Rugby - Scrap the Conversion

Just an Idea- why the conversion in Rugby??

New Scoring - 5 points for a Try (no conversion) and 2 pts each for DG & Pen.

Thoughts???

John Cregan wrote:Just an Idea- why the conversion in Rugby??

New Scoring - 5 points for a Try (no conversion) and 2 pts each for DG & Pen.

Thoughts???

I quite like the conversion.  The scoring system in RU is fine for me.  With regard to your proposal I would ask the obvious:   What would the game gain from abolishing the conversion?   From where I sit, I can see nothing that would radically improve it.  

My view?    The system as it is aint broke.  It don't need fixing.

Why?

aucklandlaurie wrote:Why?

For me a try scored in the corner should have equal value to a try scored under the posts.

This is not that bad an idea, try scored in the corners tends to be good scores after a lot of phases while tries under the post can be intercepts which seems a bit wrong to me.
I think i would give 7 points for a try and keep penalty kick/drop goals at 3.

Why not just also have the conversion infront of the posts on say the 22m line? The fact that 2 penalties is worth more than an unconverted try is a bit of a farce imo.

John Cregan wrote:

aucklandlaurie wrote:Why?

For me a try scored in the corner should have equal value to a try scored under the posts.

It does. A try scored in the corner is worth 5 points, as is the try scored between the posts. I've yet to see a subterranean try, which is what one would be if it was underneath them. Perhaps you meant under the crossbar. But I'm being pedantic now.

The point is, that all tries have a value of five points. The placing of the ball for the conversion on a line parallel to where the try was scored merely varies the degree of difficulty for the kicker.

Therefore, it could be argued that for a kicker to score a conversion from, say, a yard in from the touchline exhibits a greater degree of skill and if anything should be worth perhaps three points instead of two. I'm not advocating that of course, merely making food for thought.

A try is a try is a try. The conversion is what it is. I'm happy to live with that. I see no reason to change anything and you still didn't answer my previous question. I shall repeat it in the hope of a considered response.

What would the game gain from scrapping the Conversion? How would the game be made better for its abolition?

The Fourth Lion wrote:

What would the game gain from scrapping the Conversion?   How would the game be made better for its abolition?

I'm not in favour of the suggestion mooted, but the only advantage I can think of is that the game is started straight away, meaning more live gametime, as opposed to the extra minute or so that it would take to do the conversion...

Getting rid of the conversion will get rid of a lot of the exciting endings we have had to games - there have been many games decided by a last minute conversion.

One thing I think would be a conversion being worth 3 points if the attacking team had a penalty advantage. Although this would create a farce if a team is 8 points down in the last minute as the defending team just wouldn't touch anybody but we need a suitable deterrent to cynical penalties in the 22 and would encourage teams to go for a try rather than needlessly dropkick the ball.

If you are worried that there is too much kicking in a game maybe trial a rule where each player can only take a kick at goal once. As the game progresses there will be less kicks at goal. Would be an interesting yet potentially farcical novely.

Well I'd imagine we all know why it is the way it is (originally scoring a touchdown gave you a 'try' at scoring a kick etc etc) but honestly why would we change it?

I've heard nobody complain about it up to now, and like the lineout, scrum and much maligned dropgoal it adds a certain variety to the game which other games lack.

If we're trying to sort out anything it should be the scrum.

But if you are concerned that trys scored in the corner aren't being sufficently rewarded you could bring in some kind of 'inverse' rule i.e. A try scored under the posts will have it's conversion from the touchline while a try scored in the corner has it's conversion under the posts.  Mad.

Wasn't the value of a penalty in relation to a try tweaked years back and it was found that when more than two penalties were required to equal a try then players reckoned a penalty worth it and conceded them happily? Only when 2 penalties were better than a try did a penalty seem enough of a disincentive to discourage infringements. Must have been years ago, but I'm pretty sure I remember something along the above lines...

MunsterMac wrote:Well I'd imagine we all know why it is the way it is (originally scoring a touchdown gave you a 'try' at scoring a kick etc etc) but honestly why would we change it?

I've heard nobody complain about it up to now, and like the lineout, scrum and much maligned dropgoal it adds a certain variety to the game which other games lack.

If we're trying to sort out anything it should be the scrum.

But if you are concerned that trys scored in the corner aren't being sufficently rewarded you could bring in some kind of 'inverse' rule i.e. A try scored under the posts will have it's conversion from the touchline while a try scored in the corner has it's conversion under the posts.  Mad.

The thing I would like to change more than anything is the focus on collisions. Big tackles are fun to watch but with an over emphasis on big hits the game is suffering and so are the players.

Slight hijack here but as we're discussing rule changes that'll never happen I'd be interested to know what people think of an idea I've had for some time now.

It's always irritated me that when a team gives a penalty away if the penalty is scored the offending team gets to kick off and basically choose whether they want to kick short and try to retain possession or kick long and get field position.

A change I'd like to see is giving the team who get the penalty the choice of kicking or receiving the kick off.