Tommygilf

It keeps a lot of clubs ticking over financially, particularly through memberships, and is the only red ball cricket English players get a run out in before a home test series against both the Windies and Pakistan. Not to mention that suggesting red ball cricket should be demoted for white ball (which this would do in effect) would be just short of treason in the cricket establishment eyes. Imagine saying we should save our clubs by merging with the RFU for comparison.

Equally the premier league are over 3/4 of the way through their season, we're more comparable with other summer sports, like cricket, who are looking at cancelling the county Championship and only playing T20, Hundred and International games.

I think a shortened season is inevitable, in which case relegation may also be likely to be put on hiatus too - everything seems dependent on how long will be left in the year as the world cup cannot under any circumstances be compromised. If we're looking at late August for games getting back up to normal I'd look at dividing the league into 2 groups, with toronto and Catalans in either. Play your group home and away, simple top 2 from each group qualify for semis then a final. Including the challenge cup at Old Trafford and the Grand Final at spurs (assuming the ashes don't go ahead) gives breathing room for both comps. 10 group games, semis and a final plus the remnants of the challenge cup. On the current table doing odds and evens would mean 1 group of: Wigan, Leeds, Huddersfield, Catalans, Wakefield and HKR The other group being Cas, Warrington, Saints Hull, Salford and Toronto. Thats about 3/4 months of a season. Failing that I'm not opposed to having some form of 9s to fill in for a shortened season

I don't understand it Harry, the game was better in the 70s because it wasn't all big forwards, defences were less organised, players could show individual brilliance as there is more space and greater fatigue and in general more difference in tactics, yet everything I've watched of nines is just that? Yes its not 80 minutes of rugby but in the modern age where most players are so much fitter than they ever were its probably the closest we're ever going to get to that style of play. Sides like Wales, and indeed England on day 2, that went for a conservative and arguably more modern approach were totally taken apart by teams who played heads up rugby. Sevens I agree is in effect a totally different game, but 9s just about retains enough rugby for me. Perhaps by following the games being shortened idea due to fixture pileup this year, we may see a similarly attack focussed approach.

I do get the sense that those who "like the old way" dislike nines, which is ironic considering nines offers all the elements of the play they want.

The NRL have I believed moved to doing that and indeed in SL we just see a turnover if the ball is knocked on in the last play. As for union they have to keep some elements of their own game or they'll turn into unlimited tackle league with lineouts

Exactly, the coaches coach to the rules in the extreme.

It doesn't go in the middle mate like I said if you think RU scrums are a contest for the ball any more I'm happy to inform you they aren't. Scrums are a dead end to improve the game

Not for anyone else, A they're tedious and boring and B, if you don't know what you're doing (which is the vast amount of RL players) they are incredibly dangerous these days. I say that as someone who has played in an RU team for over 10 years in virtually every position. The last thing RL needs is "proper scrums. Oh and the idea that scrums are even a contest in RU now is a joke at the pro level especially.

If you don't want "messy scrums" but also don't want uncontested you will end up at RU scrums.

Harry come on why would you suggest anyone would want to watch a borefest? Wigan under Shaun Wane played with a deep attacking line, the winger who scored in the corner could start over 30m behind the ptb. Doesn't mean they were very exciting. Leeds by contrast at the same time tended to play more laterally which whilst being exciting also resulted in us scraping to 5th in the league twice. Cas played Champagne rugby under Powell from day dot, they only ever looked like challenging more recently however because their defence improved correspondingly. Neither Scotchy nor I have said we want a defence orientated game. I have certainly said however that defence is now significantly more important and trained. Obviously we still have off the cuff magic to break down defences, isn't that what we all want? But in general defences are significantly better now than they were 20 plus years ago. Its a fact of the game nowadays. A minimal amount of tactical divergence is an obvious result of a very small pool from which coaches are drawn from. 2 pro Leagues in the world isn't going to create much ostensible difference in approaches. Also, of course having a good forward pack is essential. Thats been true since 1895 and is as true at u8s as it is in Super League. The backs will struggle to do anything if the pack is going backwards

Sky will also be flexible as the always have been and are with the current scenario. If its 1 year in London which is compensated by having the cup final up north I don't see the problem. Leeds has trains to London literally every 30 minutes and in any case as with the cup final I'd wager a significant amount of people, perhaps a majority, either will live or stay in and around London over night. I'm also sure we'd see a boost because its a new stadium as we have seen previously with St James's park for example; without doubt this was the game earmarked by many for the test series.

I'd wager that TfL is a bit better than Manchester but I agree an earlier kick off would seem likely, if only by an hour or so.

How is it costing a fortune? Its actually 1 less game in London than there would have been this year and no magic weekend, the game has to make a living somehow.

Because modern defences are fundamentally fitter, faster and perhaps a bit more intelligent. From juniors up we're taught sliding and drifting defences, perhaps that may be an overemphasis but its certainly something that the game has built on as an area with a huge amount to be gained. Consistently forcing the attack to be under pressure even with the 10 m back. The successful Cas, Leeds and Saints teams of the recent past play hard fast and crucially, at the line. There's no point throwing the ball more than 5 metres away from the line largely, as defenses can easily see it and slide across. Defences now, just as always before, need to have questions asked of them, the defenses now however need better questions asking. They work as teams rather than as individual enforcers far more and thus are far harder to break down. This is common to many sports, football in particular has seen a vast improvement in defences in the past 15 years, and has consequently seen some teams be able to overcome that through different ways. On the numbers I agree there is a certain over-reliance on certain stats which don't help. But that said there has always been elements of that - big lads vs small lads always enjoy a bias for example. However in the podcast I've posted above in this thread it clearly states that the single biggest factors in teams winning games and coming further up the table are metres gained and, crucially, tackles missed. The teams at the bottom are invariably the teams that miss the most tackles and make the least metres. Also, the depth and creativity you highlight is playing the ball at the line and having as many handling players and options as possible. I don't think that has changed at all - what has changed however is the pace, that play looks almost in slow motion.