The Rugby thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jean Claude Vaaldamme said:
Great win for Boks, great play in very bad conditions.
Uncontested scrums is not that great for the weaker team. Our big forwards rest during scrums and have more energy for mauls and general play. It was obvious how we started to maul them so they have no defense when they had fewer big guys on the field and our big guys was rested.
Click to expand...
What? Their forwards rest too. And when they have zero pressure on their own put in, it is like playing League and the ball is cleaner and faster to their back line.

We started to maul them easily because their forwards are incredibly kak as well as unfit.

The stronger scrumming side can also not force penalties on their own put in.

Uncontested scrums is a massive advantage to the weaker side.
 
TheMightyQuin said:
What? Their forwards rest too. And when they have zero pressure on their own put in, it is like playing League and the ball is cleaner and faster to their back line.

We started to maul them easily because their forwards are incredibly kak as well as unfit.

The stronger scrumming side can also not force penalties on their own put in.

Uncontested scrums is a massive advantage to the weaker side.
Click to expand...
In 2019 RWC we played uncontested scrums against Italy I think. Rassie himself said that it did not matter and our big forwards got a rest to play harder in rucks and mauls and it showed on the field and result.
Loose forwards cannot replace the front row. Your front row is the most important part of your team, not only for scrumming. If you believe that you should support Aus. Short, heavy and strong cannot be replaced by tall, fast and fit in rucks and mauls. Center of gravity.
 
Jean Claude Vaaldamme said:
In 2019 RWC we played uncontested scrums against Italy I think. Rassie himself said that it did not matter and our big forwards got a rest to play harder in rucks and mauls and it showed on the field and result.
Loose forwards cannot replace the front row. Your front row is the most important part of your team, not only for scrumming. If you believe that you should support Aus. Short, heavy and strong cannot be replaced by tall, fast and fit in rucks and mauls. Center of gravity.
Click to expand...
Five years ago we played a completely different style of rugby. So irrelevant to today's game. Replacing loosehead and tighthead with 2 xtra forwards is neither here or there...impact in the loose will be the same.

But in a match where scrumming is not taking place, extra loose forwards or even an xtra "lock" and 8th man, will have a bigger impact in a less static game.

If you think your front row is the most important part of the team, you should support netball.
 
TheMightyQuin said:
Five years ago we played a completely different style of rugby. So irrelevant to today's game. Replacing loosehead and tighthead with 2 xtra forwards is neither here or there...impact in the loose will be the same.

But in a match where scrumming is not taking place, extra loose forwards or even an xtra "lock" and 8th man, will have a bigger impact in a less static game.

If you think your front row is the most important part of the team, you should support netball.
Click to expand...

And this is why you are on my ignore list. Well as of today
 
Jean Claude Vaaldamme said:
In 2019 RWC we played uncontested scrums against Italy I think. Rassie himself said that it did not matter and our big forwards got a rest to play harder in rucks and mauls and it showed on the field and result.
Click to expand...
Against Italy, playing versus 14 men for most of the second half...

Jean Claude Vaaldamme said:
Loose forwards cannot replace the front row. Your front row is the most important part of your team, not only for scrumming. If you believe that you should support Aus. Short, heavy and strong cannot be replaced by tall, fast and fit in rucks and mauls. Center of gravity.
Click to expand...
If you nullify the scrum you nullify a large part of the effectiveness of your front row. Unless the player is someone unique like Malcolm Marx, the big props will not get around the park as quickly and hit as many rucks and mauls as the loose forwards.

Take a look at the stats for most turnovers in a career or in a single tournament and guess how many front rankers feature?

https://www.planetrugby.com/news/al...er, the record for the,the All Blacks in 1987.
 
Cray said:
Against Italy, playing versus 14 men for most of the second half...


If you nullify the scrum you nullify a large part of the effectiveness of your front row. Unless the player is someone unique like Malcolm Marx, the big props will not get around the park as quickly and hit as many rucks and mauls as the loose forwards.

Take a look at the stats for most turnovers in a career or in a single tournament and guess how many front rankers feature?

https://www.planetrugby.com/news/all-time-rugby-world-cup-player-stats-tries-carries-tackles-and-much-more#:~:text=Most turnovers won in a single tournament&text=However, the record for the,the All Blacks in 1987.
Click to expand...
Please...stop confusing these people with actual facts as well as logic.
 
Cray said:
Against Italy, playing versus 14 men for most of the second half...


If you nullify the scrum you nullify a large part of the effectiveness of your front row. Unless the player is someone unique like Malcolm Marx, the big props will not get around the park as quickly and hit as many rucks and mauls as the loose forwards.

Take a look at the stats for most turnovers in a career or in a single tournament and guess how many front rankers feature?

https://www.planetrugby.com/news/all-time-rugby-world-cup-player-stats-tries-carries-tackles-and-much-more#:~:text=Most turnovers won in a single tournament&text=However, the record for the,the All Blacks in 1987.
Click to expand...
Yes many supporters think the guy that scores the try won the game or the guy making the turnover. Most important thing in rugby is going forward. Don't know what turnovers has to do with anything I said.
Heavy and low center of gravity, makes you go forward easier. Having saved energy from not scrumming gains you an advantage in other play. Yes you might loose more advantage from uncontested scrums, but its not that big with the rest you are gaining.
Its not the 80's anymore where we have unfit overweight front rows just walking on the field from one scrum to another.
I have never seen a team looking like they suddenly have a huge disadvantage because of uncontested scrums.
How many turnovers are there in a match? 1 or 2, maybe 3.? I havent seen an improvement in turnovers with a team suddenly fielding loose forwards instead of props.
 
Jean Claude Vaaldamme said:
Having saved energy from not scrumming gains you an advantage in other play.
Its not the 80's anymore where we have unfit overweight front rows just walking on the field from one scrum to another.
Click to expand...

So do the big heavy forwards need to "save energy" or are they fit enough? You're contradicting yourself here.

I have never seen a team looking like they suddenly have a huge disadvantage because of uncontested scrums.
Click to expand...

The advantage is with the team that was suffering in the scrums. The team that were giving off penalties on the other's team's put-in. OR were getting bad, contested ball on their own put-in, leading to slow, standing-start attack or having to kick instead of running a quick ball.

How many turnovers are there in a match? 1 or 2, maybe 3.? I havent seen an improvement in turnovers with a team suddenly fielding loose forwards instead of props.
Click to expand...

What kind of "turnovers"? There are 2 types: lost during attack due to knock on or kick. Lost due to "jackal" at the breakdown.

How could you "not have seen an improvement in turnovers with a team suddenly fielding loose forwards instead of props"...when it's never been done before?

Look's like you haven't seen a lot of stuff...
 
Question for some of the rugby fundis here. During yesterday's game, when there were uncontested scrums, Rassie subbed off du Toit for Koch at 50' and then Louw for Kwagga at 58'.

Could he have subbed on Kwagga instead of Koch for du Toit (thereby having an extra loose forward) and then taken Louw off for Koch later had scrums become contestable again?
 
Jean Claude Vaaldamme said:
Heavy and low center of gravity, makes you go forward easier.
Click to expand...
And yet we never see front rankers top the meters gained column amongst the forwards... :unsure:

Jean Claude Vaaldamme said:
Having saved energy from not scrumming gains you an advantage in other play. Yes you might loose more advantage from uncontested scrums, but its not that big with the rest you are gaining.
Its not the 80's anymore where we have unfit overweight front rows just walking on the field from one scrum to another.
I have never seen a team looking like they suddenly have a huge disadvantage because of uncontested scrums.
Click to expand...
It's not about them being unfit, big guys carrying muscle are slower around the park than leaner guys.

It's not about being at a disadvantage, it's about robbing one team of scrumming superiority.

Take a look at the scrum penalties SA got in the world cup. Losing the ability to scrum robs a team of the ability to exert set piece dominance and get penalties from the scrum

Jean Claude Vaaldamme said:
How many turnovers are there in a match? 1 or 2, maybe 3.? I havent seen an improvement in turnovers with a team suddenly fielding loose forwards instead of props.
Click to expand...
The record for turnovers by a single player in a match is 6. Being able to put more players in a ruck quicker forces the opposition to commit players to protect their possession. You are able to do that a lot better if you have more rangy, mobile guys that can get to the breakdown sooner. Front rankers are there primarily to scrum, what they do around the park is a bonus.
 
Speedster said:
Question for some of the rugby fundis here. During yesterday's game, when there were uncontested scrums, Rassie subbed off du Toit for Koch at 50' and then Louw for Kwagga at 58'.

Could he have subbed on Kwagga instead of Koch for du Toit (thereby having an extra loose forward) and then taken Louw off for Koch later had scrums become contestable again?
Click to expand...
Doubt it. Only allowed to replace a front-ranker with a non front-ranker when you have none left, is how I understand it.

That is why 2 props and a hooker are mandatoey substitutions. You could make the 5 others all scrumhalves if you wanted to.
 
TheMightyQuin said:
So do the big heavy forwards need to "save energy" or are they fit enough? You're contradicting yourself here.



The advantage is with the team that was suffering in the scrums. The team that were giving off penalties on the other's team's put-in. OR were getting bad, contested ball on their own put-in, leading to slow, standing-start attack or having to kick instead of running a quick ball.



What kind of "turnovers"? There are 2 types: lost during attack due to knock on or kick. Lost due to "jackal" at the breakdown.

How could you "not have seen an improvement in turnovers with a team suddenly fielding loose forwards instead of props"...when it's never been done before?

Look's like you haven't seen a lot of stuff...
Click to expand...

Cray said:
And yet we never see front rankers top the meters gained column amongst the forwards... :unsure:


It's not about them being unfit, big guys carrying muscle are slower around the park than leaner guys.

It's not about being at a disadvantage, it's about robbing one team of scrumming superiority.

Take a look at the scrum penalties SA got in the world cup. Losing the ability to scrum robs a team of the ability to exert set piece dominance and get penalties from the scrum


The record for turnovers by a single player in a match is 6. Being able to put more players in a ruck quicker forces the opposition to commit players to protect their possession. You are able to do that a lot better if you have more rangy, mobile guys that can get to the breakdown sooner. Front rankers are there primarily to scrum, what they do around the park is a bonus.
Click to expand...
We can go in circles the whole day.
Fact is, when they lost their front rankers and replaced them with loose forwards we scored easy maul tries and they looked like they had no defense. Just like my theory saying.
 
Good win, considering the bad conditions. And to get another bonus point is worth gold. Starting hooker and Krappies at 9 were poor. Nice to see us at the top of the standings but now the real test awaits at Ellis Park in 2 weeks time.
Also loved seeing the Lions roll WP at E.P.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X