Rugby 12s tournament

[nickyboy]

Being proposed

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/58476455

I've said for ages that since RU went professional there are too many players on the pitch. Everyone's too fit, no space for flair players so it becomes a collision-fest

No doubt the fogeys will be vehemently against it but I hope (a) it happens (b) it's a great success

To me, 7s is so far removed from 15s rugby to be practically a different sport. I hope 12s will be like 15s but with a bit more space so it tips the balance in favour of running and passing, not arm wrestling

 

[matticus]

Speaking as a keen armchair viewer, I'd agree with all of that.

Sports evolve - sometimes changing the rules makes them better to reflect this. Almost every major (commercial!) sport has seen it happen. This seems a radical change, but it might pay off handsomely.

 

[Venod]

I have said for years Union would be a better game if played with 13 men like league, a combining of the rules losing some of dafter ones from each would be a good idea.

 

[T4tomo]

It runs the risk of being too gimmicky, but fundamentally removing some players from the pitch is a major plus. with 15 fit and mobile players, its all collisions and not enough running rugby. back in the glory days, half of the forward pack didn't get involved except at set plays, so there were more gaps to exploit!

 

[ClichéGuevara]

One of the plus points to union is the variety of shapes and sizes that lends itself to the positional and tactical element. That for me adds a bigger dimension to the game. I quite enjoy the rooks and mauls. In contrast, I find league very repetitive, with a lot of the players static for relatively long periods at the play the ball, and little variation in tactics from one game to the next, so perhaps I have a bias.

One thing to note is that league, which is a similar format to the one proposed, is dying a not so slow death, with Sky giving them an ultimatum to liven it up, or lose their funding.

I couldn't see in that link which positions are liable to be removed. Presumably it will be forwards or it makes little sense. I could sort of see how removing he flankers could work in reducing numbers, but which would be the other position lost, and how would that affect a restart?

 

[T4tomo]

It is being played to Union Rules, not League. League is dull because here isn't any "what we would call union forward play".

one less back mean its hard to cover tactical kicking to both touch line and "in behind" as you've lost a winger or a full back, without leaving your first up line of tacklers short in numbers. it should open it up, without it getting into a completely different games like 7's

 

[nickyboy]

One of the plus points to union is the variety of shapes and sizes that lends itself to the positional and tactical element. That for me adds a bigger dimension to the game. I quite enjoy the rooks and mauls. In contrast, I find league very repetitive, with a lot of the players static for relatively long periods at the play the ball, and little variation in tactics from one game to the next, so perhaps I have a bias.

One thing to note is that league, which is a similar format to the one proposed, is dying a not so slow death, with Sky giving them an ultimatum to liven it up, or lose their funding.

I couldn't see in that link which positions are liable to be removed. Presumably it will be forwards or it makes little sense. I could sort of see how removing he flankers could work in reducing numbers, but which would be the other position lost, and how would that affect a restart?

I suspect you have a scrum half, full back and four others covering what are five positions in 15 a side

It will be interesting to see if it takes off, in the way that T20 cricket has taken off and usurped longer forms of the game in some countries

 

[Drago]

Rugby lite. Not for me.

 

[Beebo]

It will be interesting to see if clubs and unions are willing to release players for this.
Rugby is an attritional sport, you can’t play loads of games in a short space of time.

 

[Milkfloat]

I think it could succeed if they managed to take away the mysticism of the rules and the seeming randomness of referees decisions especially at the scrum. Uncontested scrums with reset after reset followed by a random penalty sucks the life out of me, I like the one reset rule proposed but make the scrums contested. I also think a new format is a chance to improve player safety, perhaps by reducing substitutions and even radically making players wear impact monitors a pull them off when they exceed limits.

 

[Chap sur le velo]

I hope they mean 12 a side and not 12 plus a full bench waiting to be deployed.

15 mins a side suggests too much of 7's type action pace, so how is it really any different?

I'll take a curious look, but I'm with those suggesting 13 a side with medical substitution only, as the way to improve the real game.

 

[Venod]

I think it could succeed if they managed to take away the mysticism of the rules and the seeming randomness of referees decisions especially at the scrum. Uncontested scrums with reset after reset followed by a random penalty sucks the life out of me

The rules at the scrum and the time taken to complete it, are the worst aspects of RU to me, I know its part of the game and die hard Union players extol its merits, but its not good viewing.

12 minutes a half is a waste of time.

13 a side, Union rules, less referee interpretation, scrums speeded up, League points for tries and kicks.

 

[matticus]

12 minutes a half is a waste of time.

I'm guessing that a lot of marketing thought has gone into this. 12 minutes, 12 players => "World 12s". Slick eh??
They're also aiming at a short tournament, for fans with short attention spans, where lots of games can be played in a short period (weekend?).

Much less risk in a short tournament, with less people/facilities tied up for less time.
I could imagine it expanding to longer games if the format is popular.

 

[Beebo]

The club game in England last year was full of high scoring games. Teams made a conscious decision to go all out attack. It just needs a change of mind set.

It’s really only the international game which suffers from the attritional defensive tactics. The recent Lions tour being a prime example of how not to play the game.

I would much prefer the points for a penalty to reduce to 2 and a try increased to 6.

If this tournament goes ahead it will be on a pay per view channel with limited audience. It needs to be on terrestrial TV to make an impact. But it will be all about the cash.

 

[Dayvo]

I played rugby union from the age of 14 to 35 and thoroughly enjoyed it BUT I would much rather watch a game of rugby league over union any day.
If they can come up with a decent format for 12s (max two substitutes for injuries, not tactical: a scoring system to encourage open rugby, and 2x20 minutes of actual playing time and not just waiting for scrums and line outs to get ready, then maybe it’ll rival rugby league.
BTW I’m a southern Jessie, but a fan of rugby league.