Wellsy4HullFC

Yeah I agree. I don't see the big issue. It was a better solution than giving a penalty.

You're having to look at the positions of multiple players across an entire field whilst at the same time making sure the kicking side are also onside. This would have to work throughout different levels which don't always have touch judges.

Would be too difficult to police. Think that overcomplicates things.

Wayne Bennett has recently said he'd swap who kicks off. Phil Gould says it's a stupid idea. There's pros and cons to both. Basically you're surrendering good territory and no possession for bad territory and some possession if you switch it. Your suggestion basically halves the territory situation and guarantees possession. Good for evening the game up, but a bit boring as it removes all risk. Thinking it loud, a possible other option... The team conceding kicks off (as they do now), but they can choose to kick in either direction (as long as it crosses 10). They're in control then, but there's still an element of risk and strategy.

Exactly this. I think if we get the development issue right, we won't have to worry about a quota because we'll just pick the best players and those best players will be English.

It just exclude 90% of the population, but it probably includes 90% of the engaged rugby league population. There are ways to help include the remaining, such as a North v South fixture for those outside Yorkshire/Lancashire; or just label the teams Red Rose v White Rose and have the geographical associations implied rather than emphasized.

Agree with everything else, but not this. England Knights battering France does nothing for either of us. It makes France look p***weak, and doesn't give us a challenge. Lose-lose for everyone. If we want the Knights to improve, send them on tour to Australia to play the Kiwi/Kangaroo reserve sides, or at home against the Exiles. If we want to grow the international game, we can't schedule first teams that will likely get battered by reserve teams.

I do wonder what the plan is for Lloyd. Given that we've got Pryce who is very young himself at only 22, and Logan Moy is 20, I'm not sure he's going to get much of a look-in except for injuries. I do wonder whether they're better pushing him more in his other position of stand-off and building a future around a twin half back dynasty. Pretty sure they'll link up well!

Or we need a way to develop half backs so there's not too big a jump from academy/reserve to SL. Just chucking them in and hoping they swim isn't development. We can be patient in development, but only if there's an adequate pathway.

I don't think that's fair. If there's a bad spirit in the camp, they're not going to be together as a group and will make poor choices/won't care as much about letting down others. If there's a good spirit and togetherness, players will ultimately go the extra mile for the greater good and not want to let down the others. They won't need policing. Smith failed dramatically to bring that group together when there was clearly a divide at club level. We had the hardware, but not the software to make them compatible.

That wasn't an issue of players though, that was an issue of poor organisation. If you listen to James Graham on this week's Back 10, he's very critical of Tony Smith on that tour.

Exactly what they had about 20 years ago IIRC.

Did they show the scorers? I don't know how this information is sourced, but I assume sports governing bodies feed them into a system that these news sources collect from?

It was? I'm pretty certain that the vast majority of people I spoke to wouldn't have picked Williams to start. People could see he was out of form.

Stupid autocorrect!