Is rugby going soft?
Discussion
No, it isn't.
Everyday I pop on to rugbydump.com to have a look at the latest hits and punch ups, and every other comment is something along the lines of 'nothing wrong with that', 'rugby's going soft' etc etc.
But I'm sorry - these people are wrong!
Rugby has changed since 1995, that's for sure. The game is a different animal, but softer? I think not.
The introduction of yellow cards enabled previously unpunishable crimes such as high-tackles etc to be assigned a level of severity.
Referees in the professional era have had to apply the rules more vigerously, but this surely can only be a good thing?
Rugby players are now fitter and much, much tougher. Brawls in the 1970's were a part of the game, but the fights have moved from throwing punches to who can put in the biggest hits, again, no bad thing surely?
A game between Englands 1991 Grand Slam Champions and this years 6N's squad would be an embarassing whitewash, with Will Carling and his men being left strewn across the Twickers turf.....
In short - I'm enjoying rugby now more than ever - it's a fantastic game to watch, play and understand....
Everyday I pop on to rugbydump.com to have a look at the latest hits and punch ups, and every other comment is something along the lines of 'nothing wrong with that', 'rugby's going soft' etc etc.
But I'm sorry - these people are wrong!
Rugby has changed since 1995, that's for sure. The game is a different animal, but softer? I think not.
The introduction of yellow cards enabled previously unpunishable crimes such as high-tackles etc to be assigned a level of severity.
Referees in the professional era have had to apply the rules more vigerously, but this surely can only be a good thing?
Rugby players are now fitter and much, much tougher. Brawls in the 1970's were a part of the game, but the fights have moved from throwing punches to who can put in the biggest hits, again, no bad thing surely?
A game between Englands 1991 Grand Slam Champions and this years 6N's squad would be an embarassing whitewash, with Will Carling and his men being left strewn across the Twickers turf.....
In short - I'm enjoying rugby now more than ever - it's a fantastic game to watch, play and understand....
ExChrispy Porker said:
You think the current lot would get the better of Probyn, Moore and Leonard. Really??
I'd say Leonard's modern equivalent is Adam Jones....so I think he could still play today. Probyn I am not sure about.....he was 5' 10" and only weighed 15 stone....modern scrummaging laws wouldn't help him either...David Sole wouldn't need to tape/vaseline/cut off his sleeve to deal with his binding....I also don't remember Probyn doing much around the park! Moore was only 14 1/2 stone and 5ft 9in.....I don't know enough about the "dark arts" to know if he could scrummage effectively now but he certainly got around the pitch plenty well enough but giving up two stone to a centre might be an issue...Cheib said:
I'd say Leonard's modern equivalent is Adam Jones....so I think he could still play today. Probyn I am not sure about.....he was 5' 10" and only weighed 15 stone....modern scrummaging laws wouldn't help him either...David Sole wouldn't need to tape/vaseline/cut off his sleeve to deal with his binding....I also don't remember Probyn doing much around the park! Moore was only 14 1/2 stone and 5ft 9in.....I don't know enough about the "dark arts" to know if he could scrummage effectively now but he certainly got around the pitch plenty well enough but giving up two stone to a centre might be an issue...
Don't forget Moore actually hooked! No-one has to these days.He also operated in a front row that was much much lower than today, for 80 minutes.
Very very few modern hookers could do what he did.If any.
ExChrispy Porker said:
Cheib said:
I'd say Leonard's modern equivalent is Adam Jones....so I think he could still play today. Probyn I am not sure about.....he was 5' 10" and only weighed 15 stone....modern scrummaging laws wouldn't help him either...David Sole wouldn't need to tape/vaseline/cut off his sleeve to deal with his binding....I also don't remember Probyn doing much around the park! Moore was only 14 1/2 stone and 5ft 9in.....I don't know enough about the "dark arts" to know if he could scrummage effectively now but he certainly got around the pitch plenty well enough but giving up two stone to a centre might be an issue...
Don't forget Moore actually hooked! No-one has to these days.He also operated in a front row that was much much lower than today, for 80 minutes.
Very very few modern hookers could do what he did.If any.
Modern packs weigh between 17 1/2 and 18 stone a man.....no idea what the average weight was in '91 but it's probably not a huge difference. Dooley, Ackford, Richards, Skinner....all big men. It's the backs that are just a completely different size! Still Guscott would be good enough.......
Jase was good enough to be in the 2003 final chaps dont forget, so he could cut it. Now, imagine if the refs would have let Jase scrummage to '91 standards and think what that would have done to the Aussie front row...
Moore was a superb hooker, he was a proper footballer. Guys like Fitz, Moore and Wood were all proper footballing hookers.
Moore was a superb hooker, he was a proper footballer. Guys like Fitz, Moore and Wood were all proper footballing hookers.
JCB123 said:
No, it isn't.
Everyday I pop on to rugbydump.com to have a look at the latest hits and punch ups, and every other comment is something along the lines of 'nothing wrong with that', 'rugby's going soft' etc etc.
But I'm sorry - these people are wrong!
Rugby has changed since 1995, that's for sure. The game is a different animal, but softer? I think not.
The introduction of yellow cards enabled previously unpunishable crimes such as high-tackles etc to be assigned a level of severity.
Referees in the professional era have had to apply the rules more vigerously, but this surely can only be a good thing?
Rugby players are now fitter and much, much tougher. Brawls in the 1970's were a part of the game, but the fights have moved from throwing punches to who can put in the biggest hits, again, no bad thing surely?
A game between Englands 1991 Grand Slam Champions and this years 6N's squad would be an embarassing whitewash, with Will Carling and his men being left strewn across the Twickers turf.....
In short - I'm enjoying rugby now more than ever - it's a fantastic game to watch, play and understand....
It isn't a softer game. The move to professionalism has had its effect all the way down the divisions. It is now, I think, a different game. Not entirely but the old days of having a run each half is long gone. Everyday I pop on to rugbydump.com to have a look at the latest hits and punch ups, and every other comment is something along the lines of 'nothing wrong with that', 'rugby's going soft' etc etc.
But I'm sorry - these people are wrong!
Rugby has changed since 1995, that's for sure. The game is a different animal, but softer? I think not.
The introduction of yellow cards enabled previously unpunishable crimes such as high-tackles etc to be assigned a level of severity.
Referees in the professional era have had to apply the rules more vigerously, but this surely can only be a good thing?
Rugby players are now fitter and much, much tougher. Brawls in the 1970's were a part of the game, but the fights have moved from throwing punches to who can put in the biggest hits, again, no bad thing surely?
A game between Englands 1991 Grand Slam Champions and this years 6N's squad would be an embarassing whitewash, with Will Carling and his men being left strewn across the Twickers turf.....
In short - I'm enjoying rugby now more than ever - it's a fantastic game to watch, play and understand....
I used to support a level 4 team and the front row had to run. Hey, run? How different is that? We had a hooker who could sprint. From a standing start he was away.
The changes have meant that everyone has got bigger and the days of the little bloke being able to take a tackle and then get up are disappearing. I was at the Tolouse/Quinns match earlier this years and went to see the foreigners arrive. I'm 6'3" yet I was dwarfed by the majority of the team. They een had a tall physio.
The enlargement has meant that tactics change. I still expect #15s to avoid the tackle and to pass before a late tackle won't be penalised. But they don't, even in semi professional and amateur level.
I'm not nostalgic and I have to say I really like the new style. We were at an away match when the club photographer was taken down by a tackle that left the field. The chap was thrown in the air by the speed of the impact. He inured an ankle - break or sprain I never knew. My lad had come off the field with a bit of a limp and when the ambulance turned up my first thought was that it was for him. It was for the photographer. When photographers get injured you know it has gone up a gear.
I agree with you OP. Two things make me think that. Contrast the Union V League game at the end of the 90s. The union lads - the last of the 'amateur' generation - were going off injured left right and centre and the league lads who made the jump were rocket-ship fast compared to their new union team-mates. Those swapping from league to union no longer appear that much fitter, and the speed of the play is much much faster than it was. I reckon a code re-match today would be a much closer affair.
Retirement age has also come right down usually due to injury because the hits are harder and faster and the human body is cannot cope with the current level of tackling for as long.
The increased regulation is a good thing IMO as the players are much much more powerful than they used to be and thus can do a lot more damage if they get a bit 'enthusiastic'
Retirement age has also come right down usually due to injury because the hits are harder and faster and the human body is cannot cope with the current level of tackling for as long.
The increased regulation is a good thing IMO as the players are much much more powerful than they used to be and thus can do a lot more damage if they get a bit 'enthusiastic'
My lad's played with a broken finger. It was taped up and he was told to take the ball in his other had if he could. He's played with dislocated fingers. Once, at half time, the physio pushed it back into place, he sat with ice on it for a while, went out to play and whenever the water bottles came on he got an ice pack. He came off in the end but only when he kept fumbling the ball.
We've had one player who broke ribs and continued to play. My lad 'dislocated' ribs and played on, as have many others. One chap broke an ankle and played on for a while but kept falling over. It is one of the subtle symptoms we found out.
I don't think the players are any softer now. Adrenaline sill happens. If the team is taken as a whole, the general standard is much harder. There were #15s who had never been tackled in their playing career in the old days, at least not when they had the ball. I've played #14 and was told to run into touch by my team manager before tackles. (Stay near the lines was always a good idea I thought.) I used to think the idea was not to get tackled at all and, if possible, not to run anywhere near the opposition. I used to be quite fast and my manager thought I was valuable, so we were at one there. My own personal plan when a back was not to put myself into a postion where I had to tackle. No one said anything against it. That was a good game plan. I've played flanker as well and thought the back line were the tackling position.
The front two rows ran into one another at low speed, the back row had to tackle if they couldn't avoid it and the backs tried to run with the ball and not be tackled.
The serious injury rate seems higher now than before. Certainly the Vets' age has dropped and for good reason. How often does a team nowadays field their first 15? Probably not after the first two matches.
I can only speak as I find but my lad's old team were hard from prop to full back. I have to say that I would not have lasted five minutes (with any luck) against them.
We've had one player who broke ribs and continued to play. My lad 'dislocated' ribs and played on, as have many others. One chap broke an ankle and played on for a while but kept falling over. It is one of the subtle symptoms we found out.
I don't think the players are any softer now. Adrenaline sill happens. If the team is taken as a whole, the general standard is much harder. There were #15s who had never been tackled in their playing career in the old days, at least not when they had the ball. I've played #14 and was told to run into touch by my team manager before tackles. (Stay near the lines was always a good idea I thought.) I used to think the idea was not to get tackled at all and, if possible, not to run anywhere near the opposition. I used to be quite fast and my manager thought I was valuable, so we were at one there. My own personal plan when a back was not to put myself into a postion where I had to tackle. No one said anything against it. That was a good game plan. I've played flanker as well and thought the back line were the tackling position.
The front two rows ran into one another at low speed, the back row had to tackle if they couldn't avoid it and the backs tried to run with the ball and not be tackled.
The serious injury rate seems higher now than before. Certainly the Vets' age has dropped and for good reason. How often does a team nowadays field their first 15? Probably not after the first two matches.
I can only speak as I find but my lad's old team were hard from prop to full back. I have to say that I would not have lasted five minutes (with any luck) against them.
XCP said:
So the answer to the ( slightly) rhetorical question I asked would be what then Derek? Given that front row replacements are allowed virtually willy nilly in case someone gets hurt...
As far as one can answer, given that the sport has changed so much, is that there are still real rugby payers on the pitch. Whether they are harder or softer is, without wanting to have a go at anyone, a rather pointless question. But here goes:I've been to meals where the guest of honour has been an amateur rugy player of the past. The much vaunted - and for good reason - Welsh backs of the 'good old days' and one of the English lads. I'll post a picture when I've moved house. They are great blokes to a man, full of great stories that they are being paid to tell us, and all have been excellent entertainment.
You can see that they have a backbone, but then doesn't that go for all rugby players.
I've also stood next to Johnson in a club bar.
I don't want to put the older blokes down as, as I have said, it was a different game in the old days, but I would not want to be tackled by Johnson at speed. Who hasn't winced when he's hit someone?
The laws might have been more flexible in the past but if the more traditional methods of play were allowed with the likes of Johnson then there is little likelihood of anyone standing at the final whistle, or even hearing it.
It seems to me that the game is just the same: nearing the limit of acceptable.
As for the mention of replacements, if anything I think this has made things harder. I know tactics are not high on the to do list of any of the front five, but the fact that they can be replaced means that they can play harder for a shorter period of time.
I think my team's injury list would suggest that rugby hasn't gone soft. We've had three of the first IV with long term injuries, onces that have kept them out of multiple matches. All three have had multiple breaks. One didn't play this year and seems unlikely to run out with the first team until 2013. My lad played the final two matches with an injury that in reality should have kept him on the sidelines. When any team takes to the pitch there's enough bandages to fill an ambulance.
My lad is a mountain. Picture here: http://www.brightonblues.co.uk/?page_id=2921
Want to be tackled by him? Want to argue with him that he's going soft?
Hello chaps – first time poster!!
gjf764 asked my thoughts on Twitter, so here they are! By the way, I am not in the same league as Brian Moore but I play loosehead prop for Bath and have played for England etc.
Anyway, this is a fun debate that will never end – nor should it! There are a million points to make, but I will try to keep my views short and sharp.
Rugby is now a vastly different game to that of the early 90’s. The game now involves – unarguably – miles more power and brute force. Certainly, there were some monsters playing 25 years ago, but nothing compared to those we face these days. An example - our winger, Matt Banahan, is 6’7”, 18 stones and the quickest man in our squad. Admittedly he is a phenomenon, but every team seems to have men to match him. There are still some ‘little’ guys, but they are invariably special specimens. Another example – Olly Barkley, our pretty boy, goal-kicking centre, might look slight but is in fact freakishly powerful. This doesn’t mean nobody was powerful all those years ago – of course they were – but advances in diet and weight lifting routines mean that there is almost no comparison.
I don’t think Jerry Guscott was bench-pressing 160kg like it was a bag of sugar. Saying that, his pure attacking talent (or Barry John’s) would doubtless be sufficient to see him carve the big beasts of today to pieces on the field, but unfortunately he would also find them running back at him, and this is where the problems would start. This is a bold statement – but tackling as we know it didn’t really exist 20-25 years ago. Hell, I started as a pro in 1998 and didn’t do my first actual defence session until 2000 – they just didn’t exist in rugby union until then. So for half the game they could be useful, but for the other half they would be missing tackles, getting battered and standing under their own posts.
The front row bit. Leonard doesn’t really count as he played 8 years as a pro. But Probyn, Rendall etc were my heroes. Still are really. Their game was about technique, cheating and mental toughness. So nothing much has changed!! The scrum is so brutally and incompetently over-officiated now that guile is fading out and beastly power and timing are what is needed. But, could they ‘do a job’ on us? With huge, unflinching respect, I say no, nowhere near. Modern front rows are enormous freaks on the whole, and a good biggun always beats a good littleun. And do not assume that technique no longer figures – of course it does. I am not the biggest LHP in the world, but am probably a touch larger than the average. I weigh 123kg – approx 19 and a half stones, and I sometimes play against men who make me feel tiny. We all lift heavy weights 3-4 times a week and we do nothing else (like work during the day!!). The evolution of brute force would make it a dangerous experiment. This is nature, and I am well aware that in 20 years players will look and me and my mates and laugh at how puny we are. I will, obviously, be at the bar telling anyone who will listen that I could “take ‘em low and bend ‘em in half!!” That will, however, be b
ks!
As for the ‘they used to scrum low for 80 minutes’ comment, the height isn’t what’s tiring; it’s the force you’re under. And that has probably doubled. Still, this is all relative, and those guys were the brutes of their day.
Nastiness? The old days were nastier, no doubt. More cameras mean we cannot do what we want to all the time!! Still, there is always time for the odd chinning where it is needed and we all do it. Well, not the fairies. Play in France and your nuts will still be grabbed and yanked and your eyes will still be gouged. They are my favourite games by a mile, because it feels like playing 20 years ago.
Toughness? Yes, rugby men still play on with injuries. We all do. A few months ago one of our other props indeed broke his jaw. But he finished the game because he didn’t want to look soft. Also, if we all missed games when injured we would never play. I’ve had 5 shoulder reconstructions and 4 Achilles operations so far and am scheduled in for more surgery in the coming weeks (elbow and perhaps finger). We all break fingers, elbows, tear bits and bobs and we still play. It’s silly actually, but all to do with machismo. Nothing changes! Mooro and co would have done exactly the same.
Erm, not so short and sharp. Soz…
gjf764 asked my thoughts on Twitter, so here they are! By the way, I am not in the same league as Brian Moore but I play loosehead prop for Bath and have played for England etc.
Anyway, this is a fun debate that will never end – nor should it! There are a million points to make, but I will try to keep my views short and sharp.
Rugby is now a vastly different game to that of the early 90’s. The game now involves – unarguably – miles more power and brute force. Certainly, there were some monsters playing 25 years ago, but nothing compared to those we face these days. An example - our winger, Matt Banahan, is 6’7”, 18 stones and the quickest man in our squad. Admittedly he is a phenomenon, but every team seems to have men to match him. There are still some ‘little’ guys, but they are invariably special specimens. Another example – Olly Barkley, our pretty boy, goal-kicking centre, might look slight but is in fact freakishly powerful. This doesn’t mean nobody was powerful all those years ago – of course they were – but advances in diet and weight lifting routines mean that there is almost no comparison.
I don’t think Jerry Guscott was bench-pressing 160kg like it was a bag of sugar. Saying that, his pure attacking talent (or Barry John’s) would doubtless be sufficient to see him carve the big beasts of today to pieces on the field, but unfortunately he would also find them running back at him, and this is where the problems would start. This is a bold statement – but tackling as we know it didn’t really exist 20-25 years ago. Hell, I started as a pro in 1998 and didn’t do my first actual defence session until 2000 – they just didn’t exist in rugby union until then. So for half the game they could be useful, but for the other half they would be missing tackles, getting battered and standing under their own posts.
The front row bit. Leonard doesn’t really count as he played 8 years as a pro. But Probyn, Rendall etc were my heroes. Still are really. Their game was about technique, cheating and mental toughness. So nothing much has changed!! The scrum is so brutally and incompetently over-officiated now that guile is fading out and beastly power and timing are what is needed. But, could they ‘do a job’ on us? With huge, unflinching respect, I say no, nowhere near. Modern front rows are enormous freaks on the whole, and a good biggun always beats a good littleun. And do not assume that technique no longer figures – of course it does. I am not the biggest LHP in the world, but am probably a touch larger than the average. I weigh 123kg – approx 19 and a half stones, and I sometimes play against men who make me feel tiny. We all lift heavy weights 3-4 times a week and we do nothing else (like work during the day!!). The evolution of brute force would make it a dangerous experiment. This is nature, and I am well aware that in 20 years players will look and me and my mates and laugh at how puny we are. I will, obviously, be at the bar telling anyone who will listen that I could “take ‘em low and bend ‘em in half!!” That will, however, be b
ks!As for the ‘they used to scrum low for 80 minutes’ comment, the height isn’t what’s tiring; it’s the force you’re under. And that has probably doubled. Still, this is all relative, and those guys were the brutes of their day.
Nastiness? The old days were nastier, no doubt. More cameras mean we cannot do what we want to all the time!! Still, there is always time for the odd chinning where it is needed and we all do it. Well, not the fairies. Play in France and your nuts will still be grabbed and yanked and your eyes will still be gouged. They are my favourite games by a mile, because it feels like playing 20 years ago.
Toughness? Yes, rugby men still play on with injuries. We all do. A few months ago one of our other props indeed broke his jaw. But he finished the game because he didn’t want to look soft. Also, if we all missed games when injured we would never play. I’ve had 5 shoulder reconstructions and 4 Achilles operations so far and am scheduled in for more surgery in the coming weeks (elbow and perhaps finger). We all break fingers, elbows, tear bits and bobs and we still play. It’s silly actually, but all to do with machismo. Nothing changes! Mooro and co would have done exactly the same.
Erm, not so short and sharp. Soz…
I wonder if players are reaching the top level much younger than in the '80s and '90s. They seem to be bulking up really young when before there was a big difference between school boy and international player physique. I remember school boy teams at18 being fit but still lighter and much smaller than internationals. Now 18 year old appear to be much bigger and doing much more weights at school. My first 15 back in the '80s did virtually no weights at, many played at international U18s level.
Does this create issues for the players later on?
Does this create issues for the players later on?
Thanks for taking the time to post that, I know you have the full time job of looking after Duncan Bell, however would you have ever liked to have spent a season or two in the Top 14? Aside from the money, would the mix of old school front row ethics and professionalism been appealing?
Gassing Station | Sports | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff