108 replies to this topic

[Dave T]

So basically the rule intended to open the game up more worked?

Seems fair.

They never should have taken two men off the scrum then we would have proper close games and hardly any tries

I think this is the thing, we need to be careful what we wish for.

If people want a game which generally drive closer games through fewer tries with attacks being given much less space to work in, well, dare I say it, there is an alternative solution out there for them.

[gingerjon]

I think this is the thing, we need to be careful what we wish for.

If people want a game which generally drive closer games through fewer tries with attacks being given much less space to work in, well, dare I say it, there is an alternative solution out there for them.

Things is, the OP would actually merge us back together.

And his new game would look an awful lot more like union than league in my opinion.

[RP London]

I dont quite understand some of this.. does the score have to be close at the end of the game to mean that the game was close?? I always thought that a game could be close without the final score being close. After all you can go the length of the field twice after being camped on your line for 80 minutes and you win 12-0.. If a team is pushing and pushing to score with 10 mintues to go becuase they are a couple of points back you are going to have a great game, the fact the team at the end score once to take the game away from them and then beat a demoralised team by maybe 15 points becuase they get a couple of scores the game now is automatically labelled "not close"?

The key to how exciting the game is is the game itself not the final score.

I also agree that there is no link between one rule and this.. it is how the game has progressed and you cannot move it backwards. What i would expect is that it gets closer again becuase the defence gets better, then it will widen as attack takes over.. this is natural becuase each team wants the key to win a game.. if the team leaked too many tries one year it is likely they will try to plug that the next etc..

I would agree that it is as much to do with the advent of summer rugby (which was designed to encrouage a more open flowing game.. shock.. it worked) as it is to do with anything else.

I would agree with Lobby that there are a lot of people for whom nothing can be wrong with RL.. however, i would put forward the counter that there are more on this board for whom the RFL and RL in general cannot ever do anything right!

[Wellsy4HullFC]

Is this one still going?!

[Ant]

Fraid so

Till the OP starts a new on next week

[Padge]

I would agree with Lobby that there are a lot of people for whom nothing can be wrong with RL.. however, i would put forward the counter that there are more on this board for whom the RFL and RL in general cannot ever do anything right!

The problem is that Lobby, and others for that matter, say things like "this never used to happen" and with about 5 minutes research someone often shows that it did and the statement is utter rubbish.

It isn't a matter of RL can do no wrong but of people being critical without looking into what they are claiming before hand to check if what they are posting has any standing.

[Johnoco]

Like Padge says, people make all manner of statements claiming this was better or we were all the best of friends pre SL when a little research or personal knowledge shows different.

[petero]

Just checked my original post where I did indeed refer to less games being within a converted try - however I did not categorically state that a score exceeding 6pts was a blowout. The two points were separate, i.e:

1/ there are less games equal or within a converted try
2/ there are more games where the margin is high (i.e. the score margins are higher).

I'm guessing that the higher score margins in more recent years correlates with lower results with scores of equal to or less than one converted try - though this may not hold true. Dont suppose Exile or anyone has the equivalent stats comparing say 1980, 1990 and 2011 in terms of the number of top tier games per season where the score margin was one converted try or less????

I am very sorry Lobby and I owe youy an apology for my stupidity. What I intended to state was: Lobby NEVER categorically stated that games with a margin exceeding 6 points ought to be regarde as a blow out!

Please accept my apology as in the main I do concur with your thoughts upon this subject mostly.

[RP London]

The problem is that Lobby, and others for that matter, say things like "this never used to happen" and with about 5 minutes research someone often shows that it did and the statement is utter rubbish.

It isn't a matter of RL can do no wrong but of people being critical without looking into what they are claiming before hand to check if what they are posting has any standing.

oh dont get me wrong i dont disagree with you, I have more of an issue with those that want to keep chopping and changing things because they percieve it to be bad etc.. there is a lot more right with RL than wrong and as you say a lot of what people see is wrong is just different or is just perception and is no different anyway. Also there needs more than just a cursery look at the issue to work out why that has happened and what you would need to do to stop it happening, ie blow out scores are the result but the 10m rule is not the cause.