Fantastic video. Keep the maul. It's part of the strategy and makes it much more complex. We already have a version of rugby that doesn't have mauls, line-outs and contested scrums.
Keep the maul and get rid of the obstruction. Make those binding on behind push the ball carrier at the front of the maul forward until the defenders it. The ball carrier can also shuttle the ball back with no forward movement, like in before times, as in before twenty years ago, when referees started letting what really is the old flying wedge of American football 120 years ago, banned in 1905 by the way, be played. Then the law changed with referees letting that crap happen. Like crooked feeds in scrums!
Thank you! Always look forward to your comments. Desperate for my microphone to arrive in the post, then I can chuck my ugly head in from time to time too!
@@buzzwhite_ mic! I currently just use my iPhone - didn’t expect to have an audience so early on! I’ll just use my iPhone for a camera I think :) I live in a really remote part of the world near PNG!
Endless knowledge as always. I'll be honest, I enjoy the maul and the tactics behind it. Fans just want ball in hand all of the time because that's when rugby is most entertaining so I understand why they want rid. I'm just more of an old school fan who appreciates most areas of the game
Haha it’s hard.. as a fan it can become annoying but as a player it’s super fun when it pulls off hey! Can totally relate. Hey bro I also read strong chance big ant studios put out a World Cup game this year!
I love the maul and I also love seeing people stop the maul its like the ultimate team effort situation. Funnily enough it appears that it is being adopted in American Football and there are calls to ban it there too.
In two of the American codes (NFL and NCAA), they re-legalized a few years ago part of what they'd outlawed in 1906. Apparently they thought it was too hard for the officials to discern close calls where teammates might've been pushing the ballcarrier directly from behind. No word yet regarding a similar movement in Canadian football, where it wasn't until 1956 that the tandem buck was outlawed, and no change in Federation rules.
Banned no but the laws must allow teams to defend it effectively without penalty. Otherwise it becomes a rinse and repeat tactic till they score and or get somebody in the bin. Another great video.
What do you mean by effectively? The videos shows really well how the ABs do it effectively within laws (noting some hands in the ground in the maul sometimes by ABs)
I actually agree with you on this. I don't hate the maul, but I do hate the line out-maul combo that teams exploit in the 5 meter line. It truly feels that the defending team has no hope in defending it. Plus, it's such a boring way to score. I'm from Portugal and our national team is possibly the worst at defending mauls, just look at the game against Romania, we were playing flowing rugby but eventually they scored like 5 tries with mauls. There is no way one looks at that match and thinks that it's correct and just. Or maybe I'm just salty because my national team sucks at mauls lol Edit: love your channel keep up man!
Joao!!! My man always look forward to your comments, and I’m glad I now have somewhere to stay if I ever travel to Portugal haha. No I totally agree with you, I go for a team in super rugby here that used to score 2-3 maul tries a game through David Pocock and while I loved the winning feeling it would’ve definitely sucked being on the other end! How crazy Jason Ryan has coached around 80-100 games with no maul tries scored on him though!
would the 'c' be classified as joining from the side as they arent entering through the rear most player? especially on the 'second wave' of defenders joining.
Mauls for me are very entertaining. I personally do not think they should be game because they are just part of the game. It is an aspect of the game that you should train to defend and attack with.
This is the part I object to in this type of maul: ruclips.net/video/SM-gKDUj00s/видео.htmlsi=SIG5Ak3RR97xo1Vc&t=184 , which the presenter says is "strictly illegal, but you'll get away with it". For some reason, referees have stopped looking closely for the end of the maul. Even in some of the earlier case in that video, where the prop moves outward, probably involve some unbinding that would technically end the maul, though it's not as easy to detect as the blatant case starting at 3:04.
@@uggy do they though? I feel like it was a bigger problem in the 2000s, to the point they made it legal to bring it down for a few years before copping on to how dangerous that was.
I think the maul should still have a place in the game, but there are two things that would make them fairer. One would be for referees to be more attentive as to when a maul ends when a ballcarrier at the base unbinds even for a moment. We see too many second mauls that could've been called obstruction when the ball is worked to the back of the pack and then the ballcarrier breaks off at an angle and for at least a split second is technically not part of a maul. The second thing is that arriving players should be allowed to bind to anyone of either team in the maul if they present the closest feet to their goal line, and should be allowed to unbind from anywhere as long as they immediately retire to their offside line if the maul continues. As it is right now, a maul that rolls thru an odd number of half turns gives the unfair advantage of putting the opposing pack behind them, yet have the opposition forbidden from playing them from...anywhere, really.
If the original maul can be taken straight forward (without splintering to one side or the other) then fair try. I it splinters, then short arm free kick.
There are a few things about the maul that I don't like, particularly mauls from line outs which must be close to 95% of mauls. I dislike that scrums have been seen as a way of winning a penalty (which is a different topic, but it is linked) . Penalties at scrums seem to be won by the "dominant" team ( just because you are going backwards doesn't mean you are necessarily doing anything illegal!) who then kick for territory, and then use the line up for a maul , where they execute more dominance, win more penalties, opposition loses players to the bin, resulting in even more dominance etc etc etc, all without playing any footie. This is ugly, arm wrestle, stop start rugby which is based more heavily on grunt than guile ( you need both, but for me the balance has tipped too far) and there becomes almost no way back for a team that finds itself overpowered in the forwards, Players in front of the ball carrier are offside in all aspects of the game apart from mauls (and scrums) if they engage the opposition they are obstructing. It just looks wrong, it looks illegal.
The description and narration seem to describe all advancing mauls as rolling. This is incorrect. A rolling maul is one that keeps turning. That's not the only way to drive a maul forward. None of the mauls illustrated were rolling mauls. Also, this video treats only mauls that originate from a throw-in. What about mauls that start elsewise?
Don't let your analysis and game stats change the game from what it is. Maul is part of the essence of rugby union. Supporters will not understand, we players know it and we love it!
@@klikitzsmith8416I've been saying that for years. However, if you look at the mauls in this RUclips, none of them are rolling, the narration and description to the contrary. People these days seem to want to call any driving maul rolling.
Ban it. How utterly galling it would have been if the English had won the women's world cup. Their style of play was brutal and unimaginitive. What a delightful contrast the wonderful speed and skills of our brilliant Black Ferns.
I've always hated rolling mauls, they're abysmally one-sided because it seems that only the defenders are under any scrutiny, and if the attacking side fuck up an unsure ref will just award a penalty to them anyway because its near-impossible to tell what has happened. My problem with it therefore is that a rolling maul is either a try or failing that, a milked penalty, from which they can kick for touch and rinse-repeat. I don't know if it needs to be banned per se, this video shows how it now can be neutered, and the new held-up rule also help defenders from what was a toxic part of the game. I would like to see greater levels of scrutiny on the team running the maul, breakaways seem to never be policed and are outrageous, right now its still a low-risk high-reward tactic.
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
I live in a remote community and have been waiting 6 weeks for a microphone 😅 not long now hopefully. Happy New Year everyone 🎉
Fantastic video. Keep the maul. It's part of the strategy and makes it much more complex. We already have a version of rugby that doesn't have mauls, line-outs and contested scrums.
Thank you appreciate it!!
Keep the maul and get rid of the obstruction. Make those binding on behind push the ball carrier at the front of the maul forward until the defenders it. The ball carrier can also shuttle the ball back with no forward movement, like in before times, as in before twenty years ago, when referees started letting what really is the old flying wedge of American football 120 years ago, banned in 1905 by the way, be played. Then the law changed with referees letting that crap happen. Like crooked feeds in scrums!
@@ldfreitas9437Did the law actually change, or did referees just stop looking closely for the end of the maul?
Very informative video, you videos are amazing for the amount of subscribers you have, working hard in the beginning🤙
Thank you! Always look forward to your comments. Desperate for my microphone to arrive in the post, then I can chuck my ugly head in from time to time too!
@@uggy mic or camera?
@@buzzwhite_ mic! I currently just use my iPhone - didn’t expect to have an audience so early on! I’ll just use my iPhone for a camera I think :) I live in a really remote part of the world near PNG!
@@uggy Ok cool, cant wait for that crisp audio👌
@@uggy Make sure to get the correct drivers when you get the mic so it works properly
This is abit different to usual content! Informative for an average rugby spectator like myself. I learnt something 😂😅
Endless knowledge as always. I'll be honest, I enjoy the maul and the tactics behind it. Fans just want ball in hand all of the time because that's when rugby is most entertaining so I understand why they want rid. I'm just more of an old school fan who appreciates most areas of the game
Haha it’s hard.. as a fan it can become annoying but as a player it’s super fun when it pulls off hey! Can totally relate. Hey bro I also read strong chance big ant studios put out a World Cup game this year!
@@uggy I can tell you they definitely are. Just waiting on an official announcement 👍
@@BearsGamer hell yeaaaaa
@@uggy Me vs you, England vs New Zealand, online match up, best cross over in RUclips history 😎
@@BearsGamer hahaha let’s do it
I love the maul and I also love seeing people stop the maul its like the ultimate team effort situation. Funnily enough it appears that it is being adopted in American Football and there are calls to ban it there too.
In two of the American codes (NFL and NCAA), they re-legalized a few years ago part of what they'd outlawed in 1906. Apparently they thought it was too hard for the officials to discern close calls where teammates might've been pushing the ballcarrier directly from behind. No word yet regarding a similar movement in Canadian football, where it wasn't until 1956 that the tandem buck was outlawed, and no change in Federation rules.
Banned no but the laws must allow teams to defend it effectively without penalty. Otherwise it becomes a rinse and repeat tactic till they score and or get somebody in the bin.
Another great video.
Thanks mate! Very much agree on the rinse and repeat
What do you mean by effectively? The videos shows really well how the ABs do it effectively within laws (noting some hands in the ground in the maul sometimes by ABs)
Love this channel
I love you
I actually agree with you on this. I don't hate the maul, but I do hate the line out-maul combo that teams exploit in the 5 meter line. It truly feels that the defending team has no hope in defending it. Plus, it's such a boring way to score.
I'm from Portugal and our national team is possibly the worst at defending mauls, just look at the game against Romania, we were playing flowing rugby but eventually they scored like 5 tries with mauls. There is no way one looks at that match and thinks that it's correct and just.
Or maybe I'm just salty because my national team sucks at mauls lol
Edit: love your channel keep up man!
Joao!!! My man always look forward to your comments, and I’m glad I now have somewhere to stay if I ever travel to Portugal haha.
No I totally agree with you, I go for a team in super rugby here that used to score 2-3 maul tries a game through David Pocock and while I loved the winning feeling it would’ve definitely sucked being on the other end!
How crazy Jason Ryan has coached around 80-100 games with no maul tries scored on him though!
Maul used to be a corner stone of the Game and is still to be an effective teamwork tool. Keep it alive!
would the 'c' be classified as joining from the side as they arent entering through the rear most player? especially on the 'second wave' of defenders joining.
Great question! While digging up footage they actually got penalised a fair bit for it, it’s pretty borderline!
yeah, well hopefully it gets cracked down on
Scrums are like tectonic plates coming together, mauls are when they shift hemispheres
Hahahaha the analogy of the year
@@uggy yh thx, also which pop song is that playing in the background?
@@karlosdeevs both just tunes from the RUclips audio library - I’ll check their names next time I’m at the laptop and let you know!
@@uggy thx my man, whenever you wish
I feel like I understand rugby a little better now.
Mauls for me are very entertaining. I personally do not think they should be game because they are just part of the game. It is an aspect of the game that you should train to defend and attack with.
One of the best things as a forward too!
@@uggy exactly, its a team try. Good for the sport.
Keep up the content
Thank you ☺️
I think the Change to the maul is simple if it’s moving backwards call first stop immediately,
This is the part I object to in this type of maul: ruclips.net/video/SM-gKDUj00s/видео.htmlsi=SIG5Ak3RR97xo1Vc&t=184 , which the presenter says is "strictly illegal, but you'll get away with it". For some reason, referees have stopped looking closely for the end of the maul. Even in some of the earlier case in that video, where the prop moves outward, probably involve some unbinding that would technically end the maul, though it's not as easy to detect as the blatant case starting at 3:04.
Yeah, I think the ABs are getting pretty sorted out in this area now. It's a huge improvement to be honest and are not to be underestimated.
100% it’s going to give them a big advantage over some teams at the World Cup 👍 fair few countries depend on maul tries to win
@@uggy do they though? I feel like it was a bigger problem in the 2000s, to the point they made it legal to bring it down for a few years before copping on to how dangerous that was.
I think the maul should still have a place in the game, but there are two things that would make them fairer. One would be for referees to be more attentive as to when a maul ends when a ballcarrier at the base unbinds even for a moment. We see too many second mauls that could've been called obstruction when the ball is worked to the back of the pack and then the ballcarrier breaks off at an angle and for at least a split second is technically not part of a maul.
The second thing is that arriving players should be allowed to bind to anyone of either team in the maul if they present the closest feet to their goal line, and should be allowed to unbind from anywhere as long as they immediately retire to their offside line if the maul continues. As it is right now, a maul that rolls thru an odd number of half turns gives the unfair advantage of putting the opposing pack behind them, yet have the opposition forbidden from playing them from...anywhere, really.
Isn’t this pincer just coming in at the side?
😂😅 lots of grey area!
mauless rugby is rugby league
If the original maul can be taken straight forward (without splintering to one side or the other) then fair try. I it splinters, then short arm free kick.
There are a few things about the maul that I don't like, particularly mauls from line outs which must be close to 95% of mauls.
I dislike that scrums have been seen as a way of winning a penalty (which is a different topic, but it is linked) . Penalties at scrums seem to be won by the "dominant" team ( just because you are going backwards doesn't mean you are necessarily doing anything illegal!) who then kick for territory, and then use the line up for a maul , where they execute more dominance, win more penalties, opposition loses players to the bin, resulting in even more dominance etc etc etc, all without playing any footie. This is ugly, arm wrestle, stop start rugby which is based more heavily on grunt than guile ( you need both, but for me the balance has tipped too far) and there becomes almost no way back for a team that finds itself overpowered in the forwards,
Players in front of the ball carrier are offside in all aspects of the game apart from mauls (and scrums) if they engage the opposition they are obstructing. It just looks wrong, it looks illegal.
The description and narration seem to describe all advancing mauls as rolling. This is incorrect. A rolling maul is one that keeps turning. That's not the only way to drive a maul forward. None of the mauls illustrated were rolling mauls.
Also, this video treats only mauls that originate from a throw-in. What about mauls that start elsewise?
Don't let your analysis and game stats change the game from what it is. Maul is part of the essence of rugby union. Supporters will not understand, we players know it and we love it!
Keep the rolling maul, it's part of the game.
I like muals
Surely we want to see more RUNNING rugby.
Maul should have limitations if not the game becomes boring
offenders can move all over the maul but defenders can not
Interesting point! Only one way in for defenders really
@@uggy Yeah if they roll it then that perpendicular face now should become the face the defenders can join.
@@klikitzsmith8416 I’m with ya, what country you in if you don’t mind me asking?
@@uggy One of those Kiwis in Aussie
@@klikitzsmith8416I've been saying that for years. However, if you look at the mauls in this RUclips, none of them are rolling, the narration and description to the contrary. People these days seem to want to call any driving maul rolling.
Ban it. How utterly galling it would have been if the English had won the women's world cup. Their style of play was brutal and unimaginitive. What a delightful contrast the wonderful speed and skills of our brilliant Black Ferns.
I've always hated rolling mauls, they're abysmally one-sided because it seems that only the defenders are under any scrutiny, and if the attacking side fuck up an unsure ref will just award a penalty to them anyway because its near-impossible to tell what has happened. My problem with it therefore is that a rolling maul is either a try or failing that, a milked penalty, from which they can kick for touch and rinse-repeat.
I don't know if it needs to be banned per se, this video shows how it now can be neutered, and the new held-up rule also help defenders from what was a toxic part of the game. I would like to see greater levels of scrutiny on the team running the maul, breakaways seem to never be policed and are outrageous, right now its still a low-risk high-reward tactic.
Were not luege so forwerds need the power game
Video in a week or so on the maul entirely!!
Rugby union trying to open up game with law changes.Ban the rolling maul.
The mauls are cringe
Ban.
😂😂