Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Lobbygobbler

Enabling Closer games as opposed to tryfest blowouts

109 posts in this topic

Very few games these days are within less than a converted try. This makes the game a turn off despite the so called improvements like the 10m rule and penalties for holding on for more than a nanosecond to make the game more open. In actual fact, making the game more open has the adverse affect and leads to blowouts. I'd rather see a 9-8 close game than tryfests. This would also make more sense than trying to get all teams to be superhuman - which is not going to happen on limited sky money. I also dont think the game is as enjoyable to play now due to too much emphasis on getting back 10m rather than playing the core game of rugby league.

I'd like to see us take a small step backwards and look at reducing the 10m rule and also minimise the impact if a refs whistle (i.e. tackle count does NOT go back to one after a penalty).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like it or not the casual sports fan prefers try fests. Been too a few of my friends house with a large number of people, I managed too get two RL games on the tv. One was Saints v Wire whilst the other was London v Wire. The RL in the former game was of a much higher standard but many people didn't enjoy it as it was too close and not much was happening. Whilst the london game people loved due to the amount of attacking display which was happening as its very easy too watch.

Keep the game as it is, its very entertaining, noticeably different from RU and people enjoy playing and watching it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think one sided games are just something 'rugby' has to live with. They aren't new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A game can be close and tense yet end up with a difference of more than 6.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like it or not the casual sports fan prefers try fests. Been too a few of my friends house with a large number of people, I managed too get two RL games on the tv. One was Saints v Wire whilst the other was London v Wire. The RL in the former game was of a much higher standard but many people didn't enjoy it as it was too close and not much was happening. Whilst the london game people loved due to the amount of attacking display which was happening as its very easy too watch.

Keep the game as it is, its very entertaining, noticeably different from RU and people enjoy playing and watching it.

You are kidding right? To say the London game was better is laughable.

Did people not enjoy it before the 10rule?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think one sided games are just something 'rugby' has to live with. They aren't new.

The high frequency of them is new - and has got worse since to silly 10m rule

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are kidding right? To say the London game was better is laughable.

Did people not enjoy it before the 10rule?

My opinion no, other peoples opinion yes. I can't go into detail why they liked it, they just did. These people who don't watch the game much are people who we should be trying to watch the game more often, you cant call their opinions laughable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This makes the game a turn off

Crowds up, viewers up..in SL at least. Are there blow-outs in the Championship as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The high frequency of them is new - and has got worse since to silly 10m rule

I'd like to see some scores from different eras to compare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an amateur 'Second Row' Rugby League player I bloody love the 10m rule, however I don't think many people who haven't ever played RL have a grasp of how increadibly knackering a full 80 of any level of Rugby League is, especially on the back-foot. Although I'd bloody hate for the RFL/ARLC to reduce it to 7m (or even go back to 5m. URGH!), as that would decrease the power of the collision and make the game less expansive than it can be on the 3rd, 4th and 5th tackle.

I disagree with your initial post but I defintely agree about the players having to jump up as soon as a tackle is completed as they do in the NRL and Internationals. I've said it before. I'd have absolutely no problem if Refs allowed 4-5 seconds for players to control the ruck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an amateur 'Second Row' Rugby League player I bloody love the 10m rule, however I don't think many people who haven't ever played RL have a grasp of how increadibly knackering a full 80 of any level of Rugby League is, especially on the back-foot. Although I'd bloody hate for the RFL/ARLC to reduce it to 7m (or even go back to 5m. URGH!), as that would decrease the power of the collision and make the game less expansive than it can be on the 3rd, 4th and 5th tackle.

I disagree with your initial post but I defintely agree about the players having to jump up as soon as a tackle is completed as they do in the NRL and Internationals. I've said it before. I'd have absolutely no problem if Refs allowed 4-5 seconds for players to control the ruck.

I played with a 5m rule and it enabled skill to get through defences rather than making it easier for the attacking team. Basically pace and power are now dominant given the extra yardage which results in larger score margins. Why are we constantly trying to make RL progressively more difficult to play as well from a fitness point of view. What next -a15m rule and 11a side?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What next -a15m rule and 11a side?

nope. Maybe a 5 yard rule, though. As that is less than 5 metres, then surely that would be even better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I played with a 5m rule and it enabled skill to get through defences rather than making it easier for the attacking team. Basically pace and power are now dominant given the extra yardage which results in larger score margins. Why are we constantly trying to make RL progressively more difficult to play as well from a fitness point of view. What next -a15m rule and 11a side?

a big difference now is the fitness of the forwards who can cover across more and by and large are faster . now if we go back to contested scrums with the ball going in strait that would tire the forwards a bit and give skillful halfbacks a better chance to prise open gaps in defences . of course this will never happen as theres not a hooker around these days who would have a clue how to strike for a ball or of course any props with the skills to help there hooker in the scrum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5m rule existed at a time when defences were very poorly organised and drilled. There wasn't more skill and guile needed there were just far more holes in defence.

Watching back at old games and halfbacks werent any more skillfull or artful then than now.

The major difference in blowout scores is fitness and how long the ruck lasts. Winning teams are allowed to hold down longer and that's the biggest advantage you can get now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blow out games are boring to watch.

I think so too. But they have always been a part of RL and it isn't just another stick to beat modern RL with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The number of blowout games is vastly exaggerated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suggest more surging on the terraces (without women or families) and playing the game in a rectangular ground.

That should solve the problems, what.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think so too. But they have always been a part of RL and it isn't just another stick to beat modern RL with.

Your right.

There is much more than blow out score to beat it with ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bring back hacking.

We should get Lord Leveson to investigate if that would improve the game now he has some spare time on his hands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The number of blowout games is vastly exaggerated.

This is the problem - and Lobby himself started this in the OP. He stated that very few games are split by less than 6 points - that is true, but then there are lots of great games which can finish with a margin of 12-18pts or so.

Look at the Saints v Wire playoff game. This was a great battle, some great defence, some great tries and a classic semi final - yet the difference was 18 pts in the end.

Look at the Grand Final - great game, but a winning margin of 8 points, and therefore a reason to move back to 5m according to Lobby!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are kidding right? To say the London game was better is laughable.

Did people not enjoy it before the 10rule?

I was at that match and thoroughly enjoyed it. As did the rest of the London fans.

For london to win so heavily despite having about 7 first team players out injured was remarkable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.