Why is Super 15 so much more watchable then internationals?

Remove this Banner Ad

M

mikey127

Premiership Player
Veteran
Feb 4, 2011
4,923
3,908
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Hi guys I don't know a heap about your game as I;m more of a AFL and Rugby league fan so I'm not trolling just asking a question.

When I watch super 15 Rugby I find most games fantastic to watch espiccially watching the Chiefs of a couple of years ago

International Rugby seems over ref'd and slow

Do the refs let more go in Super 15 or are the teams just more attcking.

Again pls don't think I;m trolling I just seem to enjoy super 15 but find international rugby a lot more boring in general
 
It's a different style of rugby. In test rugby there's a lot more emphasis on the set piece (scrum, lineout) and at the breakdown/ruck and teams are better at closing off space. There's basically less space and time. It's a higher intensity game and usually more tactical.

Super rugby is often a lot more open...which is partly because it's a lower level, but also because that's the typical sort of rugby played by NZ and Australia. There's also a greater emphasis on winning with style (at least for some teams) whereas test matches are all about winning. Northern Hemisphere teams and South Africa tend to play with a different style that's based around forward dominance and a good kicking game. The best games, IMO usually have a contrast in styles and I'd say most rugby fans prefer test matches. Once you get more familiar with the game you gain a greater appreciation for the tactics. Without that familiarity it's probably harder to enjoy the tighter games.

This is obviously generalising. You get plenty of tight, tactical games in super rugby and open games in test rugby. It comes down to which teams are playing as rugby can be played in very different ways. For example, Fiji and Argentina are basically completely opposite in their approach. In super rugby the Reds and the Bulls have very contrasting styles. Fans prefer different styles too - some prefer the trench warfare type games, others like to see the ball flung about. No different to Aussie Rules or League in that sense.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

(Log in to remove this ad.)

0497 said:
Whenever you have something big on the line, teams tend to be more conservative.
Click to expand...

This a point made on a couple of other threads.
In the WC there were instances of 15~20 phases.
Anybody with any knowledge of RU knows that this is an incediblely long time to maintain control so the the RU purists applaud this as good rugby whilst those of us wanting to watch an "entertaining" game of RU are disappointed.

0497 said:
You could say the same thing about soccer.
Click to expand...

You don't have to pick on soccer it happens in most sports at finals time.

It's interesting different sports approaches to "inventiveness".
Most people don't realise how regulated American Football is so it always appears the same good old game.
Australian Football is not adverse to making changes though these days it tends to be in re-action to new coaching tactics that alter the game.
RL has made a few simple but strong changes that have worked well.
Both RU and soccer's biggest changes involved negating passing back to gain a special advantage.
At least all the contact football codes have the possibility of field goal to unlock a close contest and minimise the possibility of a draw which most people believe is undesirable.
 
cos789 said:
This a point made on a couple of other threads.
In the WC there were instances of 15~20 phases.
Anybody with any knowledge of RU knows that this is an incediblely long time to maintain control so the the RU purists applaud this as good rugby whilst those of us wanting to watch an "entertaining" game of RU are disappointed.



You don't have to pick on soccer it happens in most sports at finals time.

It's interesting different sports approaches to "inventiveness".
Most people don't realise how regulated American Football is so it always appears the same good old game.
Australian Football is not adverse to making changes though these days it tends to be in re-action to new coaching tactics that alter the game.
RL has made a few simple but strong changes that have worked well.
Both RU and soccer's biggest changes involved negating passing back to gain a special advantage.
At least all the contact football codes have the possibility of field goal to unlock a close contest and minimise the possibility of a draw which most people believe is undesirable.
Click to expand...

Nobody else see the form of this guy?
 
sighclone said:
Nobody else see the form of this guy?
Click to expand...

Since you have bolded this, I suspect you have a problem with this.
"RL has made a few simple but strong changes that have worked well."

They change from unlimited tackles to six tackles.
In modern times they changed from 5m. to 10m.

Simple but effective.
 
That's not really what I said straw man.

The 10 metre rule means that it's easiest to make ground by just running from dummy half or having a forward take a one out hit up. The game is therefore all about completion rates and winning the forcings back contest. I think it would be better with a 5 metre rule as it would reward more skillful players and force teams to pass the ball more. That doesn't necessarily take any athleticism out of the game, just perhaps some of the one dimensional players who often get referred to as "athletes."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Numero 31
Melbourne Rebels (Super Rugby Pacific)
Replies
3
Views
734
joey_jo_jo
J

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top