Archived

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

ehbandit

11 a side RL

Recommended Posts

ehbandit    82

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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
walter sobchak    952

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ehbandit    82

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gruff    46

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Matt J    4

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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ehbandit    82

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ehbandit    82

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
brooza    387

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Blind side johnny    2,548

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ehbandit    82

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lobbygobbler    204

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
keighley    579

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
superten    43

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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lobbygobbler    204

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ehbandit    82

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Duff Duff    54

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

 

I agree with both of these points.

 

I want to see the footballing side of play protected and encouraged. If matches are only won by the fittest, the game would be less interesting to watch. When making changes, we need remember every part and level of the game - not just the professional game.

 

I appreciate, though, that you're looking for a way to help struggling junior teams, Ehbandit. I think the 9-a-side option would be useful, as the smaller sides would help teams that struggle for numbers a bit and those teams that struggle for numbers A LOT. Additionally, as an established variant, we could have uniformity in our approach across the country to any numbers issues and establish a 'safety net' of scheduled 9s events that these teams can participate in regularly.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ehbandit    82

I agree with both of these points.

 

I want to see the footballing side of play protected and encouraged. If matches are only won by the fittest, the game would be less interesting to watch. When making changes, we need remember every part and level of the game - not just the professional game.

 

I appreciate, though, that you're looking for a way to help struggling junior teams, Ehbandit. I think the 9-a-side option would be useful, as the smaller sides would help teams that struggle for numbers a bit and those teams that struggle for numbers A LOT. Additionally, as an established variant, we could have uniformity in our approach across the country to any numbers issues and establish a 'safety net' of scheduled 9s events that these teams can participate in regularly.

 

I get what your saying about the nine aside, never thought of that angle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

 

Just to be clear, a 9s match is normally only 15 minutes long so you could play double headers or even triple headers instead. Three 15 minutes matches is 45 minutes of play compared to the 50 minutes you get with 25 minute halves.

You could structure competitions counting each game separately, using aggregate scores, or play as best of three.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.