Another stupid rugby question

Another stupid rugby question

Post by Mentalguy2k » Wed, 27 Mar 2013 21:45:29


Inspired by comments below and the 6N in general.

Let's say a player has been tackled, places the ball well out the back of
the ruck, ruck has formed, competed and died out with several players from
each team in the "pile" and the scrum-half is standing over the ball waiting
to play it. Basically, everything has stopped.

What, then, is the point of a defending player running headlong into the
ruck with a big hit on a player who is already pretty pinned, and ending up
on the floor or tangled up? Is it like deer butting each other with antlers
to see who's the boss or does it have any kind of tactical advantage? From
what I can see (and I saw it plenty of times during the 6N) you're pretty
much taking yourself out of the defensive line, just to give a whack to an
opponent who is usually already out of the game if the scrum half was to
play the ball there and then. I could be wrong but I'd have thought that
having the maximum number of players on their feet when defending would be
the most advantageous way to play? I can see why the attacking team does it
(to take a defender out of the next play) but I don't understand why a
defender would. Red mist? Revenge for an earlier bit of naughtiness? Or just
a free hit?

 
 
 

Another stupid rugby question

Post by Ben » Wed, 27 Mar 2013 22:08:43

Quote:

> Inspired by comments below and the 6N in general.

> Let's say a player has been tackled, places the ball well out the back of

> the ruck, ruck has formed, competed and died out with several players from

> each team in the "pile" and the scrum-half is standing over the ball waiting

> to play it. Basically, everything has stopped.

> What, then, is the point of a defending player running headlong into the

> ruck with a big hit on a player who is already pretty pinned, and ending up

> on the floor or tangled up? Is it like deer butting each other with antlers

> to see who's the boss or does it have any kind of tactical advantage? From

> what I can see (and I saw it plenty of times during the 6N) you're pretty

> much taking yourself out of the defensive line, just to give a whack to an

> opponent who is usually already out of the game if the scrum half was to

> play the ball there and then. I could be wrong but I'd have thought that

> having the maximum number of players on their feet when defending would be

> the most advantageous way to play? I can see why the attacking team does it

> (to take a defender out of the next play) but I don't understand why a

> defender would. Red mist? Revenge for an earlier bit of naughtiness? Or just

> a free hit?

To slow ball down. Defenders are off guard, and a defending player who decided to challenge at the ruck again can either break through and get a foot on the ball, slow the ball down (because he has to be dealt with) and/or commit another forward to the ruck to secure the ball again.

 
 
 

Another stupid rugby question

Post by Mentalguy2k » Wed, 27 Mar 2013 23:51:34


Quote:

> Inspired by comments below and the 6N in general.

> Let's say a player has been tackled, places the ball well out the back of

> the ruck, ruck has formed, competed and died out with several players from

> each team in the "pile" and the scrum-half is standing over the ball
> waiting

> to play it. Basically, everything has stopped.

> What, then, is the point of a defending player running headlong into the

> ruck with a big hit on a player who is already pretty pinned, and ending
> up

> on the floor or tangled up? Is it like deer butting each other with
> antlers

> to see who's the boss or does it have any kind of tactical advantage? From

> what I can see (and I saw it plenty of times during the 6N) you're pretty

> much taking yourself out of the defensive line, just to give a whack to an

> opponent who is usually already out of the game if the scrum half was to

> play the ball there and then. I could be wrong but I'd have thought that

> having the maximum number of players on their feet when defending would be

> the most advantageous way to play? I can see why the attacking team does
> it

> (to take a defender out of the next play) but I don't understand why a

> defender would. Red mist? Revenge for an earlier bit of naughtiness? Or
> just

> a free hit?
>To slow ball down. Defenders are off guard, and a defending player who
>decided to challenge at the ruck again can either break through and get a
>foot on the ball, slow the ball >down (because he has to be dealt with)
>and/or commit another forward to the ruck to secure the ball again.

Good answer, thanks.

 
 
 

Another stupid rugby question

Post by Uncle Dav » Thu, 28 Mar 2013 00:21:43


Quote:
>> To slow ball down. Defenders are off guard, and a defending player who
>> decided to challenge at the ruck again can either break through and
>> get a foot on the ball, slow the ball >down (because he has to be
>> dealt with) and/or commit another forward to the ruck to secure the
>> ball again.

> Good answer, thanks.

It is, but I think sometimes your original thought is nearer the truth!

UD

 
 
 

Another stupid rugby question

Post by Mentalguy2k » Thu, 28 Mar 2013 00:43:19


Quote:

>>> To slow ball down. Defenders are off guard, and a defending player who
>>> decided to challenge at the ruck again can either break through and
>>> get a foot on the ball, slow the ball >down (because he has to be
>>> dealt with) and/or commit another forward to the ruck to secure the
>>> ball again.

>> Good answer, thanks.

> It is, but I think sometimes your original thought is nearer the truth!

It does seem very unneccessary a lot of the time, the guy is never going to
get anywhere near the ball. Fun, though! I blame Steve Walsh.
 
 
 

Another stupid rugby question

Post by Dechuck » Thu, 28 Mar 2013 08:26:17


Quote:




>>>> To slow ball down. Defenders are off guard, and a defending player who
>>>> decided to challenge at the ruck again can either break through and
>>>> get a foot on the ball, slow the ball >down (because he has to be
>>>> dealt with) and/or commit another forward to the ruck to secure the
>>>> ball again.

>>> Good answer, thanks.

>> It is, but I think sometimes your original thought is nearer the truth!

> It does seem very unneccessary a lot of the time, the guy is never going
> to get anywhere near the ball. Fun, though! I blame Steve Walsh.

True but if he can push one of the players back onto the ball it will slow
things down

- Show quoted text -

 
 
 

Another stupid rugby question

Post by Greig Blanchet » Fri, 29 Mar 2013 04:14:07

On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 12:45:29 -0000, "Mentalguy2k8"

Quote:

>Inspired by comments below and the 6N in general.

>Let's say a player has been tackled, places the ball well out the back of
>the ruck, ruck has formed, competed and died out with several players from
>each team in the "pile" and the scrum-half is standing over the ball waiting
>to play it. Basically, everything has stopped.

>What, then, is the point of a defending player running headlong into the
>ruck with a big hit on a player who is already pretty pinned, and ending up
>on the floor or tangled up? Is it like deer butting each other with antlers
>to see who's the boss or does it have any kind of tactical advantage? From
>what I can see (and I saw it plenty of times during the 6N) you're pretty
>much taking yourself out of the defensive line, just to give a whack to an
>opponent who is usually already out of the game if the scrum half was to
>play the ball there and then. I could be wrong but I'd have thought that
>having the maximum number of players on their feet when defending would be
>the most advantageous way to play? I can see why the attacking team does it
>(to take a defender out of the next play) but I don't understand why a
>defender would. Red mist? Revenge for an earlier bit of naughtiness? Or just
>a free hit?

Blimey. We better send out the Men In Black, boys. Here's a pom who's
cottoned on to how we play. Better nueralize him quick before he
spreads the word.
--
greig