We value your privacy

We and our partners store and/or access information on a device, such as cookies and process personal data, such as unique identifiers and standard information sent by a device for personalised ads and content, ad and content measurement, and audience insights, as well as to develop and improve products.

With your permission we and our partners may use precise geolocation. You may click to consent to our and our partners’ processing as described above. Please note that some processing of your personal data may not require your consent, but you have a right to object to such processing.

More Options

Thu 28 Jun 2018 | 04:08
History was made but should the extra points 'Power Try' be adopted globally?

28
Comments

The World Series of Rugby in Australia played host to the first ever Power Try in professional rugby, when Crusaders scrumhalf Mitchell Drummond went over against the Force in Perth. The try is worth 7 points immediately, with a conversion to follow. 

The Power Try comes into play when a team initiates an attack from within their own 22m and there is no break in continuity of possession by the scoring team. If successful, a converted try takes the total points gained to 9, obviously proving a big incentive to play attacking rugby.

If possession changes or a penalty, lineout or scrum is awarded, then this breaks the sequence of possession for the try scoring team and a normal five-point try would be earned.

The new rule amendment was approved earlier this year as a closed law trial and is taking place in the inaugural World Series Rugby, that sees the Western Force hosting representative teams from Fiji, Tonga, Samoa, New Zealand and Hong Kong.

History was made by the Crusaders as they were the first side, from four matches featuring this format, to succesfully complete a Power Try, on their way to a 44-8 win over the Force in Perth.

The Force next take on a Samoan side on 14 July, while the Crusaders head back to Super Rugby, when they host the Highlanders on July 6th.

Incentives to get more points means more ambitious, attacking rugby should be attempted but what do you think of the concept of the seven point Power Try?

Posted By: Grant Constable

28 Comments

  • drg
    10:22 PM 30/06/2018

    *thinks*..

    I'm glad you put some punctuation in there...

  • larry
    8:59 PM 30/06/2018

    Exactly! Who says that all tries scored from 80 or 90 meters away take more effort! That is a stupid argument. Lots of tries scored from close in take a whole hell of a lot of effort!

  • larry
    8:56 PM 30/06/2018

    Tries do not necessarily take more effort if scored from 80 or 90 or 100 meters! If a try is scored from 10 meters out, it could take much more effort, and that would be of breaking more tackles, making crips passes, a backline running a movement to trick the defense. Long tries usually come from mistakes that an attacking team make deep in the opposition's quarter. An intercepted pass can mean the person intercepting the pass only has to run full speed to score, with little or no defenders nearby to even come close to making a tackle. That could be seen as a "cheap" try. Why should that equate to nine points?

  • larry
    8:53 PM 30/06/2018

    The pitch is a bit wider than before. I believe it was 75 yards, and now it's more like 78 yards.
    The scoring should remain as is. Whether a try takes more effort from a long way out is a stupid argument. Lots of tries scored from near a goal line take much effort. If someone intercepts a pass when a try seems guaranteed on one end, it won't take a whole lot of effort for the wing, or whoever, to intercept that pass with everyone up on attack and no one, or no more than one of the opposition, back to defend. That's could be a 95 meter scamper with the only effort shown being the running speed of the one who intercepts the pass.

  • larry
    8:48 PM 30/06/2018

    Agree with your post. It's ridiculous.

  • larry
    8:46 PM 30/06/2018

    Why should a try scored from 90 meters away be worth any more than one scored from near to the goal line? Perhaps the one scored from a long distance didn't take as much effort! Perhaps that try scored from a turnover inside the opposition's 22 took a lot more effort of the forwards to counter ruck! This is another stupidity, and another attempt to make the game more like a video game spectacle than anything else.
    I am reminded of the changes in 1993 to make a try worth 5 points. I thought then that it would have been better to do this: change the penalty kick to 2 points, unless it was dropped kicked and not placed, which would be 3 points.

  • drg
    3:06 PM 30/06/2018

    Shortly after the 2003 world cup where England won the game with *cough* 10 man rugby *cough*.... ok, not quite, but that was a rock solid tactic in their book of tactics... everyone seemed to realise that was the way to go:

    Ruck ruck ruck ruck ruck, drop goal.
    Ruck ruck ruck ruck ruck penalty, penalty kick.

    etc.. it kept the board going and it worked..

    So then teams started realising having a spicy 10 who can cut defences to ribbons with their fancy tomfoolery was over rated, why not bring on a guy who can slot the ball from the halfway line and then just make up numbers in the other aspects of the game... (not massively accurate, but it's a forwards description)...

    I think eventually teams recognised that 10's could be a weakness, fans got bored of kickfests, so they start employing bigger guys to run through the 10 channel, everyone outside the 10 has become lazy so they can be smashed too, and/or run around by a giant winger...

    I think nowadays people recognise that champagne rugby looks good and is fun, but again, to combat a kick orientated game, why not just alter the points for kicks... making "power running rugby" be more rewarding whether it starts from your own 22 or the oppo 22, it shouldn't make a difference.

    I guess we're just old men though..

  • 10stonenumber10
    9:33 PM 29/06/2018

    The scoring doesn't need to change. The pitch needs to catch up with their players. By the 1960s, everybody could dunk the 10ft hoop. The 3 point line is the one that has changed. It started at 19ft, now it is closer to 24ft, all because the players were taller, and more technically skilled at shooting.

    The only thing that hasn't changed in rugby is the size of the pitch. Make it wider. Make it longer. More space to attack. More space to defend. Players will need a better rugby brain to keep up, bulk will leave them behind.

  • drg
    9:23 PM 29/06/2018

    I did address the changes in scoring, but this all seems so arcadey, or idk, some sort of 1970's US cheesy take on how the future will be:

    In the future, we'll have poweerrrrrr trys. It just, I dunno, maybe it's the name that bugs me, but it just strikes me as a shit idea... Why does a game that has drawn crowds for 100's of years need to change core concepts to entertain the youth of today? I was a kid when I was introduced to 7's, I was still a kid when I was introduced to 15's, I was a kid when I was playing club rugby, and in the eyes of the law, I was a kid when I played my first senior game. Now I'm still a few years away from the average retirement age of pro rugby players and I still play... I have gone through childhood, into young adulthood into adulthood and been entertained by the sport... Am I so out of touch that I can start saying "kids these days"?

    I mean really judging by the news articles and all, it'd be better off if the sport involved a games controller and whole load of weaponry or some sort of activism role for the winning team or something?

    You mention 20/20 cricket, but that in some ways is more of an alternative to the core sport which still runs in its own fairly unaltered state (am I correct?)

    Tbh this just sort of brings to mind something like, if in a cricket match you hold the bat from the other end and hit the ball over the boundary with the handle then you win the game automatically... Some sort of quidditch golden snitch or whatever...

  • flanker2712
    7:20 PM 29/06/2018

    We already have Sevens, which is the version that got rugby back into the Olympics and, I think, will eventually be much bigger in terms of global viewing, sponsorship, salaries etc, than 15-a-side.

    Plus, Pickay has already picked a few holes in the power try law variation.

  • flanker2712
    7:13 PM 29/06/2018

    It will be like watching cricket!

  • nhunter
    3:40 PM 29/06/2018

    I appreciate that to a rugby fan of today, this seems over-complex for an already confusing scoring system for the non-initiated. However, the scoring has evolved constantly in rugby - it was only 71 it became 4 points for a try, and 92 it became 5 points. Society is changing, people have less leisure time, and sports are changing a result. Look at cricket (20/20) - no-one has a week any more to watch a match, golf (9 hole tourneys), etc. Football doesn't change as no-one seems to score anyhow. In US football, they seem to stop every time someone falls over, so you'd never know if they changed the rules over the commercial breaks. In tennis, they keep having to slow the ball down because the men keep scoring aces.

    However, rugby needs to look at itself in competition with these other sports, and draw in new crowds, otherwise terraces will just be full of old farts. It also needs to expand into new markets to finally stop being played competitively in about 10 countries. So I'm up for giving this a go. I wasn't certain about 5 points for a try, but couldn't imagine going back to 4, and just seeing endless penalties.

  • moo
    11:39 AM 29/06/2018

    Between this and the Italian lineout defence, the inaction will be immense! Finally a game I'll be able to keep up with.

  • drg
    11:00 AM 29/06/2018

    Hahahahahaha!

  • pickay
    10:32 AM 29/06/2018

    Oh, good point, so if that "taken back into the own 22" applies, then I need to update my scenario:
    The attacking team plays backwards into their own 22, then waits to get tackled, as a ruck will nullify the fact that the ball was taken back. The defending team, however, has zero interest in doing that, so they'll just stay of of the 22 and wait. Stalemate.
    As long as nobody moves, the game continues. Eternally.

  • drg
    10:16 AM 29/06/2018

    I wonder if this is like the passing back into the 22 thing?

    I didn't watch the video again so I can't remember but does the event have to START in the 22... Therefore, if you turned the ball over just outside the 22 then I don't think passing it back into the 22 to start it would count? Again that is one of my gripes in the sense that what if someone gets tackled just outside the 22, but your team steal the ball at the ruck and the player that pinches it has one foot on the line of the 22 and one outside the 22, is that counted as in? Will we need TMO angles to check whether he was touching the line? Will we have controversial power trys now? Or trys not given as power trys where in later reviews they were? Ugh

  • pickay
    10:08 AM 29/06/2018

    Another thought about scenarios with power tries: Say you have an attacking 5m line-out or scrum, so you are really close to scoring. But it's the 80th minute and you are trailing by 8 points. Then the only option left is to play backwards until you reach your own 22, then flip it and reverse it and start attacking again and try to score the power try! Does that make sense?
    Moreover, the defending team would have a great incentive to commit a penalty offence, as this breaks the power try sequence. The attacking team wins the penalty, but has to play it backwards again in order to get another shot at winning the game...

    Of course this is all very theoretical, but still it just gives me brain cramps. So, as others in this forum already commented, why open up this can of worms?

  • pickay
    9:44 AM 29/06/2018

    Word! The only reasonable approach imho would be to further increase the number of points for any try compared to kicks, as it has been done successively in the history of the sport.
    We started off with 0 points for a try, and then 1 2 3 4 5 here we are!

  • pickay
    8:40 AM 29/06/2018

    Must be a drop-goal surely, no? I'd say as soon as the ball goes through the posts the drop-goal is scored and therefore play is stopped immediately, and then restarted from halfway.
    Not exactly the same here, but similar:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnCTqhVYbBs

    The ref's explanation: As soon as the ball goes through the posts the penalty is scored and play does not continue.

  • albertabound
    8:14 AM 29/06/2018

    While we're on rules, there's something I've always been curious about but never got an answer to. If someone kicks a drop-goal and one their team (on-side of course) manages to catch it after it has went through the posts but before it hits the ground, and then touches it to the ground, is it a drop goal or a try?

  • leggaj5
    2:10 AM 29/06/2018

    Tries should only be worth 4 points like in the good old days. Also, NZ teams attack from inside the 22 all the time anyways.

  • breakaway
    1:39 AM 29/06/2018

    "should the extra points 'Power Try' be adopted globally?"

    Short answer: No.
    Long answer: No, this idea is just plain stupid.

  • chopper
    11:23 PM 28/06/2018

    For f@$& sake. If you want to play, leaue, Aussie rules, lacrosse, water polo, hurling, etc. then play them. Leave the point scoring and rules for changes thay make the game better. This rings of tv advertisement and commercoal breaks and paddy power wanting bets being put down on "super plays". Bugger off amd watch american football if you eant statistician working out probabilities through a game bad enough some numpty came up with bonus points. 5 for a try, 2 for conversion and 3 for a penalty/drop goal. Go and annoy another sport with this brain fart...

  • pgrugby
    11:08 PM 28/06/2018

    If it the pushover try starts from inside your own 22 then definitely 18!

  • finedisregard
    10:05 PM 28/06/2018

    So how much is a push over try? 12?

    Stop fiddling with the laws!

  • drg
    6:45 PM 28/06/2018

    I'm in agreement with Pickay, what is the bloody point?

    To me this sounds like a totally franchise based hybrid games to entertain halfwit fans who are having tailgate parties and waiting impatiently for the next interval break to buy another hot dog and have something else to stimulate their mind because they can't be entertained by one thing for more than 2-3 minutes at a time..(he says typing on his phone whilst loading up the laptop...)

    Basically this seems one step away from Sunday morning NFL!

    It's a hybrid on steroids neon lights, smoke screen, luminous kits... I mean, do we have anyone designing rugby boots yet like those trainers we had as kids that flash a light each time you step? Or is that a market I need to get into? (Trademark!)...

    I just don't get the need to do this? Why? "Encourages running rugby"... Yeh and running rugby encourages tackles which encourages 70% of all head injuries on a rugby pitch (if I recall those figures correctly).. so make the game safer by removing aspects of the game we've all known and accepted, but introduce different aspects, which ironically make the game more dangerous??

    Nope I'm afraid that whilst I'm aware scoring values for certain plays have been altered in the past, I can't see the point in this.. if.you want to change scoring to encourage running rugby, why not reduce the value of penalty kicks to 2 points, increase a try to a standard 6 and have a one point conversion value or something like that..

    This new idea of "power try" (the name just smacks that pathetic "wooooo YEEEEEEAH"), will open up cans of worms when players turn balls over on their own 22, or was it just out of the 22, ok assistant referee, please add your own incorrect input whilst I analyse whether their foot was touching the white or not..

    Fck me I hate myself for being the old shit moaning about this game. I might just take up bowls or golf..

  • rememberthemer
    6:08 PM 28/06/2018

    Not saying this is good or bad, but compared with the tackle laws this is trivially simple.

  • pickay
    5:58 PM 28/06/2018

    Great, let's make rugby even more complicated and confusing! Way to go!!
    But why stop there?! Here some more ideas:
    8 points for a try from your own 22 if it's in one continuous play without any rucks formed.
    9 points if you start inside your own in-goal area.
    3 points for a drop-kick conversion instead of the usual 2.

    Then spice it up by adding some bonus points on top of that:
    +1 point if the play involved a kick-pass.
    +0.5 points for every cartwheel performed by the attacking team.

    Then we should probably add another 3-4 TMOs to keep track of all of this, and then the game will be so much better than it is now!!

Related Articles