RugbyRebels

I wondered if they were awarding LBPs in the group stages and looked it up - yes they are, but for some reason if you lose by 8 or less, not 7 as in the Premiership (and everywhere else I'm aware of).

Anyone know the reason for this?

CunningPunter wrote:I wondered if they were awarding LBPs in the group stages and looked it up - yes they are, but for some reason if you lose by 8 or less, not 7 as in the Premiership (and everywhere else I'm aware of).

Anyone know the reason for this?

I think you may have misread it. Wikipedia quite confusingly states it as "losing by less than 8 points" which is correct, but oddly worded. The Rugby Wold Cup website says "loss by 7 points or less" (fewer!).

https://www.rugbyworldcup.com/tournament-rules

Puja

Puja wrote: The Rugby Wold Cup website says "loss by 7 points or less"

Yorkshire v. Lincolnshire final ?..

Puja wrote:

CunningPunter wrote:I wondered if they were awarding LBPs in the group stages and looked it up - yes they are, but for some reason if you lose by 8 or less, not 7 as in the Premiership (and everywhere else I'm aware of).

Anyone know the reason for this?

I think you may have misread it. Wikipedia quite confusingly states it as "losing by less than 8 points" which is correct, but oddly worded. The Rugby Wold Cup website says "loss by 7 points or less" (fewer!).

https://www.rugbyworldcup.com/tournament-rules

Puja

You're right! The first reply on Google, which on closer inspection turns out to be from the Sun, says "lose by eight or less":

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/5448512/ ... and-tonga/

but others (eg the Independent) say "less than eight points", and as you say the RWC site confirms this.

A lesson to evaluate one's sources I suppose ...

Don't even think you should have a bonus point for losing whatever the points difference. Why give somebody a reward just cos they kept the score down. You don't see it in any other sport

belgarion wrote:Don't even think you should have a bonus point for losing whatever the points difference. Why give somebody a reward just cos they kept the score down. You don't see it in any other sport

In an ideal world, I agree, but then I'd say the same for the TBP as well

Part of the idea of bonus points is to try and give teams incentives towards the end of the game and to incentivise more spectator friendly play. It’s not just a reward for production but also a carrot for a good performance/spectacle.

Slightly off topic but.....I’d like something along the lines of the NFL two point conversion. Perhaps a scrum on the 22, inline with where the try was scored and the attacking team has a set time or number of breakdowns to score a try.

So you'd remove a contest for the ball?

belgarion wrote:Don't even think you should have a bonus point for losing whatever the points difference. Why give somebody a reward just cos they kept the score down. You don't see it in any other sport

I like it. Rugby is probably the fairest sport out there - it's very hard to fluke a win and most of the time the scoreline reflects the game. If you're within 7 points, then you have generally pushed the other side hard (in more than a few cases, leading the match until the last few minutes) and I have no qualms about rewarding that, rather than sending them away with nothing.

Puja

Digby wrote:So you'd remove a contest for the ball?

No. Normal play but with time and/or breakdown limit. If the first thing they do is knock on or the defending team force a turnover at the first breakdown then they’ve lost their chance.

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:So you'd remove a contest for the ball?

No. Normal play but with time and/or breakdown limit. If the first thing they do is knock on or the defending team force a turnover at the first breakdown then they’ve lost their chance.

So there's only a minimum time or number of breakdowns on the part of the attacking side, gotcha. Would you be removing the kicking option for a conversion? If not how many extra points would be needed to tempt teams to go for the extras?

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:So you'd remove a contest for the ball?

No. Normal play but with time and/or breakdown limit. If the first thing they do is knock on or the defending team force a turnover at the first breakdown then they’ve lost their chance.

So there's only a minimum time or number of breakdowns on the part of the attacking side, gotcha. Would you be removing the kicking option for a conversion? If not how many extra points would be needed to tempt teams to go for the extras?

Yep. In place of the conversion. Points is difficult. 3 seems like not enough of a reward for the risk, 4 seems too close to a standard try. Could return a conversion to 1 point, I suppose. It’s getting too messy. As you were.

I always thought an aussie rules type (centre) bounce restart could be a novel restart in Union. I don't think it would work in the present climate of referring challenge in the air etc.

I always thought an aussie rules type (centre) bounce restart could be a novel restart in Union. I don't think it would work in the present climate of referring challenge in the air etc.

Blue cards allowing a losing side to bring on an extra player if they were more than 20 points down would be ace.

What have I started? Sorry all.

Two players would probably better as that way you could have double flankers with the second set pushing either side of the second row.

One word for you - Multiball!

Puja

Three teams, triangular pitch.

Rugby X.

4D Chess

Mellsblue wrote:Rugby X.

The thread is won; thank you everyone else for playing.

Puja

How many times are ITV going to allow Ugo and Lawrence to give their business a free plug?

Digby wrote:How many times are ITV going to allow Ugo and Lawrence to give their business a free plug?

Clearly not enough, cause I haven't a clue what their business is.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:How many times are ITV going to allow Ugo and Lawrence to give their business a free plug?

Clearly not enough, cause I haven't a clue what their business is.

Puja

Aren't they ambassadors for RugbyX? If not they're talking about it an awful lot