Jump to content


Rugby League World - Grand Finals Issue

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD - THE GRAND FINALS ISSUE - OUT 17 OCT OR DOWNLOAD IT NOW!
Try our Fantastic 4-Issue Bundle Offer:
For just £14, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:

The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final drama from both hemispheres plus Four Nations preview
The Four Nations Issue (out 21 Nov) – Fantastic coverage of the Four Nations tournament down under
The Golden Boot Issue (out 19 Dec) – A look back at the 2014 season plus the big reveal of the winner of the Golden Boot
The 2015 Season Preview Issue (out 23 Jan) – How will your team perform in 2015? We preview every club.


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Was 4-tackle rugby league any good?


  • Please log in to reply
42 replies to this topic

#1 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,307 posts

Posted 25 March 2013 - 11:44 PM

I don't remember unlimited tackle (too young) but I've seen old videos and union so I get an idea what it was like. But 4 tackles just sounds awful. I'm guessing that since that era didn't last long that it really was as bad as it sounds.

Anyone remember it?

#2 koli

koli
  • Coach
  • 170 posts

Posted 26 March 2013 - 04:46 AM

It was very frantic and quickly obvious that it needed more tackles.

#3 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,307 posts

Posted 26 March 2013 - 10:41 AM

That's what I thought. Why did anyone think that 4 tackles were enough?

#4 saints10coach

saints10coach
  • Moderator
  • 1,681 posts

Posted 26 March 2013 - 10:50 AM

I think originally they were copying the 4 downs as in American Football. 6 tackles was an improvement. Unlimited tackles, you could go a whole game without having the ball, if you did not have a good pack.

#5 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,847 posts

Posted 26 March 2013 - 10:59 AM

I think originally they were copying the 4 downs as in American Football.


Yeah, what they didn't factor in is that you only had to go ten yards in American Football to get another set.

Four wasn't enough but six has worked fine over the years.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#6 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 15,237 posts

Posted 26 March 2013 - 11:05 AM

I think originally they were copying the 4 downs as in American Football. 6 tackles was an improvement. Unlimited tackles, you could go a whole game without having the ball, if you did not have a good pack.

You could compete for the ball at the PTB though and if you had a skilled player win it occasionally. Unlimited tackle RL was much more like the way Union is played today than Union was played at that time. I never played 4 tackle League - I'd moved to playing Union by then, but on TV it did look very frantic.
"Your a one trick pony Trojan" - Parksider 10th March 2013

#7 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 41,719 posts

Posted 26 March 2013 - 11:18 AM

You could compete for the ball at the PTB though and if you had a skilled player win it occasionally. Unlimited tackle RL was much more like the way Union is played today than Union was played at that time. I never played 4 tackle League - I'd moved to playing Union by then, but on TV it did look very frantic.


WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#8 Just Browny

Just Browny
  • Coach
  • 11,799 posts

Posted 26 March 2013 - 11:31 AM

I'd be interested in seeing an experiment playing a five-tackle rule as a means of reducing score margins and dominance of one team over another. More interested than going back to five metres or contested scrums, certainly.

I can confirm 30+ less sales for Scotland vs Italy at Workington, after this afternoons test purchase for the Tonga match, £7.50 is extremely reasonable, however a £2.50 'delivery' fee for a walk in purchase is beyond taking the mickey, good luck with that, it's cheaper on the telly.


#9 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 41,719 posts

Posted 26 March 2013 - 11:36 AM

You could challenge at the ptb under six tackles
Very messy

Edited by l'angelo mysterioso, 26 March 2013 - 11:37 AM.

WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#10 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,847 posts

Posted 26 March 2013 - 11:39 AM

I watched the 1966 Challenge Cup final recently and what particularly struck me was the aimless kicking out at the ptb. No real chance of getting the ball, maybe run your studs over the ball carrier's fingers with a bit of luck ....
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#11 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 18,233 posts

Posted 26 March 2013 - 11:39 AM

You could challenge at the ptb under six tackles
Very messy


The PTB used to be a mini version of a competitive scrum, and had all the same problems. In fact in the very early days a scrum was formed after every tackle.

Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com
Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007
Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.


#12 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 41,719 posts

Posted 26 March 2013 - 11:42 AM

The PTB used to be a mini version of a competitive scrum, and had all the same problems. In fact in the very early days a scrum was formed after every tackle.

Correct and was described as such in official publications
WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#13 John Rhino

John Rhino
  • Coach
  • 2,510 posts

Posted 26 March 2013 - 11:43 AM

Things were a lot different back then. For a start the pitch was two feet deep mud for most of the season. You could compete for the ball at the PTB and it was a scrum if the dummy half caught in possession. Few scoots then! A lot of games were just a midfield slog. Anyone who has only seen SL would not enjoy it one little bit.
Four tackles was awful. Progress was only made from penalties.

Derby City - proud to be flying the flag for Rugby League in the Midlands for over 24 years.
 

Visit:  http://www.derbycityrlfc.co.uk and see the progress being made.

 

Follow us on Twitter: @derbycityrlfc


#14 Viking Warrior

Viking Warrior
  • Coach
  • 5,202 posts

Posted 26 March 2013 - 11:47 AM

l have seen all three, and unlimited tackles could be the proverbial game of two halves, the team receiving the kick off could theoretically keep the ball for a full halfif they didn't knock on or give a loose pass which could be intercepted. 4 tackles was frantic and didn't allow for a constructive attack to be formulated. but six tackles for me is just right, giving the game more structure as a whole,
"Why is Napoleon crying ?" said one sailor to the other, "poor ###### thinks he's being exiled to st helens" came the reply.



https://scontent-a-l...276002364_n.jpg

#15 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 41,719 posts

Posted 26 March 2013 - 11:48 AM

Things were a lot different back then. For a start the pitch was two feet deep mud for most of the season. You could compete for the ball at the PTB and it was a scrum if the dummy half caught in possession. Few scoots then! A lot of games were just a midfield slog. Anyone who has only seen SL would not enjoy it one little bit.
Four tackles was awful. Progress was only made from penalties.



Them wot tdays forrards was forrards and ookers ooked

Edited by l'angelo mysterioso, 26 March 2013 - 11:50 AM.

WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#16 Just Browny

Just Browny
  • Coach
  • 11,799 posts

Posted 26 March 2013 - 11:48 AM

Things were a lot different back then. For a start the pitch was two feet deep mud for most of the season. You could compete for the ball at the PTB and it was a scrum if the dummy half caught in possession. Few scoots then! A lot of games were just a midfield slog. Anyone who has only seen SL would not enjoy it one little bit.
Four tackles was awful. Progress was only made from penalties.


John, is dropping a tackle worth a look then? After all, teams are able to make a lot of progress these days, on (generally) decent pitches and with 10 metres to exploit.

I suppose the points in favour would be that teams would have to do more to score when they have the ball, and may try to move the ball a bit more earlier in the set. On the other hand, a team with a weaker pack or without a halfback with a big boot would get punished.

I can confirm 30+ less sales for Scotland vs Italy at Workington, after this afternoons test purchase for the Tonga match, £7.50 is extremely reasonable, however a £2.50 'delivery' fee for a walk in purchase is beyond taking the mickey, good luck with that, it's cheaper on the telly.


#17 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 15,237 posts

Posted 26 March 2013 - 12:59 PM

The PTB used to be a mini version of a competitive scrum, and had all the same problems. In fact in the very early days a scrum was formed after every tackle.

When I played U17 unlimited tackle RL in the sixties we had a player called Peter Coates ( I believe he subsequently signed for Dewsbury) who was a pastmaster at winning the ball at the PTB - I'd say 2/3 times a game he'd win the ball back. Plus of course you had to pass the ball from AHB, if you were caught in possession you conceded a scrum to the oppostion, so not many dashes by the dummy half. Even in those days of contested scrums, the majority went with the feed no matter who had the head.
"Your a one trick pony Trojan" - Parksider 10th March 2013

#18 RunItOffAfi

RunItOffAfi
  • Coach
  • 244 posts

Posted 26 March 2013 - 04:14 PM

I remember watching the very first game under four tackles. I think it was against Barrow in October 1966 in the Floodlit trophy on a rainy night at Watersheddings (that was a rare event!). What a farce of a match it was. Both sides seemed to panic every time they had the ball, knowing that they only had a very limited number of tackles to do anything with it. Matches after this under the new rule improved a little, but six tackles turned into a better option and history has told us it works reasonably well.

As an aside, I believe that RU are exploring the possibility of a limited number of tackles, to get away from the ludicrous situation of one team sometimes having 20 or more attempts to breach the line. Where we went years ago, other sports seem to follow eventually.

#19 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 15,243 posts

Posted 26 March 2013 - 04:28 PM

John, is dropping a tackle worth a look then? After all, teams are able to make a lot of progress these days, on (generally) decent pitches and with 10 metres to exploit.

I suppose the points in favour would be that teams would have to do more to score when they have the ball, and may try to move the ball a bit more earlier in the set. On the other hand, a team with a weaker pack or without a halfback with a big boot would get punished.

I think it is an interesting one. I would just urge some caution on this one, as we saw when we added the zero tackle it can make quite a big difference to things.

If we genuinely believe that games are too high-scoring then I do think your suggestion would be a better alternative to moving the defensive line.

#20 marklaspalmas

marklaspalmas
  • Coach
  • 11,532 posts

Posted 26 March 2013 - 05:33 PM

I enjoyed the aspect of the game that allowed markers to 'strike' for the ball at the PTB. Of course it was a shambles in the 60s and 70s with players kicking out willynilly. All that was eliminated with the introduction of the rule that sent the tackle count back to zero for an attempt at striking for the ball. Simple and effective. Players were only striking when a sloppy PTB from the opposition allowed a reasonable posdsibility of possession being gained.

A separate point is whether the play is played correctly or not by the team in possession.........

 

A Fev Blog

 

 

 

 





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users