Monday, April 21st, 2008...3:54 pm
Checkers vs Chess (Rugby League vs Rugby Union)
Rugby union is like chess and rugby league is like checkers.
Checkers is a game where the checker piece does the same thing.
Rugby league is a game where all the players do the same thing, they take the ball up, on the tackle they put the ball thru there legs and start again. Rugby league scrums are golden oldie scrums so that doesn’t count, there are no lineouts or mauls. Sure, running the ball up has a different degree on demand between the forward and backs but not much. To disallow one team having all the possession there is a six tackle count, as the game does not allow more contests to see possession changes hands. The rugby league player, if lined up in a police lineout would all look the same physical design.
Chess is a game where the chess piece does very different things.
The array of very different abilities of each chess piece allows the chess player to be very creative when it comes down to playing tactics. Chess has more structure than checkers, I submit that union has more structure than league, and it should remain so.
Rugby union can be broken down into combinations: Front row, back row, loose forwards, back of scrum, centre field, back three. These combinations perform as units within the structured game of rugby, performing specialised roles, with specific skills and body shape. Fracturing the demand for a player with these specialised skills is a move away from the structured (chess) game and a move towards a more generic player (checkers). The generic player will be selected on his ability to multi task rather than perform a specialised role (ie15 loose forwards).
Please note that rugby has been able to live within a fine balance of structured (scrums, malls, kick offs, 22 drop outs, full lineouts) and non structured play (phase play, quick taps, quick lineouts). The operative word is ‘balance’, and all rule changes should be measured on how they keep this very fine balance (see my comments on ELVs) . Balance is critical, as it allows a fair chance for the rugby player (prop, half back, 2nd 5/8, etc) specialised skill to be exercised within the games many contests (Front row contests, mid field contests, tall timber lineout contests, speedster wing contests, back of the scrum contests). Non structured play reduces the fair chance of these type of contests occurring within a game as the player one on one contest is random and not structured. Just as chess is divided between non structured pieces (the pawn) and other more structured chess pieces (Queen, King, Rook, Castle, Bishop), so in a way is rugby union by way of the nature of mix between structured and non structured play.
If rugby administrators break the rule ‘rugby is like chess’, they will have a hybrid game that is some where between checkers (union) and chess (league). A hybrid game will see rugby lose its hard won identity and the marketing boys will tell you that to have a good brand your need a distinctive point of difference from the competition.
The honest intention to attract TV revenues from the temporary fan (those that watch rugby league, Australian rules, American football, and soccer) is commendable, but not at the expense of the ‘true rugby fan’. Rule changes and playing times suitable for TV viewing are not always in the best interest of the rugby fan, administrators must protect the base that got the game to from 1901 to 2008.
Note: Sorry rugby league fans if you don’t see it my way.
The above philosophy is my light house when I discuss all matters playing the game, and it supports this blog title : Forwards should be forwards, and backs should be backs. A game for fatties, skinnies, tall and short players!
Any thing else is not the rugby game that I fell for when I was a young fella watching the All Blacks win and lose. If I my views are in the minority, then I will be another number in the statistic titled: “Declining attendance”.
A quote before you leave:
..”They say that death kills you, but death doesn’t kill you. Boredom and indifference kill you.”.. By Iggy Pop
This quote highlights that rugby union greatest sin is to be boring and indifferent.
PLEASE READ OTHER LEADING POSTS HERE : Foundation Posts
21 Comments
April 22nd, 2008 at 3:25 pm
[...] 1) Return the traditional rugby structure back into the game. See posts named ELVs and Chess vs Checkers. [...]
April 23rd, 2008 at 4:55 pm
[...] Align :: RightRight Align :: BookmarkBookmark This Page :: PrintPrint This Page « Checkers vs Chess (Rugby League vs Rugby Union) Rucking [...]
April 27th, 2008 at 9:46 pm
[...] it seams they are in some sort of blind puppy love with them. See my blog posts named ELVs and Chess vs Checkers for a full [...]
May 1st, 2008 at 3:50 pm
[...] review posts: Chess vs Checkers, Experiment Law [...]
May 3rd, 2008 at 2:12 pm
[...] This game was so much the checkers, ok once in a while, but chess is the better game. See foundation post : Chess vs Checkers [...]
May 6th, 2008 at 6:37 am
[...] At the moment the scrum and the full lineout are the only occasions between scoring where rugby has forwards and backs completely separated. The need to promote the separation of forwards and backs is critical to the development of the skill of the rugby player (chess piece) to create winning and exciting tactics (chess tactics – discovered attack). (see foundation post Chess vs Checkers) [...]
May 6th, 2008 at 4:59 pm
[...] to allow the execution of strategies by rugby unions very unique playing combinations (please read Chess vs Checkers). Allowing forwards to be forwards and backs to be backs. Please re read this last paragraph, [...]
May 9th, 2008 at 3:46 pm
[...] Therefore ‘traditional rucking’ or ‘hands in the ruck’ will not solely swing the advantage back to the attacking side faced with FWTD. The attacking team must be given the opportunity to realign forwards being forwards and backs being backs to allow specialists to return there traditional roles while maintaining possession during (or at the end of) continual phase play. This hole in the new ELVs is fundamental. (Please read Chess vs Checkers post,) [...]
May 11th, 2008 at 2:53 pm
[...] This is why in my post ELVs (Experiment Law Variation) – Tactic Review I called for promotion of the maul, full lineouts and the 50/22 rule. To try and get this measly 15% structured ‘ball in play’ to at least a 30% minimum. Why, structured play promotes the specialised skills identified within rugby union and it’s these skills that require players to be ‘all shapes and sizes’. Once again I refer the reader to the Chess vs Checkers post. [...]
May 13th, 2008 at 11:12 am
[...] Chess vs Checkers [...]
May 22nd, 2008 at 7:24 am
[...] read posts Chess vs Checkers , and other Foundation posts for further [...]
August 2nd, 2008 at 8:34 am
[...] version of rugby, for a full explanation of my thoughts please read foundation posts (must read Chess vs Checkers) . I have said before I like the ELVs but with amendments, see my ELV amendments page for [...]
November 1st, 2008 at 12:24 pm
[...] Post Checkers vs Chess (Rugby League vs Rugby Union) (Click it) . This is what rugby used to be about, dam administrator idiots. No matter the ELV [...]
November 19th, 2008 at 6:46 am
What do you think about the ‘iinitiation rule’?
http://uptheguts.co.nz/2008/11/18/hello-world/
March 11th, 2009 at 8:05 am
[...] He said the experimental law variations had led to the decline in standard. “The law variations with the use of all the free kicks, I just don’t agree with. It makes the game different. It’s a hybrid game that is being played.” [Please read foundation posts: Chess vs Checkers] [...]
March 15th, 2009 at 6:00 am
[...] just refresh your self with my foundation post ‘Chess vs Checkers’, a few quotes from [...]
March 29th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
[...] Chris Cuthbertson, the RFU’s ELV task group leader, says: “We have areas of concern in many areas of the experiments. Rugby is meant to be a game of chess, and we are in danger of turning it into draughts.” [Guess who's been reading my BLOG - See original post Chess vs Checkers] [...]
June 11th, 2009 at 9:32 pm
Great article. Thanks for the great resource.
June 11th, 2009 at 9:33 pm
Good article – plenty of food for thought.
June 29th, 2009 at 6:56 pm
this is exactly the post I needed to see!
January 2nd, 2010 at 2:47 pm
Excellent tips .I really appreciate all these points, and I agree completely…
Leave a Reply