Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 400 - Out Now!

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD MAGAZINE - ISSUE 400 - OUT NOW!
84 pages, 38 years of history from Open Rugby to the present day.
Click here for the digital edition to read online via smartphone, tablet and desktop devices including iPhone, iPad, Android & Kindle HD.
Click here to order a copy for delivery by post. Annual subscriptions also available worldwide.
Find out what's inside Issue 400
/ View a Gallery of all 400 covers / WH Smith Branches stocking Issue 400
Read Jamie Jones-Buchanan's Top 5 RLW Interviews including Marwan Koukash, Lee Briers, Gareth Thomas, Steve Ganson & Matt King OBE


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

11 a side RL


  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#1 ehbandit

ehbandit
  • Coach
  • 590 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 01:32 PM

With junior teams seeming to struggle for numbers in a few areas, would the game work with teams of eleven players? The game could be played on a slightly smaller pitch, and without scrums.
Could this work? Any thoughts?

#2 ehbandit

ehbandit
  • Coach
  • 590 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 01:32 PM

could this work at pro level also?

#3 walter sobchak

walter sobchak
  • Coach
  • 1,624 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 01:41 PM

could this work at pro level also?


The problems facing rugby league aren't on the field but off it, the product on the pitch is our major asset unlike with rugby union their off the field Organization, development, money, sponsorship, media etc is their major assets.

#4 ehbandit

ehbandit
  • Coach
  • 590 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 01:45 PM

I agree the product is good, but a lot of teams struggle to get 13 players for games, by reducing the number required ,more teams should survive at youth level. by only reducing the field size slightly and removing scrums the game is still fundamentally the same. It could be a solution, and I wouldn't be surprised if this is what happens in the future

Edited by ehbandit, 12 April 2013 - 01:45 PM.


#5 Gruff

Gruff
  • Coach
  • 642 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 01:50 PM

I agree the product is good, but a lot of teams struggle to get 13 players for games, by reducing the number required ,more teams should survive at youth level. by only reducing the field size slightly and removing scrums the game is still fundamentally the same. It could be a solution, and I wouldn't be surprised if this is what happens in the future

 No

 

You don't drastically alter a product to accommodate the weak minority.  It is up to them to work up to be part of the strong majority.

 

If they can't get 13 players it is up to them to assess why this is and work at it, not for everyone else to change to suit.



#6 superten

superten
  • Coach
  • 364 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 02:03 PM

play rl 9s instead run both parrarel 13 a side and 9 a side.


Chief Crazy Eagle

#7 Matt J

Matt J
  • Moderator
  • 7,712 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 02:09 PM

In junior football, theyre playing reduced numbers to get everybody on the ball more as they do in the Netherlands.

Maybe ssomething to look at the junior game in RL?

Cummins Out.


#8 ehbandit

ehbandit
  • Coach
  • 590 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 02:18 PM

In junior football, theyre playing reduced numbers to get everybody on the ball more as they do in the Netherlands.
Maybe ssomething to look at the junior game in RL?

yes. this would ba another advantage.

#9 brooza

brooza
  • Moderator
  • 4,259 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 02:39 PM

If they need to play reduced numbers, make it 9s rather than yet another split


St Albans Centurions 1st Team Manager. Former Medway Dragons Wheelchair RL player.

 

Leeds Rhinos, St Albans Centurions y Griffons Madrid fan. Also follow (to a lesser extent) Catalans Dragons, London Broncos, South Sydney Rabbitohs, Jacksonville Axemen, Vrchlabi Mad Squirrels, København Black Swans, Red Star Belgrade and North Hertfordshire Crusaders.
 
Moderator of the International board


#10 ehbandit

ehbandit
  • Coach
  • 590 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 02:53 PM

If they need to play reduced numbers, make it 9s rather than yet another split


9s would be ok, however I think the playing time would have to be drastically reduced. with 11s the game duration could stay the same.

#11 Rugby League Wiki

Rugby League Wiki
  • Players
  • 18 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 02:56 PM

If they need to play reduced numbers, make it 9s rather than yet another split

 

I agree with this, I think the solution is to use nines more.

 

Perhaps a few more 9s festivals, at regular intervals and in convenient locations, could be established to provide competition of struggling teams.



#12 brooza

brooza
  • Moderator
  • 4,259 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 03:14 PM

9s would be ok, however I think the playing time would have to be drastically reduced. with 11s the game duration could stay the same.

Yes, but then you're creating yet another format of the game


St Albans Centurions 1st Team Manager. Former Medway Dragons Wheelchair RL player.

 

Leeds Rhinos, St Albans Centurions y Griffons Madrid fan. Also follow (to a lesser extent) Catalans Dragons, London Broncos, South Sydney Rabbitohs, Jacksonville Axemen, Vrchlabi Mad Squirrels, København Black Swans, Red Star Belgrade and North Hertfordshire Crusaders.
 
Moderator of the International board


#13 Blind side johnny

Blind side johnny
  • Coach
  • 9,058 posts

Posted 12 April 2013 - 05:39 PM

With junior teams seeming to struggle for numbers in a few areas, would the game work with teams of eleven players? The game could be played on a slightly smaller pitch, and without scrums.
Could this work? Any thoughts?

 

 

In the Heavy Woollen district they used to play 11 a side in the Sunday leagues 40 years ago - I don't know when it came to an end. No full back or loose forward. It was mildly entertaining but, of course, fitness levels (particularly in Sunday RL) were a little short of what they are nowadays.


Believe what you see, don't see what you believe.


John Ray (1627 - 1705)

#14 ehbandit

ehbandit
  • Coach
  • 590 posts

Posted 13 April 2013 - 06:53 AM

In the Heavy Woollen district they used to play 11 a side in the Sunday leagues 40 years ago - I don't know when it came to an end. No full back or loose forward. It was mildly entertaining but, of course, fitness levels (particularly in Sunday RL) were a little short of what they are nowadays.

never knew that, so it has been done before. It
could work then.

Edited by ehbandit, 13 April 2013 - 06:54 AM.


#15 Lobbygobbler

Lobbygobbler
  • Coach
  • 5,779 posts

Posted 13 April 2013 - 08:36 AM

Rugby League is hard enough (in terms of defending) to play with 13 players under the current rules.

We already see larger score margins if there are small imbalances over the 80minutes. I still think RL should make it harder to score by reducing the attacking advantage even with 13.

11aside over 80 minutes would worsen score margins even if the attack advantage was reduced. It would also be a very physically demanding game to play. Not the sort of game to pull in newbies as I think the enjoyment would suffer.

In fact Id rather see 15 a side RL than 11 a side

#16 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 4,907 posts

Posted 13 April 2013 - 12:23 PM

Rugby League is hard enough (in terms of defending) to play with 13 players under the current rules.

We already see larger score margins if there are small imbalances over the 80minutes. I still think RL should make it harder to score by reducing the attacking advantage even with 13.

11aside over 80 minutes would worsen score margins even if the attack advantage was reduced. It would also be a very physically demanding game to play. Not the sort of game to pull in newbies as I think the enjoyment would suffer.

In fact Id rather see 15 a side RL than 11 a side

 

 

I think that's exactly right. Even at fully pro level the players have to be supremely fit to compete at 13 a side. 11 a side at amateur level would be impossible.



#17 superten

superten
  • Coach
  • 364 posts

Posted 13 April 2013 - 12:36 PM

fiances in time might play apart in reducing player numbers I  think 12 aside with no loose forward and only 3 subs could be looked at saving two players wages. 


Chief Crazy Eagle

#18 Lobbygobbler

Lobbygobbler
  • Coach
  • 5,779 posts

Posted 13 April 2013 - 01:43 PM

fiances in time might play apart in reducing player numbers I think 12 aside with no loose forward and only 3 subs could be looked at saving two players wages.


Even then youd have to reduce down to 5m defence or less AND maybe 4 tackles. Some people seem fascinated with making RL more and more physically demanding to play (perhaps to be different to RU). This is not the right approach for mass appeal.

#19 ehbandit

ehbandit
  • Coach
  • 590 posts

Posted 13 April 2013 - 01:59 PM

my main point is that teams are struggling for numbers and this may be a solution, for youth level. play 20 minute halves instead of 25 and have a slightly smaller pitch, so players do not need to cover as much ground.

#20 Duff Duff

Duff Duff
  • Banned
  • 717 posts

Posted 13 April 2013 - 07:38 PM

The problem is rugby league has evolved to such an extent that is it in danger of being to demanding to play recreationally like American Football. The authorities have to careful otherwise parcipation levels will be effected.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users