Whatever next? The England Guide to Expansive Rugby?

The latest gossip from the BEEB


"A major attempt to end, or at least curtail, the problems associated with the scrum is being made by a former Australian prop of Argentine extraction, Enrique "Topo" Rodriguez. The Sydney-based Rodriguez, who won 26 caps for the Wallabies, is in the process of producing a detailed publication focused solely on the scrum, after consulting around 150 ex-players and coaches around the world."

A few thoughts.

1. He's of Argentinian extraction so might know a bit about scrummaging.
2. He's got 26 caps for the wallabies so scratch point 1.
3. It's probably going to be a very short paper.
4. It's conclusion will probably be "No shoving = No worries mate. Hooroo."

I can barely wait.

How long is the pause between the announcement of this publication and its release?

Massive.

Then it has to be reset (incorrect binding material)

Funny how they felt the need to put in "of Argentine extraction". Because the idea of getting an Aussie to advise the IRFU on what should happen in the scrum is ridiculous. I don't like to use stereotypes, but aren't they the ones who wish the scrum didn't exist?

Re the title of this piece, it depends which England era you look at.

The team in recent years has played with a lack of ideas and creativity. But the England side of +/- 1999-2002 played with a freedom and efficiency rarely seen, as borne out by the record breaking number of tries they scored (through the backs) in the 6N, including a 6 try thumping of France one year - something even the SH sides at their finest rarely do.

expansive rugby?saes?

But it wasn't expansive simonfromsurrey it was bosh bish bash by the forwards up the jumper,truck and trailer stuff which had to be defended,
once enough people committed the ball came out for a run in or Johnny would chip ahead for a speedster to tap it down.

Im not disrespecting the methods it payed off very well for England,
but don't ever confuse that with expansive rugby.

Oh for goodness sakes, guys, just accept that England have been known to play expansive rugby now and then. By which I mean winning the ball up front maybe, but then passing it in flowing movements through the backs (and forwards) to score treis.

senghenydd - anyone who calls English 'saes' deserves as little respect as any English person who calls a Welsh person a sh**psh*gger. Both are offensive in the extreme and not funny on any level. Cut it out, please.

I think the Aussie scrum has improved dramatically in the last short while, either that or both NZ and SA were fooling in the 3N. Their stocks are still low, and they'll suffer with injuries, but I don't think the scrum will offer quite the same target it did in 2007.

senghenydd1913 wrote:expansive rugby?saes?

Saesneg if you wish, but not Saes.

Pakistani if you wish, but not person of Asian descent.

OK?

TheGreyGhost wrote:I think the Aussie scrum has improved dramatically in the last short while, either that or both NZ and SA were fooling in the 3N. Their stocks are still low, and they'll suffer with injuries, but I don't think the scrum will offer quite the same target it did in 2007.

I agree, it's not as weak as it was TGG, but come on, they're far from being in a position to be able to preach about it, let alone redefine it for the better of the game. I can only begin to imagine what your average Kiwi would do with an English manual on 3/4 running plays.

It really is simple, passive engage, refs checks binding, give all clear, push when ball comes in.

Glas a du wrote:It really is simple, passive engage, refs checks binding, give all clear, push when ball comes in.

passive? in rugby? have some self respect.

whats the ref going to do, skip round and check the binding while the other side slips theirs, or wehe pop back and check agagin.

won't work.

Get rid of ctpe and let the ref kick the offending prop in the balls the way it used to be done

viewtothegym wrote:But it wasn't expansive simonfromsurrey it was bosh bish bash by the forwards up the jumper,truck and trailer stuff which had to be defended,
once enough people committed the ball came out for a run in or Johnny would chip ahead for a speedster to tap it down.

Im not disrespecting the methods it payed off very well for England,
but don't ever confuse that with expansive rugby.

That really isn't true at all. There was a period in the very early 2000s when England played a great brand of rugby. They had a formidable pack but they weren't playing ten-man rugby at all.

Also, whoever mentioned it, 'Sais' is the Welsh word for an Englishman. I don't see what's wrong with using it to describe an Englishman.

Whats offensive about the Southwestern Association of Episcopal Schools ?

People may not know who "Topo" Rodriguez is.

Born in 52, he was one of the few players to play for more than one country - in fact he managed three. He played 42 test-matches between turning out for Argentina, Australia and Tahiti. He retired in 1987 and was regarded as one of the great props and scrummagers of the game in the seventies and eighties. He was part of the famous Australian Grand Slam winning team along with his friend, Mark Ella.

Highly successful whilst playing the game, unfortunately, he became mentally unwell after he left the game and ended on his uppers over the next decade, moving from job to job, failed businesses, family life, and losing everything that mattered to him.

He eventually was diagnosed properly for bipolar disorder, and with proper treatments, recovered his life. He remains very popular with Australian and Argentine fans - of a certain vintage - and his extraordinary life has been retold in countless interviews, and was even made into a play. He is a big advocate of championing the rights and realities of people with mental illness.

The publication might prove to be very interesting for those with an interest in the front five.

luckless_pedestrian wrote:
Also, whoever mentioned it, 'Sais' is the Welsh word for an Englishman. I don't see what's wrong with using it to describe an Englishman.

Are you happy to be called a Taff ?

England played some good expansive rugby against us in Cardiff earlier this year, then repeated it against Italy.

The wheels may started to come unglued vs France onwards but they did do well prior...

What a stupid comment Rodriguez was a top class Prop,and as good a Scrummager as most.
IF the book or Report is genuine it MAY have real value.Frankly anything is better than the current dogs mess that passes for a Scrum now.
Oh dear ,that will upset those here who think a Props primary role is to run a 100 metres in 9.6 seconds.
Then lean on and deliberately Collapse/not Bind Scrums[it`s called winning a penalty].
Because most Refs are to thick to pick it.

emack

Agree with you. why bother with scrummages at all? After all they exist merely to allow fat boys to think that they can play rugby.
How much time do scrummages waste with their slow forming, falling down, slowly getting up, falling down again etc..Spurious penalty.. three points... thanks ref.
Nobody really understands the scrum so why not just forget it and restart with an uncontested scrum? Keeps the fatties away from the ball for another few minutes and allows the talented to play without the worry of falling over one of the aforementioned chubbies?

english_osprey wrote:emack

Agree with you. why bother with scrummages at all? After all they exist merely to allow fat boys to think that they can play rugby.
How much time do scrummages waste with their slow forming, falling down, slowly getting up, falling down again etc..Spurious penalty.. three points... thanks ref.
Nobody really understands the scrum so why not just forget it and restart with an uncontested scrum? Keeps the fatties away from the ball for another few minutes and allows the talented to play without the worry of falling over one of the aforementioned chubbies?

Why don't we do away with the forwards completely ? That'll make it 7 a side, then make the game 7 minutes each half ? Or why not just get the referee to toss a coin to see which side wins ? And then everyone can get into the pub rather than seeing two hardened packs go head to head and fight to win the ball. I suggest you watch RL if you want competed scrums to be got rid of.

ERF

I like your thinking!

Ahhh classic comments from a back. You just stand there at the back and do your make up, let the men play rugby and you can play some netball when we're done.

emack2 wrote:What a stupid comment Rodriguez was a top class Prop,and as good a Scrummager as most.
IF the book or Report is genuine it MAY have real value.Frankly anything is better than the current dogs mess that passes for a Scrum now.
Oh dear ,that will upset those here who think a Props primary role is to run a 100 metres in 9.6 seconds.
Then lean on and deliberately Collapse/not Bind Scrums[it`s called winning a penalty].
Because most Refs are to thick to pick it.

Thanks Chuckles, I see the sense of humour bypass is holding up.

Ahhh classic comments from a back. You just stand there at the back and do your make up, let the men play rugby and you can play some netball when we're done..

Despite playing as a back I like watching a good scrummaging battle. It's an interesting facet of the game. A couple of the current interpretations annoy me though. Some refs stop the scrum after it goes back a few metres and award a penalty, why? Let it advance, only stop it if it becomes dangerous, there should be nothing stopping a powerful scrum stampeding forward 20 odd metres. The other thing is when refs allow 9s to pass the ball away after their front rows have stood up to make it nice and easy for them.

The problem is that we seldom see a good scrummaging battle!
What we usually get is a scrum and then a reset scrum then somebody slips, or pretends to slip and then perhaps an arbitrary penalty and 3 points or perhaps reset again...etc etc.
I was unfortunate enough to witness one scrum in the ospreys-llanelli game set and reset for what seemed an eternity. Then I had to suffer analysis on scrum v telling me that one particular prop had 'done well for his team' because he had ultimately won a penalty (by cheating).
Is that the style of rugby that anybody wants to watch, really?

The problem is too many rules
Nowadays unless there is a rule you can do something pretty much everything is illegal, its the same principle in every aspect of life, too many signs, warnings, rules, risks, liability blah de fecking blah
rugby used to be a melee and over the years was transcribed into a series of sequences of play. Over regulation serves no purpose other than to allow the elf and safety czars to point the finger. It doesn't make the game safer, it just slows it down. Get rid of rules at the scrum, the front row largely ignore them anyway if they can.

Lets get back to agincourt, that way england might beat france

Gatts wrote:
Lets get back to agincourt, that way england might beat france

England rugby fan wrote:

Gatts wrote:
Lets get back to agincourt, that way england might beat france

another puncture...buy a new chariot

Gatts wrote:

England rugby fan wrote:

Gatts wrote:
Lets get back to agincourt, that way england might beat france

another puncture...buy a new chariot

You really do need to change the record. I'm not quite sure why you keep mentioning England on threads that have got nothing to do with them.

England rugby fan wrote:

Gatts wrote:

England rugby fan wrote:

Gatts wrote:
Lets get back to agincourt, that way england might beat france

another puncture...buy a new chariot

You really do need to change the record. I'm not quite sure why you keep mentioning England on threads that have got nothing to do with them.

You are right

mentioning England on a rugby forum is well, demented.

Gatts wrote:
You are right

mentioning England on a rugby forum is well, demented.

You said it.

saes expansive rugby? one other myth to dispel then

the lost generation?