Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bugs

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Bugs

    season 11, league 14, round 7, Birkenhead Butchers - Miami Blues 16:54
    action: our fly-half kicks the ball into a blocker, after which the ball goes into touch.
    outcome: line-out for the blocking side awarded.

  • #2
    It could have been a case where the blocker did not play at the ball, in which case the lineout is awarded to the blocking side.

    Comment


    • danielw
      danielw commented
      Editing a comment
      Interesting remarks, guys, although I must admit that will be a bit hard to watch seeing players doing that, and you could be pretty sure World Rugby will at the first opportunity amend the rules - like it is a penalty to the opposition when a player under pressure on purpose throws a ball into touch. So while in theory there are "loopholes", rugby players simply don't revert to such blatant negative tactics. I can't imagine any respected coach will ever advise his players to throw/kick balls into the opposition in the hope of retaining possession.

    • samuelrambo
      samuelrambo commented
      Editing a comment
      Hence my surprise that the rules weren't already amended to be like the league rule!
      We're not advocating for guys throwing the ball into touch as soon as they get near the sidelines - it might seem a bit weird but in reality it isn't that strange.
      If I was the coach, I'd tell my guys: "If you are going over the sideline with the ball and there's an opposition player coming across in cover to tackle you, if you can throw the ball backwards at him before he goes over the sideline and it goes out, then it is our ball! So keep your heads up!". Imagine an SBW with the arm free in the tackle to simply offload the ball into an opposition player and they knock the ball into touch. If anything, what it means is that the tacklers need to wrap the ball player up when taking them over the sideline. That's most likely what will happen.
      I think gpred and I are more like Scott Robertson than Ian Foster. You probably think we're from another planet, and thinking like this is why NZ didn't win the World Cup this year ....
      Last edited by samuelrambo; 12-16-2019, 07:46 PM.

    • samuelrambo
      samuelrambo commented
      Editing a comment
      Consider this classic tackle from rugby league.
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjvL5sBas_Q
      If the player with the ball in hand had flung it desperately at the tackler just before he got caught (or at the fullback covering), it might have gone into touch and in rugby it would have been the attacker's throw into the lineout. In league it is the defense's feed into the ensuing scrum if the defender is not deemed to have played at the ball.
      I don't think this is out of the realms of possibility.

  • #3
    The knock-on bug, where the player fumbles the ball, but never drops it.
    This is a Rugby League rule, not a Rugby Union one.

    Comment


    • gpred
      gpred commented
      Editing a comment
      I think it is a bug. As an aside this is only a knock on in Rugby League if a player from the other team touches it before it is regathered.

    • danielw
      danielw commented
      Editing a comment
      Yep, the same rules apply in rugby union (I assume in RL it is also when the ball touches any player, not only opponent).

      "A knock-on occurs when a player loses possession of the ball and it goes forward, or when a player hits the ball forward with the hand or arm, or when the ball hits the hand or arm and goes forward, and the ball touches the ground or another player before the original player can catch it."
      Last edited by danielw; 12-18-2019, 07:02 AM.

    • moujik
      moujik commented
      Editing a comment
      season 11, league 14, round 8, Birkenhead Butchers - Preston Pirates 57:21
      action: a player fumbles the ball, without dropping it to the ground
      outcome: scrum for a knock on

  • #4
    Following on from the knock-on issue, during the last round of matches Edinburgh lost to the LA Rams by one point. However at the death, the clock had ticked past 80, the Rams knocked on, but instead of giving the Blues a scrum, the ref blew for full-time. I think the ref had got tired and just wanted to go home 😀

    In fairness whilst it's possible Edinburgh could have knicked a win, that wasn't really plausible.

    indeed the same thing happened in reverse two weeks ago where Edinburgh won by a point, but knocked on at 80 mins, and the ref blew for full-time.

    Just shows that bugs aren't partial and can work both for and against you!


    Comment


    • gpred
      gpred commented
      Editing a comment
      Hard luck Wanderer. Thanks for a great game, we were very lucky to walk away with a win.

    • Wanderer
      Wanderer commented
      Editing a comment
      Yep Daniel, you are quite right, the ref made the right call.

      https://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=5&language=EN

      Well at least I've learned something new!

      Congrats on your win Gpred, I thought your team's tactics were really good, and I do feel that I learned more in that defeat than the previous 3 wins!

      So this week we're trying something different, but they do say that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery!

    • gpred
      gpred commented
      Editing a comment
      Thanks Wanderer. Be interesting to see how you get on. I think the tactics the Rams use can be beneficial in tight games, but sometimes they backfire for sure! Once the defensive improvements launch, I would think they would favour more conservative play.

  • #5
    my 2 cents.....

    I have noticed this too, but only recently. It didn't happen that much before.
    Perhaps while trying to tweek the defence this my be a result of that??
    As mentioned in another post from me, I had one, almost two, instance of an old bug in which all the players run off the field to one side.
    So again, perhaps when someone adjusts something it creates new bugs

    Comment


    • GrahamNZ
      GrahamNZ commented
      Editing a comment
      From the Manawatu Boars v Jonnesburg Blitz game in Round 8.
      A bit crushing to concede a try because of this (tap penalty).

      Gabe - not being ungrateful. It's a bug that you probably already have on your to do list.


  • #6
    From one of my games:

    At this stage we still had a bonus point and a chance of scoring to level the scores again, but what transpired after the final hooter had sounded pretty much sums up our season to date.
    We gained a scrum penalty just inside our own half. Of course we had to tap and run. We moved into the Rockdale 22, but knocked the ball on.
    I thought that this meant the end of the game, but the ref allowed them to take the mark and continue! (doesn't sound right to me)
    The ball was kicked ahead, Ngava raced off, grabbed it and sprinted to the line to not only give Rockdale a bonus point try, but deny us our hard earned bonus point.
    Bell put the conversion over.

    Comment


    • danielw
      danielw commented
      Editing a comment
      I think the critical question is whether the ball went dead in play after full time. If your team knocked-on and the opposition immediately gathered the ball, play will continue until the ball goes dead. Note, once the ball is dead, the ref will blow the final whistle - no scrum awarded to the non-offending team. But it seems they took a quick mark from the knock-on - I'm not sure about the ruling in this specific case - I think too play should have been stopped.
      Last edited by danielw; 12-19-2019, 03:27 AM.

    • danielw
      danielw commented
      Editing a comment
      Ok, to be sure, it could not have been a quick mark anyway (only to be taken from a kick by the opposition and ball caught by your player inside your 22 - that's an in-game bug. It would have been fine if the opposition caught the ball from the knock-on and played immediately like you described, but the "impossible" quick mark taken makes the ensuing play leading to the try, feel unrealistic.
      Last edited by danielw; 12-19-2019, 04:15 AM.

  • #7
    Another issue that's been bugging me for a long time, is the description of the penalty awarded when the attacking player is tackled and the defending team wants to contest the ball before a ruck is formed- I don't have a issue with the penalty awarded, but it should be called "not releasing the ball", and NOT "hands in the ruck". That, in fact, implies a totally different situation where a ruck was formed and the opposition try to pinch the ball - in this case the penalty will be awarded to the attacking team, and not the defending side - thus an opposite ruling to the one that is depicted in the game play.

    The penalty description in the game play is thus technically incorrect, and while I predict that for many managers it won't bother them, there are knowledgeable rugby people too also playing the game, and such technical inaccuracies should not be in the game.

    Comment


    • danielw
      danielw commented
      Editing a comment
      Yep, I think you're absolutely right that the internet changed people's expectations and appreciation of what goes in behind the scenes to deliver a product/service. I would say especially the younger generations have little sympathy when the service is not 100% up to their expectations, whether realistic or not. It's one of those things that we as a society have not fully grasped or comprehended yet, how the internet changed people's view of their world.

      Like you, I also like to do my own thing - in my case financial modelling regarding investment and retirement planning, building spreadsheet simulation models, etc. While financial institutions have the manpower and resources to do probably much more what I on my own ever could, it is something I like to do, burning the midnight oil so to speak. In the process I do get a lot wiser (not even realizing it at times) but it gives me the intrinsic understanding of topics I would not have gained by ordinary reading or studying. I'm pretty sure you have experienced the same - putting the theory into practice and gaining an awful amount of understanding/insight that would not have possible otherwise.

    • gpred
      gpred commented
      Editing a comment
      Looks like this keep you very busy Graham!

    • GrahamNZ
      GrahamNZ commented
      Editing a comment
      Sure does Gabe,
      I run live broadcasts of 12 tournaments/gauntlets too.

      All goes towards the rating lists . Here is one of them for example:
      https://www.computerchess.org.uk/ccr...ersions_only=1

  • #8
    I think you're doing an excellent job and I am very appreciative of all your efforts! I also wished more guys would chime in with a donation here and there, but as it is I think there's only a few of us...

    Comment


    • GrahamNZ
      GrahamNZ commented
      Editing a comment
      Yes. Let's hope that Gabe doesn't lose interest, otherwise we'll all be worse off.

      I appreciate that Gabe is always looking to improve the game when he has the time.

    • gpred
      gpred commented
      Editing a comment
      Thanks Van. Yep there are only a few and danw is one of them, so I'm not having a go at him specifically. Just saying in general, please don't demand things. I'm trying my best. At the moment I have been spending all my spare time trying to work on the defensive improvements that people have requested.

  • #9
    Sorry Gabe, I meant this thread as a look-up for examples to aid development not opinions or suggestions. There's certainly no expectations from me on when if anytime, you choose to use it.

    Comment


    • gpred
      gpred commented
      Editing a comment
      Thanks moujik, all good.

  • #10
    Defensive behaviour
    season 11, league 14, round 8, Birkenhead Butchers - Preston Pirates 27:43
    action: a winger is chased by 5 running across the field.. after the tackle, all but the tackler suddenly stop and turn around and run away from the tackle, at the same time another two players which were further away run to the ruck instead. So it makes sense for AI, but looks unnatural.

    Comment


    • #11
      no complaints this week.

      Looked quite good actually.

      Comment


      • GrahamNZ
        GrahamNZ commented
        Editing a comment
        Looks pretty good to me as well.

      • samuelrambo
        samuelrambo commented
        Editing a comment
        Well this is high praise indeed! In all seriousness though, the game has again looked very good this week. It is great to see close contests between evenly matched sides, and it makes for gripping viewing.

      • lederhosen
        lederhosen commented
        Editing a comment
        Again, this weeks playoff matches were good. I lost one and won the other.
        Very few off loads, good 1on1 tackles and what seemd to be the right amount of quick long passes when needed.
        much better game.

    • #12
      Not a bug, but there are two teams called the Pretoria Panthers.

      Comment


      • #13
        In the light of recent changes a new bug might have been introduced..

        Invisible man.
        Where a few defenders run past the line of the attacker, not to cover, because all attackers are covered on that side. So the attacker just runs through and sometimes in between the defenders.

        Examples from league 6, round 1, Birkenhead Butchers - Inverness Indians
        21:31 #13 runs a straight line, with no reaction by the defenders running across
        48:38 #15 seems to be covered by 5 defenders, but they all make sure he gets through

        Comment


        • #14
          just some observations today....

          had a few instances were players would walk away from a breakdown instead of contesting the ruck. Resulting in the attacker just pick and go. Counter-ruck settings are just under medium mostly.

          defenders ignoring or walking away from attackers, especially on the mid to outside wing.

          counter-rucking defenders just seem a bit slow to react, even when they have greater numbers on the spot

          Comment


          • zagrijs
            zagrijs commented
            Editing a comment
            AFAIK, as much as there is a slider there is only 3 ruck settings, low, medium and high, so might be that it registered as low. Best to put it in middle of "medium" to ensure medium ruck numbers.

            2. Mind giving examples, i.e video clips or photos.

          • moujik
            moujik commented
            Editing a comment
            I raised this issue before. Where nearest players run away from the ruck to be replaced by players further away. It somehow makes sense to AI but looks very unnatural.

            I would say any players near the ruck should go in or set up guard as a base. Especially if the ruck is isolated from the defensive line. From there there could be some variations on the ruck numbers. So all the shuffling by AI should exclude ruckers, guards and bodyguards.

            Or maybe keeping the minimum realistic base the sliders could be rebranded as 'ruck intensity'. How aggressive and how long the defenders try to counter ruck, it might involve bigger numbers or it might just mean a second effort by the same ruckers..
            Last edited by moujik; 09-04-2020, 04:17 PM.

        • #15
          Click image for larger version  Name:	1-5.jpg Views:	1 Size:	360.1 KB ID:	25860


          Click image for larger version  Name:	5.jpg Views:	1 Size:	594.9 KB ID:	25861


          Click image for larger version  Name:	7.jpg Views:	1 Size:	233.0 KB ID:	25862



          I didn't go through the whole match....and its not a biggy. Just wanted you to know, and perhaps others see the same thing too and can report it.
          It all started after the 20min mark.

          Comment


          • zagrijs
            zagrijs commented
            Editing a comment
            Answered above, but not applicable here.

          • zagrijs
            zagrijs commented
            Editing a comment
            The only times I have really seen defenses not commit any players to rucks was a few years back in a test match between England and Italy where Italy didn't commit any defenders and was standing very flat to rush the defense (since it is not a ruck the offside line is different), but afaik a law change was made very shortly afterwards to remove the benefit of that.

            The other time is when the attack are so close to the ruck (technically not a ruck since no defender joined), they immediately secure the ball and the defense just reset the defensive line, i.e there is no benefit to the defense to join the ruck

          • moujik
            moujik commented
            Editing a comment
            zagrijs yeah I remember Eddie Jones had the biggest whine in the history of the game.. and they changed the law soon after.. overreaction imo..

            in any case, the ruck guard/pillar or his opposite do not just suddenly run away from an isolated ruck even if their team mates are arriving. It looks weird no matter settings.
        Working...
        X