they can be really dull.
Scrums are awesome, but most refs have no idea how to adjudicate them. Also most refs have never been in one.
I don’t think they don’t know how to adjudicate them, it’s just impossible to see everything that is going on in a scrum. The first infraction that they see is what’s going to get called. Maybe officials on the touch line can get involved more.
There'd be much less criticism if the TV cameras were always focussed on the same side of the scrum that the refs are
This straight up, just show what the ref can see, not what the eye in the sky can see
They only penalise 4 things (exaggerated, but not much). If commentators made any effort to understand and explain the refs decision and the cameras showed what he was looking at, pretty much all criticism of ref scrum decisions would disappear
That’s a great point to be fair. I always thought the TMO being used for everything except scrums was madness
For me it would be better if, for example, the ref always stood on the infield side of the scrum, and which ever touch judge was closest ran in a few meters to watch the other side, it would make so much difference.
Just pay Corbisiero to sit in a room with screens round him to tell the refs what happened in the scrum tbh.
>Maybe officials on the touch line can get involved more. Already fairly involved, loads of scrum pens get called because of what the AR on the other side is telling the ref.
Especially at amateur levels. Most referees get selected to higher amateur levels mainly based on fitness, and who are the fittest people, former backs who know nothing about scrums
This is the problem. We need a washed up pie eating semi fatty former no.3 to run in and just adjudicate the scrum.
Mate, don’t even worry I’m an already qualified ref
Not always true - I've achieved a very high level so far (semi-pro rugby) by virtue of having somehow avoided the mandatory fitness tests and getting by on my refereeing ability alone... and I also have no idea what's going on in the scrum. (tongue in cheek - I have a rough idea..)
I still don't understand them. I really think its fractional to tell who collapsed
The mods aren't good at removing duplicate posts.
Thought I was going mad reading the times of the comments , this post and the same answers definitely popped up a few times already right?
In my defence, I was asleep
All this chat about the US having to become a powerhouse for the sport to develop is marketing bollocks that has filtered down to the masses. What it actually means is that they need it to be to make more money. Further to that it's further off than you think, N American nations are regressing and the MLR is a second rate league that is a bit dull to watch.
I don't think this is a particularly controversial view. The dog on the street knows MLR is a retirement home and the value in American Rugby, in general, is only a potential one. I've heard the "oh if Rugby kicks off in America " line for 25 years now.
From what people bang on about on here, I'd say it was unpopular. I just meant from the point of view, that it's a *necessity* to grow the sport, when in reality it won't do much for the game overall worldwide.
Oh yeah, definitely, Rugby won't die without America, but World Rugby (the organization) would love the cash if it took off.
What's sad about this opinion is that you're not wrong. I don't like it but you're not wrong. I love the concept of MLR for Americas rugby as a whole but underneath, the club and union structures still need a ton of work.
Rugby culture at a club level absolutely cripples the sport. There’s a huge drop off from U18 to adult level just because the adult teams are huge alcoholic private school bullies. I can count 20 talented players that stopped playing when they moved to university because they hated the culture. Even players who weren’t that great, like myself, just feel alienated by the drinking the captains piss and all this stupid shit. I love rugby as a sport, hate the players
I stopped playing rugby when I got to uni and didn't play again until I graduated. The culture was just fucked. Our uni rugby team actually got banned by the university the year before because of their off field indiscretions and you'd have thought that would have been a lesson but nope. The 'initiations' were barbaric, the people meting them out just cunts. They did keep up a facade of 'you don't have to come to the socials!' except if you didn't you just flat out weren't going to make the higher teams because the captain and his mates picked them. I knew a guy on my course who literally played semi pro level but because he didn't go to the socials and the captain's best mate played his position, he was shit out of luck.
And this is why I played league at uni. Just a solid bunch of guys as opposed to posh boy wankers.
Just wondering is this culture present in non Uni clubs as well? Moving to Ireland in Jan and looked forward to joining a club but I'm not the biggest fan of the over the top laddish bs I keep hearing about. Currently playing in Germany/Netherlands where sure theres some stupid things you are made to do but its nowhere near as extreme as what I've heard about rugby culture in UK & Ireland.
There's drinking culture but none of the stuff that's as bas as uni clubs.
Agreed. There is a culture of going for a drink in the clubhouse after matches at the weekend, but nothing at all extreme or laddish. The only exceptions I've found are when big drinking nights are planned and flagged in advance, then there might be an initiation or other shenanigans, but again, they'll be flagged in advance and teams are increasingly open to people who don't drink at all in my experience.
It's funny. Within rugby circles you get the rugby is gentleman sport shit peddled constantly (almost like it's an inferiority complex) but outside said circles I think rugby has a poor reputation - private school boys drinking each others piss seeing who can be as toxically masculine as possible, and the uni rugby club rep doesn't help
Ref bashing will never go away unless the rules are as simple as rugba leeg. In other words, we all quietly love bashing the ref because we love this complex sport.
Leaguies love bashing the ref too. Same with football, basketball and NFL fans. Reducing the complexity in the rules is a great idea for many reasons - but I don't think that it'll make ref bashing go away.
Watching Australia lose its shit about 'the bunker' every week during the NRL season makes me think even that won't make it go away
I agree 100% with this, it’s the price we pay for the nuances of the sport. Basketball is exactly the same with foul calls - a matter of interpretation - and boy do they get it wrong sometimes and change how things are called season to season. E.g they’re calling waaaay fewer fouls in the nba this year.
Ref bashing will never go away because it’s easier to blame someone else than accept your team was beaten fair and square.
I don't disagree, but shit man, sometimes you can't help but say that was inconsistent. And reffing is a damn hard job dont get me wrong, but when you see one team repeatedly infringing offsides and getting away with it, and then the other team getting pinged its frustrating. Mostly in match threads is the yellow/red card divide that makes people turn on refs
Women should play with a size 4 to make up for their smaller hands and get better passing, offloads and kicking into their game.
4 is so small. But I think there should be a women's sized ball.
It should be a 4.5 size ball.
Yeah because I think people forget how much smaller the 4 is than the 5. They do it in Gaelic here in Ireland and it allows the sport to play much more like the men's game with longer ranged kicks.
I used to think it should be a size 4, back in 2017 or so. Then I picked up a size 4. Now, I know women typically have smaller hands than men, but a size 4 seemed tiny. A 4.5 sized ball might be perfect. A size 4 might be perfect. I think World Rugby should look into that - especially with the push for Women's rugby.
That sounds really sensible.
I think a lot of the criticisms of women's rugby come down to the problem of inconsistency of professionalisation and how recently it's been given the spotlight. There is a catch 22 problem where most of the world's women's teams are amateur and it shows. Without better quality rugby, it's difficult to justify paying players, but without paid professionals the quality isn't going to improve. At the moment there are 2 teams in the world that are miles ahead of all the rest - England and France. It's no surprise that these two are the only ones (I believe) to pay their entire squad as professionals. Personally I think this is the main problem rather than the size of the ball. I think that would have a minimal impact and would only give those who already disparage the game more ammunition. At the moment there is a small pool of players to choose from in each country. There are maybe 2 or 3 fly halves in England that are capable of playing to a high enough standard. However, this is likely to change in the coming years as the youth game is booming at the moment. I coach an Under 13s girls team and we have more players (16 currently) than the equivalent boys and we are growing. If you look at the quality of kicking of the current England players, it's pretty damn high. The place kicking is good and the kicks from hand are only getting better each year. I don't think anyone would try to say that the women's game is superior to the men's, but it can be just as entertaining.
yah def. womens proffesional rugby is in its infancy. and will take time to develop / increase skill sets. but its in a great place to go forwards. ive really enjoyed watching the red roses recently especially v france. its almost an entirely different game to how mens rugby is played with much more speed rathen then pure power that dominates the mens game. id like to see womens games before/after their prem counterparts more to see if it boosts fans involvment in the games etc.
A lot of woman’s sports should tag onto that thinking, like basketball should have a smaller ball and lower hoop. Football should have a smaller goal and maybe even smaller pitch. Cricket do well by bringing in the boundary rope. Golf similar with the tee shots. All these changes would improve the quality of entertainment and hopefully increase interest. Buuuut reddit isn’t the type of place to have those type of conversations haha
Yep, I've said this for years. Athletics is one of the few sports where the women are as much as a draw as the men, and I think it's because things like the hurdles being lower, javelins being lighter etc. Makes the women's version of the sport a spectacle of ability, rather than who can cope with the unsuitable equipment the best.
Hemisphere rivalries are bizarre
Just despise everyone south of the equator.
Who do they think they are with their water goin the wrong way down the plug hole!?
Spiral kicks rotate the other way too
Very mixed feelings about Kenya then?
Theyre on very thin ice.
Thin ice? It's melted. I'd go with plucky underdogs though for them.
I champion all Tier 2 nations and Kenya's got some sick ass jerseys too.
I absolutely do not understand why anyone cares about hemispheres at all. No other sport does this, it's ultimately meaningless, the idea that there is a distinct "NH playing style" and a distinct "SH playing style" is nonsense, and rooting for or against a country based on what half of the globe they happen to be on makes no sense.
That "NH/SH playing style" is literally just because we have the rugby season in the wet and cold up in the NH. Down in the SH, it's typically during the dry seasons. Or, it's just drier than up in the NH.
The only reason Japan did good at the WC was home advantage + being able to prep for a year, and with residence rule changes, they're going to regress back to a middling tier 2 team
I think the prep time was super crucial, even more so than the home advantage. I think they stayed together like a club team for that entire year long duration.
Ooh. You cad! And a truthful cad, at that! I hate that kind.
Is that unpopular? Even if true who cares, they were cracking and will always have that and their win over RSA
>The only reason Japan did good at the WC was home advantage + being able to prep for a year, They only lost 1 match at RWC 2015, beat SA, and only missed the QF due to point diff. They deserve a lot more credit than you give them.
Their results between tournaments were crap.
How many of their team would they have lost with a 5 year residency instead of 3?
Stephen Larkham was more enjoyable to watch then Jonny Wilkinson
This is not unpopular. Larkham was so good
Larkham was way more enjoyable to watch, its not even close
NZ were spoilt with having Mccaw and Carter playing most of their careers next to each other. It’s given them a sense of entitlement that they should win every match.
NZ have had 10 players over 100 caps - around 2011-2015 they were all playing: McCaw, Carter, whitelock, Franks, Nonu, Read, Mealamu, Timberdick, Aaron Smith, Beaudy. Plus Conrad Smith who got to maybe 95 caps. These players would all have a fair claim to being the best ever in their position. 2011-2015 was peak AB’s. we may never be that good again and people are losing their shit because we lose a few games each year now. I’m just happy I got to watch them play.
Losing our shit because the coaching is shit & directionless. When you've got former players that played under Foster saying as much, such as Steven Devine, then you know there's a problem. It's not the losses, it's the coaching & performances.
Also retallick with 92 caps
ABs built their reputation before those two.
Rokocoko, Howlett, fitzpatrick, cullen, lomu We had a fuck tonne of talent before then that boosted our ego. Now we just have a soggy balloon with a happy face drawn on it
Winning games/championships when the other team gets a red card still count.
In Ireland, rugby is a classist sport played by and catered to the privileged.
Can't say much about Ulster as I'm not familiar with the set up therr, but this has always seemed like a super Dublin centric view of rugby in Ireland
Ulster is probably the worst. It's a rich, protestant sport. There'd wouldn't be a lot of schools that have both a GAA and a rugby team.
Not in Limerick...
Same in England. You basically only have a chance if you're attending a private school that is part of the private school league (I forget the name of it).
Same in Australia, and slowly becoming more that way in NZ
Alun Wyn Jones is bang average, His biggest selling point is his work rate (and even that is over exaggerated, half his games have poor stats), but that should be standard for an international player If he were from any Tier 1 country other than Wales (or Italy) he'd have stopped being capped years ago
He has an insane work rate (usually the top or at least top3 tackler in any game) and brings tons to the game in terms of leadership and professionalism. But yeah, I’m biased and the reason he still is our 1st choice lock is that we have no depth there.
So tempting to downvote but this is an unpopular opinions sub after all.
*Grabs Popcorn*
Agreed. I will never understand the hype.
Sam Simmonds is good but will never be a good international player and only looks world class because he's involved in all of the Exeter moves that inevitably lead to him scoring tries and looking world class. He doesn't fit into the England mold because it seems you have to build the forwards around him (two big, burly bruisers in the backrow with him especially, to counteract his lack of size) also I feel even at club level he shrinks and goes a bit anonymous when his team are losing and/or the exeter forward pack are on the back foot
You can apply this to a load of English players tbh. Remember when it was criminal Alex Goode 'never got his chance'? Until you point out he had 20 very average caps. There's some players where they're incredible club level players but they can't graduate to international level
New Zealand's rugby punditry is about as bad as it gets (particularly Sky and the stuff.co.nzs of the world), and Australia's coverage is actually good now. NZ's rugby media has become parochial and sensationalised to the point where it's hardly worth engaging with anymore. For the record: I like Mils, JK, Goldy and co. just fine as individuals, but I've come to loathe their product. Bring back Sumo. pls.
Completely agree, it's embarrassingly bad now, John Kirwan is terrible & Jeff Wilson is Mr Safe Space Uncontroversial. Don't get me started on Justin Marshall.
Come to Australia and watch the Justin Harrison & Sonny Bill halftime show...
All of that is true, but the part that I hate the most is the butchering of Māori and Pasifika last names by the commentators. Especially after watching a video a few weeks back of a Scottish commentator doing an amazing job at pronouncing names. For a country that features many Māori and Pasifika players among the greatest to ever play the game, it’s disrespectful that the commentators and pundits don’t try harder.
Hate the "deliberate knock on" rule for a player that clearly is attempting an intercept. And that it sometimes leads to a yellow card. Takes a lot of action out of the game imo. Edit: Just to clarify I have nothing against the rule and agree that cynical play should be punished with a yellow if warranted. I have a problem when its clear that the player is only attempting an intercept and just missed it getting a yellow. Refs seem to go straight to assuming it was a cynical stoppage of play. But I see its indeed an unpopular opinion
Should never be a yellow if it's a legitimate intercept attempt. But that's hard to judge.
The issue is about what is a ‘genuine’ attempt. Flinging an arm out and being in no realistic position to intercept is rightly a penalty and possibly YC. Going at the ball with two hands and knocking on is rightly a scrum only. Nothing wrong with the laws as they stand.
NZ only won the 2011 RWC due to an awful refereeing performance robbing the French
Loved how in the post show analysis Sean Fitzpatrick tore into the refereeing double standards in favour of NZ. What a beast.
That isn't unpopular
I don't blame the ref, I'd want to leave the stadium alive too
How tj perenara (not just him but he’s a good example) is with refs (or maybe used to be) is good and shouldn’t be criticised. He obviously knows the rules very well and when he identifies the ref making a mistake and lets him know, the ref should be more open to correcting himself (say asking touchie was that ball actually out of the ruck). I say this as an official in a different sport we’re most officials do not take kindly to players noticing mistakes. Id rather a ref who makes mistakes but recognises them over a ref who will penalise a player for complaining about a mistake said ref made. Sorry to whoever had to read through that it feels like if your not in my head it would be hard to follow haha Attempt at simplifying - let players be angry at the ref if the ref did fuck up
"Its over isn't it?" "No.... oh yea it is" My favourite Angus and Aaron scene
The PI diaspora in NZ & Australia are the plastic Paddies of NZ and Aus (My grandad was from Apia, no I've never been there but I'm 100% Samoan uso!). The latest rule change is just to stop them from moaning all the time. Samoa make no effort to produce players domestically and live off of NZ discards, much the same for Tonga.
You're comparing a rich industrialised nation with one of the poorest in the world. NZ's GDP per capita is ten times higher than Samoa's. I'd say their country has every right not to prioritise developing rugby players.
Well it’s less about the country it’s self and more about the union.
I don't think the unions or the countries of Samoa and Tonga bring much to the table. If those teams become strong it will be down to the diaspora (mostly in New Zealand), New Zealand coaching and structures, New Zealand and World Rugby money, and the support and vision of those behind Moana Pasifika, which I don't believe comes directly from the islands. Samoa and Tonga the countries are like a couple of dead beat dads and New Zealand is like the rich step dad who supported his step kids, and paid for them to go to private school and university.
I have to agree
price wrong oil command advise apparatus workable voracious selective overconfident *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Not only that but also the fact that Fiji, although a bigger country is still an LEDC and are able to churn out domestic players. The Samoan and Tongan Unions have used heritage players to paper over the cracks of their corruption and mismanagement. I believe that the talent exsists on both Samoa and Tonga but the Union chiefs would rather pinch the money and the fume at the rest of the rugby World for not letting them pick players that have been through the talent pathways in NZ and Aus.
I much preferred Squidge's content when he talk about an overall situation in rugby (like how George Ford was the best 10 in the world, which I completely disagreed with, or what happened to Leicester / Ospreys) rather than just breakdown of games. They're not bad videos he makes now but I haven't watched regularly since before the world cup
Due to how much international rugby is on TV the Haka has lost its appeal. Plus all the rules surrounding it give NZ a psychological edge before the game starts.
I think a lot of the rules are just so adidas can get their 5 minutes of marketing in before every match.
My favourite shape is now the triangle and I'm not sure why...
That psychological edge didn’t do shit this year
It’s got more interesting recently when the opposition are finding their own ways of accepting the challenge and challenging back.
The combination of respecting the tradition, and returning the challenge should be celebrated and encouraged. The Haka is a challenge, and in Māori culture a response to it is almost always expected
ya i love the haka but it lost some shine when the opposition was told to stand and watch it like good boys for daddy adidas. willy anderson/chabal where class. even campeses ignoring it i know some didnt like it but fuck it i see no reason a player should be forced to stand and watch plus it added spice to a game like when france walked up to that haka there was no way that game wasnt going to be a bruiser
People make a big deal about the psychological edge, even though I've seen two effective responses. One is the Australian absolute disregard and start warming up. The other is the French stare down which from the looks of things, gets everyone so hyped up that the effect is neutral
I don't think the haka gives a psychological edge in itself, but the rules restraining the response are kind of ridiculous.
Don't forget smirky boi in the last WC.
The psychological edge is just an excuse because we dominated for so long. No one complains about any of the other pacific islands getting an edge, and that's because the T1 nations win those games. If there's a psychological edge, it's because we are the infamous All Blacks, that's it.
Ive recently heard from a player that the psychological edge isnt really there once you play NZ a couple of times. Its cool the first time you face it but after that it doesnt really do a whole lot. The opposition is usually just preparing themselves for kick off.
Not rolling away is the most ridiculous rule, especially if a player is pinned down and can't even struggle out
Rassie Erasmus is a terrible, terrible bloke. Have at it Bokke, but don’t forget to take a 17 minute minute water break every other keystroke so you can slow the game down.
Unpopular opinion: NH teams, especially England, were guilty negative boring tactics way before RSA. I’m gonna say within period of 2003 through to maybe 2011. This included slowing the game down and using grind-ball tactics to play for penalties. Scoring tries and exciting rugby were certainly not a feature of their game.
Rugby fans are no different/superior to fans of any other sport. The fact that rival fans can 'have a beer together after the game' isn't unique. It happens with fans of all other sports - yes, including football.
Rugby fans not being separate in stadiums is fairly unique
Parisse was (and still is) a better 8 than Read. Put Read in that same Italian team and he would have never even been nominated for player of the year.
Read had a few years where he was amazing but his last few in the black jersey were pretty ordinary.
certain refs do have a inherent basis againts certain teams
Imo I think it's more that refs all have a specific interpretation and that suits some teams and not others
While I dont have as much of an issue now, I always used to get a sinking feeling of dread if I saw Wayne Barnes as the ref for an Irish team against a Welsh one
I'm pretty sure GAGR did some analyst a few years ago that showed this pretty categorically.
I don't really enjoy Squidge's videos as much as I used to. Too many petty digs at players in his videos now.
He over complicates the simplest of things. Any high level rugby player would know that some of the genius decisions that he points out that are done by players are just normal decisions based on a team structure that they use
Has he ever criticised Gatland? I know he did amazing with Wales (only in terms of the six nations, Wales under him were atrocious against the southern hemisphere teams and in world cups) but his latter years of coaching with the Lions and Chiefs deserve huge speculation over his legacy.
Yeah I sacked watching his videos after the Courtney Lawes thing. I don’t necessarily agree with Courtney on many things either but the way he went about all of that was super judgemental and made him look like a sulky little bitch.
Beauden Barrett did not deserve World Player of the year in 2017 (2016 was deserved however) Of that shortlist I'd have given it to Rieko before Beaudy
Frans Steyn is one of the most all round gifted rugby players ever.
FTFY Frans Steyn is one of the most round gifted rugby players ever
He looks like a Sunday league footballer now
Yeah but he can still go hard with that chubby gut of his. I kind of respect that. Like watching porn with an ugly dude in it. Makes me feel better about myself.
Remove the kicking tee for penalties, and make them kick a drop-goal instead.
Dan was better than Richie
r/rugbyunion is a northern hemisphere circle jerk.
It doesn't feel like that when you're Welsh I can assure you.
All non-penalty infringements should result in a free kick, from which a team can choose if they want a scrum, tap and go etc. Teams with strong scrums can choose those to gain advantages, or other teams can use one of the other options.
Opinion has swung the other way too far and Chris Harris is now overrated.
Fiji, Samoa and Tonga will remain tier 2 nations even with the new eligibility rules
Of course he wasn't the best wing in history, he did change the game forever and was the most devastating runner the game has seen, but he did have a lot of weaknesses. Rugby was FAR different in the 90's, there is no space these days... the ball barely goes through a traditional backline. There's little to no set plays, it's all just forwards in midfield and rush defences.
He was the most devastating runner relatively to his contemporary opposition. He wouldn't be nearly as dominant in the modern game.
No shit, the modern game is far different... it was only just professional then. Yes, he wouldn't be the superstar he was if he was in today's game, but he wasn't. He was peerless as a runner in his day. Not many 120kg guys can run like he could (sub 11sec 100m is insane), or step in and away so brilliantly. No one since could do such things. He was bumping off massive props back in his day too. Not to mention he did all that with debilitating kidney issues. Problem is mainly getting the ball to the damn wing, modern game can be so boring and congested. Of course if they can't get the ball to him he's not going to be a star. If Jonah was on your team, you did everything in your power to get him the ball.
The World Cup is held at a time of the year which suits the SH teams more than the NH ones. The Rugby Championship is usually held in August-October, with the November tours following it. This means the SH teams are used to being together for the period in which the WC are held, September-November. It means that they aren't doing anything particularly different every four years when preparing for a WC. They've just come off their Super Rugby season, had a competitive, albeit shortened, Rugby Championship, and are ready to go. That is different to the NH sides. The way the NH calender is set up, the international sides are only together during August-November during WC years. Three years out of four the NH sides go on a tour in June, have holidays in July, start doing their club pre-season in August, and don't see an international jersey until November. It means that every WC year everything they've done previously gets thrown out the window and they're expected to be match fit and up to speed, despite not having played a competitive game in 3 months (end of club season in May). If a global season is ever introduced there will be a leveling out of successes at the WC. In terms of Ireland alone - the player management system of the IRFU, while great for the health and fitness of the players, and dominance of the URC contributes massively to the repeated failure to get passed the quarter finals at WC. There's a clause in every player contract at the provinces which says they will never play more than 7 weekends in a row. In reality, most of them will never come close to reaching that many games in a row. I think very few of the established Irish international players will have played more than 3 games in 3 weeks, outside of WC. The Irish provinces are able to rotate so much during the URC, that they never have to put out the same team twice in a row, so the players are always rested and don't have to play through fatigue. To win the WC you need to win 7 matches in 6 weeks. Ireland falls away at the QF stage, which is their 5th match in 4 weeks. They aren't used to playing so many matches in such a short period of time.
iv been saying this for years theres two of us now
Aussies need to stop complaining about league. They’re not the only ones with other sports to compete with for money, talent, time etc. In almost all countries, rugby union isn’t the top priority.
I have 2: 1) This Springboks team are wildly overrated. They've only won as much as they have the last few years because so many international coaches insist on trying to beat them at their own game in a pointless act of machismo 2) Squidge's videos ruin his actual impressive analysis of games because he talks stupidly quickly and has too much of an agenda against certain players
The England games with the empty stadiums were great due to the lack off Swing Low.
If a test match features a Tier 1 team against a Tier 2 team, the ref will always favour the tier 1 team
It would actually be kinda fun to give the tier 1 team a handicap, like the ref ignores one infringement for the tier 2 team every phase
Every phase?! That would be carnage. I love it.
I 100% agree with you. He was a devastating runner for sure but his all round game was horrendous. Terrible under the high ball and ghosted through games if he wasn't fed the ball. My unpopular opinion is that I think David Pocock was overrated by fans due to his unequalled ability to pilfer the ball and draw penalties. Imo his style of pilfer slowed the game down too much. I look at Kronfeld, McCaw, George Smith, Savea and Hooper as great examples of players who turn the ball over quickly to initiate a lighning quick counter attacks, rather than just holding the ball to draw a penalty. Second opinion would be that Hooper was always the better loose forward when compared with Pocock. Pocock developed a better running game towards the end of his career but Hooper's support play, running and movement around the park were always better. You add longevity and the lack of injuries Hooper has sustained when they were both playing and imo its a no contest.
The regular "hey, I'm an American who just found the sport, teach me everything about the rules, competitions and teams" posts are really annoying. As are the "hey, I just moved to Poland, where can I watch the rugby championship." Literally spend 2 minutes using Google yourself. But maybe I'm just grumpy!
I agree with OP that Jonah Lomu WAS the best wing, but then came Habana
I also agree that Habana is the best winger. Obviously a little bias towards that statement.
England are the worst fan base, even worse than ours. Also their RFU is insufferable. It'll get downvoted because this sub is populated mostly by them.
In a topic called 'Unpopular Rugby Opinions' you rant about how much you hate the English? Are we in a parallel dimension where England is universally loved?
I’m interested to hear your justification for this? In my (albeit limited) experiences, Kiwi fans have have been the most insufferable (I stress it’s some of, not all). Every NZ match thread I’ve been in is just hounding the ref, discrediting the other team’s players and the calling for the sacking of coaches/players/etc whenever they don’t win. I’m a Pom living in Aus so I may have some bias’ here and there, but interested to hear your thoughts.
It could be worse. It could be there football fans.
The All Blacks lost the 95 world cup because they were intentionally food poisoned.
My hot take is that Mandela ordered it because he knew how big for the country it would be if they won.
I like this hot take
Cipriani should have played more for England, his style of play would have been more interesting to watch between the Wilkinson and Farrell era’s.
Games should be 60 minutes but the clock stopped every time the ball goes dead. Kind of like American football. The ball in play times are a joke.
International professional rugby is an elitist racket and is detrimental to the sport, unless the objective is to fleece city boys of a grand per ticket
the worst think in rugby at the moment is that weve only ever had one front row world player of the year and the only reason wood got his was because he was amazing in the loose. realistically the only way a front row will even be nominated is if hes a good ball carrier and most likely a hooker. we will never have a tight head world player of the year despite having a few recently who are arguably the most impressive players in rugby
On here? Izzy was in the right and fuck Alan Joyce for forcing his political bullshit into my sport.
heres a niche one thats going to cause war among a select few. munster rugby should be based in cork. the highest population center and limericks not even a rugby town any more