Leaderboard

Former work colleague of mine Emma Breheny ran the touchline with her youngest son Cameron today. Her eldest son Liam was the ref.

No not for me. I don't particularly see the need to name trophies after anyone.

Imagine being mic'd up to your mum as a teenage boy.

I listened enthralled to my grandfather (born 1897, a family from Ireland, working as navvies in the Midlands, moving to the northern coalfields at the turn of the century, himself working down the mine a week before his 12th birthday). He was captivated by this wonderful new sport, immersed himself in it, and shared tales of Harold Wagstaff, Hunslet’s “Terrible Six”, the four cups, T’old Tin Pot and the county matches. He was at Odsal in 1954. Lions and Kangaroo tours. And so much more. My grandchildren have no interest in the game, in spite of living within sight of one of the game’s iconic grounds, so I have no one to pass on my stories: streams of coaches on the M1 on Wembley day, the exploits of Roger Millward, Alex Murphy, Paul Charlton, Paul Newlove, Martin Offiah, “Alfie” Langer; 30,000 crowds at Wakefield, 30 different ground to visit. And so much more. For the younger ones, what will your tales be to your grandchildren as they help on the allotment on a Saturday morning? Perhaps glittering nights at Old Trafford at the end of the season, the astonishing stamina and endurance of Graham and Roby, the footwork of Tomkins, the attacking intervention of the best Australian full-backs. And so much more. It would be good to know. The “rose-tinted spectacles” comment is employed to reinforce an argument, score points, win “likes”, and is brought in to be purposefully offensive in an environment very much lacking in respect. It would be nice if better discussion techniques were used.

The trouble is this stuff is so subjective. Someone else comes along in 10 years and there will be the same kind of calls.

We were taught to tackle around the thighs, from the front, with the head to one side. Any second man needed would tackle around the chest. The coaching manuals of the 60s and 70, were full of such illustrations. You were taught, as a tackler, to “ride” the tackle and soften the impact on yourself, though the tougher players would drive forward to put the man “on his backside”. There was never any suggestion of wrestling, or delaying the PTB, or holding up the tackle to involve a third man: the ball carrier was put down as efficiently as possible. There’s plenty of video from the time which displays this. We have allowed, encouraged, and expected the game to evolve from one primarily of evasion to one of impact, where players are recruited, coached, selected, on their ability to dominate in an impact situation. We are now seeing the consequences.

No. I fully support the rules that have been brought in to improve the game.

The thing with the tackler lowering the head beneath the armpit, if that is the case, is that it could well also lead to all kinds of issues and could well increase the risk of concussion to the tackling player. It will inevitably lead to the tackler leading with the head more to try and clamp the ball which could well increase the chances of head clashes with other defenders, the attacking player and elbows etc. Even concepts like using bumpers are quite different in Rugby League compared to Union. We already know that the tackler is more likely to suffer concussions than the attacker and the sport should be careful that they don't exacerbate the situation.

Protecting the players is paramount or we'll just end up with a body count piled high down the line. Sport evolves and just because the game isn't the same as it was 128 years ago, doesn't mean it's not rugby league. It's very easy to look back to a time when rugby league was a 'proper' sport but the version of rugby league that you're remembering would have been thought as a game for pansies by those in the George Hotel all those years ago. If you want to sign the petition, do by all means, but think about whether you're also signing a petition advocating your kids getting dementia in later life.

This feels like looking to do something rather than doing something worthwhile. Playing RL (any contact sport) is dangerous and will increase your risk of developing certain conditions. There is no way of getting away from that - these measures aren't far enough to do anything other than make it look like the RFL are doing something. The logical conclusion of this is to not take the risk in the first place, anything else is merely shuffling deckchairs on the Titanic for such a perspective. RU has had these rules (or similar) for some years, they are still facing legal threats and concerns over long term impacts of head injuries. To me, either accept it is dangerous and play, or don't accept that level of danger can't be removed and don't.

Many aren't arguing with that though and I strongly suspect the majority would agree with it. This is conflating getting rid of high tackles and thuggery with these moves. They are not the same.

That video has a cheery tone that doesn't flesh out or explain at all the finer points to a rather seismic change. A very strange tone to present things in, with JJB as the cheerful face of pressing on.

I would be happy to rename the MoM in the GF for Burrow, as others have said. I don't think literally copying the NRL trophy is the way to go though ..

The experts say that there is around about a 3 times more chance of getting concussion as a defender rather than an attacker. I believe this will increase with the new laws. Personally I think we will see an increase in concussions and back injuries which is why I am against it and looking at it from a player welfare perspective. From a coaching perspective I think it offers a bit of intrigue to see how teams adapt to it, I'm think of how quick you should now be able to hit the deck winning the tackle and get a quick play the ball or how defenders will now struggle to wrap the ball up so it gives you more attacking options from offloads.

Wouldn't argue with that, however Wakefield are not operating 200 miles from the games heartland. Wakefield like Halifax will always survive, at what level that is tends to be cyclical. London have everything stacked against them, and the only way they can ever break out is with a massive influx of cash. Take what Wakefield are supposedly getting ten times by ten. I've no issue with a London team, but it's never been done properly. They need to be in North London. They need to be at the very least part owners of a stadium, one with a 10k+ capacity. They in essence need to be a grade A club, and in London, and with a very small existing supporter bases, that will cost someone in London money the best part of 20-30 million pounds.

Think there's a few posts on here about "spoiling the game" to be fair but agree the videos could be better. And yes head clashes are the most dangerous, this is about changing the culture of the tackling high, but direct contact to the head from arm or shoulder can still cause concussion. I have seen some RU research that showed a player going into a tackle high was 3-4 more likely to suffer a concussion than one going low. I'll see if I can find it.

I've seen plenty of concussions as a result of two defending players tackling from the side and clashing heads. It's certainly not risk free.

I struggle to understand why anyone thinks that trying to reduce the number of players suffering brain damage in later life is "spoiling the game". Similar laws have been in place in RU for a few years now. I reffed an U18 s RU match yesterday which was a very tough, hard fought contest. I gave one penalty for a high tackle which was a shoulder grab. No one watching that game would have described it as soft. I played amateur RL in 80s/90s and tackling low was quite common. The game is quite different now. One man hit ups running into 2/3/4 players dominate the game, the tacklers mostly go in high, head and neck contact is common, players are bigger and faster helped by multiple substitutions meaning the biggest players only have to be able to play half a game and the 10m offside was brought in to encourage attacking play. It has done the exact opposite and just increased the size of the collisions. The players most at risk are full-time professionals. The NFL limits contact training to once a week, they've introduced padded helmets as well. RL should limit contact training. What does tackling players round the head and neck add to the game? Would you be happy if your son/daughter ended up with dementia and died in their 40/50s? Similar laws has been in RU a few seasons now. I've yet to hear any player complain that they haven't been hit round the head and want to go back to allowing high tackling. Or we can knowingly allow more young men like James Graham and Lachlan Coote to suffer brain damage so as not to spoil our fun. You can't remove all risk from the game. But the game has a duty to reduce the risk of players being brain damaged.

Those of us who have bemoaned the number of interchanges that are allowed in the course of a game have been saying this for a long time. The game was a far better spectacle when 'fatigue' was a natural part of the process, not this bringing on fresh players at regular intervals because the 10 to 15 minute 'impact' player is knackered.

A young chap called Lee Briers giving Australian’s a masterclass in game management in both 2000 and 2011.

You don’t have a clue do you? The mind boggles. They don’t have a monopoly in the area. They’re a well run operation but they’re willing to take the risk.

Yeah, I think he should be forced to play for Batley rather than join a full-time SL club...

Having been involved on and off in France for over 35 years my opinion for what it's worth. France even with only 70 clubs producers the highest % of players that can move into SL/Championship than anyone. We still just don't get it and in my opinion pay lip service to the potential that France can produce. In some small towns and villages rugby league is simply in the DNA it would not take much investment and effort to make the game strong. The Dragons have been a fantastic Toulouse have grown too best way forward is to give 100% support to the traditional rugby league areas in England and France.

My Best Young Talents in France (Born 2002 and Later) *I’m definitely not a French rugby league expert but these are the top guys I have observed, Also this list is ranked on potential not current Ability. 30.Anthony Barjou HK/WG Avignon 29.Maxime Rostang HB Avignon 28.Mateo Lacans HK Lezignan 27.Baptiste Rodriguez LK Toulouse 26.Audric Le Cam SR Catalans 25.Julien Laporte HB Catalans 24.Arthur Salles CE Lezignan 23.Sacha Kouassi LK Villeneuve 22.Thiabut Marty CE Lezignan 21.Benjamin Sinimale SR Albi 20.Mathieu Pons WG Saint Gaudens 19.Matis Dala’Asta HB Limoux 18.Felix Aubry SR Carcassonne 17.Matteo Stefani CE Toulouse 16.Guillaume Poulain CE Villeneuve 15.Loan Castano LK Catalans 14.Baptiste Pourchi WG Avignon 13.Stephane Guillon HK Toulouse 12.Yanis Belmaaziz SR/LK Limoux 11.Thomas Monclus HB Lezignan 10.Justin Tropis CE Toulouse 9.Guillermo Aispuro-Bichet SR Catalans 8.Louis Grossmey* LK South Sydney Rabbitohs 7.Yacine Ben Abdeslem HK Catalans 6.Quinton Crunel FB Limoux 5.Enzo Griffier CE Sydney Roosters 4.Nolan Lopez-Buttignol HK Carcassonne 3.Wail Skoundri LK Toulouse 2.Tanguy Zenon FB Catalans 1.Cesar Rougé HB Catalans HM- HB Mathis Jammes, Limoux HB Lenny Chachoua, Catalans PR Mattheo Devisme, Toulouse (Not 100% sure of age) SR Enzo Deltheil, Villeneuve + a heap of really talented players who I couldn’t fit A lot of these boys are seriously talented and have big futures ahead of them. I’m really excited by this new generation and I hope we continue to see more and more Frenchmen in First Grade.

" you need to tell him it was a high tackle son" "Sigh, I know mam, i know".... "Just trying to help, I can stop helping if you want....."

Just noticed the 'defects' headline on the BBC website story has now been changed to 'switches'. Congrats to all on here who complained!

The Man of Steel Award is awarded to the best player, the RFL, or Super League, made the wrong decision for the right reason in naming something after Steve Prescott. There were better ways of actually honouring his legacy as a person than an award which could have been named after a number of individuals.

I don’t think it is just lowering the tackle height by 4”, but to answer your question I think it’s another step to the slow sanitisation of a sport which overtime will lose some of the physical elements that make it so exciting. In the same way that I think the game is worse off for banning the shoulder charge (when what they should have done is just penalise the ones that weren’t executed properly). If we you only listened to experts then you probably wouldn’t play at all.

I'm not necessarily against a lower tackle situation, but the examples used to differentiate in that RFL video with JJB are a muddled joke.

That's the discussion that has been taking place for the last 10 pages isn't it? Your assertion of this is simply a case of reducing the tackle height by 4” isn't backed up by the message given by the governing body. It is much more than that.

I want to go and watch a game if RL with fantastic handing and running skills on show. I want to watch superb tackles. What I don’t want to watch is superb athletes and showmen being carried off the field like punch drunk boxers. We were all taught to ride the tackle and relax as we hit the ground. What we can’t do to protect our heads and necks ( which are perhaps the most vulnerable parts of our bodies) from the head hunters who make up for lack of skill with acts of thuggery. Getting ride of thugs should be priority!

Prob well this is all about the current legal action the RFL are skint and running scared. Touch and pass here we come not for me.

Interesting you mention alcohol as it is well known that alcohol is also a cause of dementia. As is drugs. Of course alcohol has always been a large part of the social aspect of both codes. Drugs, well I'll not go there, but what I will say more generally is that it would be very naive of anyone to think that RL lives in a bubble when it comes to them. Then there are things like family history and genetics. The point is yes the sport can mitigate against risk and should. However I think we are way off properly studying dementia when it comes to RL and some studies produce sensationalist headline results due to the poor sampling used i.e heavily skewed by those with issues coming forward by the many without them not. If a player has any family history, drank alcohol, took drugs, smoked, diabetes etc then I think it becomes awfully difficult to conclusively prove it was caused by RL. I am not saying that playing RL isn't a risk factor but it is one of many others.

Birmingham flight time changed to a more manageable 8-30 on the Friday

Ah, historically (50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s) having the best defense was the key to a championship winning team. This was particularly true in the playoffs and Super Bowl when historically playcalling became less risky and more conservative. However there has been a change in this in that the NFL became more of a quarterback’s domain and versatility at the skill position became key. The quarterbacks en masse are expected to contribute much greater scrambling ability than those previous eras. Coaching also changed in the constant evolution of NFL tactics between offence and defense - many taking their inspiration in schemes from the college game that were previously thought incompatible with the pro game. This is the era you have entered as a new watcher of the sport so I understand with that context your comments.

If it does accur, then hopefully the BBC will show it, oh and have JJB summarising to explain what all the free kicks are for - with subtitles for when he gets excited he talks to fast and becomes inaudible.

Talking of straw, going down to Clarence street to help clear the straw off the pitch on wintry Sunday mornings so the game can be played, the hired floodlights when we played the Australian tourists, going to Odsal on a foggy night when you could barely see half the pitch, or going to Headingly and watching Mick Maketo ‘the panty hose prop’ tearing the loiners apart. Happy days, life was much simpler then.

As a little lad in 1950s not many had TVs and not many had one.not on our estate any way soccer was only on on CUPFINAL day . Rugby league was the only game in town in west Leeds beyond Armley from Bramley over the river Kirkstall Burley road area meanwood woodhouse etc .only thing about football I'd knew about was John Charles going to Juventus etc . Even lads who attended football schools still played RL in streets and the park Headingley just up the Hill Barley Mow up the other hill . We talked about Boston , Bevan ,Jones Stivvy, I remember sitting on the straw in 1957 Leeds 13 Wigan 11 38000 attendance Boston scoring 2 length of field tries . Times change but cherish the memories

Whats the differrence from a group of 22 players turning up for a Community club training session or 22 mates getting together for a mess around on a field where the rules cant touch them Theres ways around the stupid rule, which makes it all the more stupid and pointless to start with

Ecclestone will be one starting winger surely, and I know they are actively looking for another winger.

How'd that pan out for the England-Tonga series?

The "newspaper" article is a pile of nonsense. It's not the councils money and the S106 funding has quite clearly been spent on its intended purpose. Unless they think the new owner is gonna pull the stand down and put in PP for houses... The councillor who asked the question is completely ignorant of the processes. The thing WMDC got wrong with the Newmarket/Yorkcourt S106, was not enforcing the payment of the cash before they allowed the Newcold disaggregation. They won't make that mistake with Axiom.

I found this thread whilst doing some work for the Record Keepers' Club on the international games this season. I thought this would be of interest: https://www.intrl.sport/news/why-sims-not-tests/ Well worth reading the full piece, as it's not too long, but in short, IRL's official term for a match played for world rankings points is "Recognised Senior International Match". At the RKC we use the shorthand "Full International" for this, as it's more commonly used and has historical relevance. The RKC worked with IRL in provided the summary linked above, and was part of IRL's History & Heritage Group who compiled the historic list of Full Internationals, which are used as IRL's official records; the RKC has also aligned to this list for all the international stats on our website. HTH.

No.

The issue is the brain hitting the inside of the head. The only ‘head protection’ is going to have to be between the brain and the skull…

I still dont understand how any findings into this thinks high tackles is the main problem for concussion. Every ex pro or semi pro ive spoken to about it believe the majority they can ever remember were from either tacklers getting their heads in the wrong position, accidental head clashes (with opponents heads, knees, elbows etc) or from heads hitting the ground hard.

The Video published just demonstrates again how little understanding of the game the people at the top of the RFL actually have.

I know the "rugby leagues dead" line gets trotted out a lot, but I really do fear what impact this will have. Was it an average of 50+ penalties in the trial games. That's simply unworkable as an entertainment sport. That's not to say we shouldn't work hard to protect players. I like the maximum games and minimum off-season, probably could have gone further here. But this rule isn't the right one IMO Unfortunately anyone who has a concern that this isn't the right way to go, gets shut down by some journos saying "safety is paramount, if you disagree with the rule you enjoy seeing players getting dementia"

Back to the topic of Carcassonne....I'm in two minds; I love to see more teams in League 1 and I'd love a trip to Carcassone again - I've been on a couple of occasions and seen the Canaries play there against their close rivals. I follow them on their YouTube Channel and they look a skillful, well drilled team and potentially better than most in League 1, but I'm sure there will be people saying if they join they start at the bottom and work up. The other tack is to think will it weaken the current French leagues if one of the better teams leaves their system? But if they don't leave Elite 1 they have nowhere else to go , if they have ambition they'll want to progress to the Championship and eventually Super League. I like the idea of the top Elite 2 teams playing a series with top League 1 sides and the same for Elite 1 vs Championship - it could be done at the end of 2025 to give IMG/RFL some idea if the leagues are comparable/ compatable and end up with a great UK/French club contest at the season end.