Training The Thread Formerly Known As The Training Thread

[Scodog10]

Loose Zones dont change how its played in a negative way or in a way against how the game should be played. Just moves the game away from rauling mauls and uber defensive tactics.

Bonus points is like Mickey mouse league stuff in preseason makes scoring a farce. Should never be a consideration.

They do. The game has to stop and reset at every stoppage. Each time that happens instead of a stoppage restarting in 3 seconds it blows out to 10. You’ll still get repeat stoppages because players will still rush in once the balls in motion.

The obvious effect will be quarters blowing out to 35 minutes and the AFLPA jumping up and down about going back to 16 minute quarters costing the consumer. The only comparison is Ice Hockey with face offs where a continuous game stops for a period of time for everything to reset. We have no idea what unforeseen effects there will be of such a big change.

Ultimately coaches won’t defend differently because of it. Are you able to elaborate how the bonus point in super rugby has been Mickey Mouse?

 

[loki04]

They do. The game has to stop and reset at every stoppage. Each time that happens instead of a stoppage restarting in 3 seconds it blows out to 10. You’ll still get repeat stoppages because players will still rush in once the balls in motion.

The obvious effect will be quarters blowing out to 35 minutes and the AFLPA jumping up and down about going back to 16 minute quarters costing the consumer. The only comparison is Ice Hockey with face offs where a continuous game stops for a period of time for everything to reset. We have no idea what unforeseen effects there will be of such a big change.

Ultimately coaches won’t defend differently because of it. Are you able to elaborate how the bonus point in super rugby has been Mickey Mouse?

No it doesn't have to stop you adjudicate with video umpires if the teams aren't set then its a free kick.

You don't allow set up time based off stopping the game too many people automatically look to US sports when thinking zone implementation.

Teams have from the time play stops to it starts again to get back in position, if not its a free kick. Both teams out then free against the team furthest out.

Video can be set up with overlays of ground in 3rds and have a team set up specifically for it with a feed to main umpire (who concentrates on his area only).

This will stop teams pressing down away from their zones as far as they only have limited time to get back in. But won't restrict leading.

Only need any 6 players inside so any player can drop in if person leads out too far etc.

 

[Scodog10]

No it doesn't have to stop you adjudicate with video umpires if the teams aren't set then its a free kick.

You don't allow set up time based off stopping the game too many people automatically look to US sports when thinking zone implementation.

Teams have from the time play stops to it starts again to get back in position, if not its a free kick. Both teams out then free against the team furthest out.

Video can be set up with overlays of ground in 3rds and have a team set up specifically for it with a feed to main umpire (who concentrates on his area only).

This will stop teams pressing down away from their zones as far as they only have limited time to get back in. But won't restrict leading.

Only need any 6 players inside so any player can drop in if person leads out too far etc.

We’re now introducing video umpires to adjudicated players sticking in zones? Stop for a moment and think about introducing a second rule to adjudicate another rule. In any other environment that would be kicked to the curb immediately, but apparently the bonus point is mad. That takes the cake.

Mason Cox as our bail out kick is now expected to press up from I50 to the defensive arc to contest a ball that ultimately rolls out of bounce then has an arbitrary 5 seconds or whatever to fold back into our F50? You do realise don’t you that it’s roughly a hundred metres from arc to arc along a boundary so in that scenario he’s covering about 70-80 in a straight line. Best case scenario it’s taking 10 seconds for a player to cover that ground? If Mason Cox is at the bottom of a pack do you think he’s getting there in under 15 seconds? No chance. What about when there’s a defensive goal square stoppage how stupid will it look with 24 players inside that 15-20 metre radius and 12 a hundred metres plus away. How are you supposed to clear that congestion with your next link in the chain two plus kicks away? Are you expected to run it out until the forwards can press up or do you just kick to space and wait for more congestion when the forwards and stoppage players arrive at that contest? Or are we making it that your six mids need to push into the middle third and only forwards or defenders can compete in F50 stoppages? Your rule is mad and will have so many unforeseen consequences that it’s not worth my time discussing further until you’ve actually thought on it properly.

I’m also assuming that given you didn’t elaborate on how the bonus point has been proven to be a Mickey Mouse rule in super rugby it obviously isn’t. Especially given it’s been in place for more than a decade...

 

[jackcass]

We’re now introducing video umpires to adjudicated players sticking in zones? Stop for a moment and think about introducing a second rule to adjudicate another rule. In any other environment that would be kicked to the curb immediately, but apparently the bonus point is mad. That takes the cake.

Mason Cox as our bail out kick is now expected to press up from I50 to the defensive arc to contest a ball that ultimately rolls out of bounce then has an arbitrary 5 seconds or whatever to fold back into our F50? You do realise don’t you that it’s roughly a hundred metres from arc to arc along a boundary so in that scenario he’s covering about 70-80 in a straight line. Best case scenario it’s taking 10 seconds for a player to cover that ground? If Mason Cox is at the bottom of a pack do you think he’s getting there in under 15 seconds? No chance. What about when there’s a defensive goal square stoppage how stupid will it look with 24 players inside that 15-20 metre radius and 12 a hundred metres plus away. How are you supposed to clear that congestion with your next link in the chain two plus kicks away? Are you expected to run it out until the forwards can press up or do you just kick to space and wait for more congestion when the forwards and stoppage players arrive at that contest? Or are we making it that your six mids need to push into the middle third and only forwards or defenders can compete in F50 stoppages? Your rule is mad and will have so many unforeseen consequences that it’s not worth my time discussing further until you’ve actually thought on it properly.

I’m also assuming that given you didn’t elaborate on how the bonus point has been proven to be a Mickey Mouse rule in super rugby it obviously isn’t. Especially given it’s been in place for more than a decade...

I think the premise of zones is that players, particularly forwards, don't push so hard into defense so you don't get these situations.

 

[jackcass]

I love Jamie's ink.

I prefer Moore's.

 

[loki04]

We’re now introducing video umpires to adjudicated players sticking in zones? Stop for a moment and think about introducing a second rule to adjudicate another rule. In any other environment that would be kicked to the curb immediately, but apparently the bonus point is mad. That takes the cake.

Mason Cox as our bail out kick is now expected to press up from I50 to the defensive arc to contest a ball that ultimately rolls out of bounce then has an arbitrary 5 seconds or whatever to fold back into our F50? You do realise don’t you that it’s roughly a hundred metres from arc to arc along a boundary so in that scenario he’s covering about 70-80 in a straight line. Best case scenario it’s taking 10 seconds for a player to cover that ground? If Mason Cox is at the bottom of a pack do you think he’s getting there in under 15 seconds? No chance. What about when there’s a defensive goal square stoppage how stupid will it look with 24 players inside that 15-20 metre radius and 12 a hundred metres plus away. How are you supposed to clear that congestion with your next link in the chain two plus kicks away? Are you expected to run it out until the forwards can press up or do you just kick to space and wait for more congestion when the forwards and stoppage players arrive at that contest? Or are we making it that your six mids need to push into the middle third and only forwards or defenders can compete in F50 stoppages? Your rule is mad and will have so many unforeseen consequences that it’s not worth my time discussing further until you’ve actually thought on it properly.

I’m also assuming that given you didn’t elaborate on how the bonus point has been proven to be a Mickey Mouse rule in super rugby it obviously isn’t. Especially given it’s been in place for more than a decade...

Point one you are introducing penalties around failing to be in your area without a deterrent teams would ignore the rule, pretty self explanatory I would of thought?
On top of that yes you set up video refs so as not to effect the main umpires job or game flow. This is a non issue and not sure why you see it as a difficulty?


Re Mason or other deep leading fwd, firstly you are assuming a ground split of 50/80/50 on a 180m field.
Why not 60/60/60 with a red line across both ends of the square for player visual?
Means he would be moving much less to fold back.

Also that would be a decision made on his or the coaching staffs behalf to lead all the way to the Half back flank.
So given that would be in play, either he doesn't lead as deep or another player rolls back closer to the front 3rd. Tactics will change which is the whole point.

Stoppage in the back line with only 12 players and the rest up the end they belong? Where's the issue?

The fwd can lead out as soon as play resumes, the teams can set up to have players spread fwd of the play, or hang out a bit or kick it 50m to a leading fwd depending on depth...there's numerous options here you haven't thought it through at all only looking at it through a negative lens.
Did you ask yourself these same scenarios and how to combat them before posting?
The whole point is to spread the field create space and make it more difficult to set up and maintain flooding/press style zones.

This achieves that.

Bonus point is much like super goals not needed and adding another scoring dimension to a game that doesn't require it.
Teams will still play exactly how they do now except when in a position to capitalise on the extra point they will. Flooding and the press will still exist, coaches will be defensively minded and congestion will still reign as king.

 

[loki04]

I'm not averse to mandating set numbers of players in zones but worry that the 50m arc's as the field is currently laid out is not the best layout to enforce it in. Maybe do away with the 50m arcs and have lines boundary line to boundary line along the forward and defensive ends of the 50m square would improve that. Allows forward to make longer leads with a degree of safety and doesn't overly impinge players caught at boundary stoppages.

Yep I think 1/3 slpits.