Jump to content

Brian McDermott’s Four Quarters Idea


Recommended Posts

On 03/04/2020 at 18:59, Marauder said:

Used to knock a couple of games in a week in the past and those guys were not as fit and did a 40 hour (37.1/4 hours if they worked at the pit) week.

84/85 season 

Friday 29th March Castleford away

Sunday 31st March Oldham away

Friday 5th April Barrow home

Monday 8th April Hull KR away

Thursday 11th April Leigh home

Sunday 14th April Warrington home

Wednesday 17th April Widnes home

Friday 19th April Saints home

Saturday 20th April Hull home

As Marauder said on "top of a full shift" .

Crazy fixture list due to a bad winter but we just got on with it.

Hull FC in the last game was 18 - 64 as we were well shot by then .

Nine games in 23 days !!!! 

 

Edited by yanto
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


22 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Yep the changes we have seen in the rules have largely been a response to the evolution of players and tactics rather than any real proactive attempt to change the game.

The old games have their charms but to a modern eye defensive lines are slow, defensive discipline is appalling and its shocking how many breaks are just players being beaten for speed rather than going through any sort of gap. 

You can change all the rules back to whatever era you want, physically and tactically the game has evolved so much it would still look entirely different to how it did now. 

Oh 100%. Its like me saying I prefer the pike and shot era of warfare in the 1600s whilst the modern world is working in ultra fast tanks and laser guided missiles 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Oh I can see why you have your preference, but there isn't really a way to bring that back. The same is true in most sports

5m would see much deeper lines and more reliance on creativity as per the part time days.

People continually forget it was 3 training sessions max after work, 2 or 3 games a week, 40 - 50 times a season as a second job. I would say the players put on a brilliant show all things considered. 

Given the almost infinite advantages SL players have nowadays and in relative terms, the current game and players are a touch behind.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Marty Funkhouser said:

5m would see much deeper lines and more reliance on creativity as per the part time days.

People continually forget it was 3 training sessions max after work, 2 or 3 games a week, 40 - 50 times a season as a second job. I would say the players put on a brilliant show all things considered. 

Given the almost infinite advantages SL players have nowadays and in relative terms, the current game and players are a touch behind.

Nah to be honest mate I'm not convinced it would, passing at the line has and always will be the best way of holding a defence in place so you can play around it. Thats true of 10m, 5m and no retreating defensive lines. I'm not convinced by the creativity argument either, as others have pointed out the lack of defensive cohesion and organisation, in tandem with a reduced fitness seems to have made space more available. A miss pass confounds half the opposition for example.

I don't blame the players for the quality and standard, its clearly of its time and as you state the number of training sessions are going to make attacking the primary focus. Things have moved on and professionalism has undoubtedly made physicality and defensive organisation more influential. It can be seen in various sports so RL is by no means alone.

Thats not to say players aren't great or anything, but they are, like everything, of their day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, yanto said:

84/85 season 

Friday 29th March Castleford away

Sunday 31st March Oldham away

Friday 5th April Barrow home

Monday 8th April Hull KR away

Thursday 11th April Leigh home

Sunday 14th April Warrington home

Wednesday 17th April Widnes home

Friday 19th April Saints home

Saturday 20th April Hull home

As Marauder said on "top of a full shift" .

Crazy fixture list due to a bad winter but we just got on with it.

Hull FC in the last game was 18 - 64 as we were well shot by then .

Nine games in 23 days !!!! 

 

Being a child in the winter of '62-63, I had forgotten how bad '84-85 had been.  Thanks for the reminder, yanto.

However, back in 1962-63, Wigan, for example, didn't play from just before Christmas until early March.  Then, they played 23 games in 84 days!  Oh, and in the middle of that was an international against France for good measure which would have included Wigan players such as Boston!

Meritorious though such achievements were, I wouldn't necessarily want to replicate them absolutely.  Some compromise might be a good idea - not least of all for reasons of player welfare - and I find some merit in the idea of 60-minute games, whether or not with a break at 15 minutes.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, jamescolin said:

If we can start in July why not leave the game as it is and as I suggested on another thread have a  season that goes back to the old days and have it continued through Winter ? We have had a months play so starting in July we would probably finish in January, early February.. Then start the new season in March. 

That's certainly an option too, and also one I'd quite like. I certainly don't want LESS rugby to watch over the next 2 years if we can help it.

A lot will depend on what Sky want, given it would mean us playing right through the football season. I don't think we're going to be able to make the decision in isolation - what broadcasters want and how other sports are making up games will have to be taken into account. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, BJW said:

Broncos v Warrington at Carcassonne was played in 4 x 20 minute quarters

 

15 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

I'm pretty sure that Australia played the USA in quarters on the way back from a tri nations in circa 2004 I think

Yep, and after the trials it never caught on, so bin it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, yanto said:

84/85 season 

Friday 29th March Castleford away

Sunday 31st March Oldham away

Friday 5th April Barrow home

Monday 8th April Hull KR away

Thursday 11th April Leigh home

Sunday 14th April Warrington home

Wednesday 17th April Widnes home

Friday 19th April Saints home

Saturday 20th April Hull home

As Marauder said on "top of a full shift" .

Crazy fixture list due to a bad winter but we just got on with it.

Hull FC in the last game was 18 - 64 as we were well shot by then .

Nine games in 23 days !!!! 

 

And, that is not just aligned to the pro game, teams in the National Conference being Amatuer player's who also work have to comply with such fixture lists, especially those who have had long cup runs and have to get the league fixtures played before the league deadline, and the League insists on the games being played even if there are mid week games and clubs have to travel from say Lancashire to North Cumbria, or Cumbria to Humberside/West Yorkshire and any combination thereof.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

Having watched the highlights from the BBC today, I'd wager it would be simply impossible to play the same tactics as then. 

The defence is arguably the biggest change in the past 40 years. Back then, teams working in defence seems like it was almost non existent and relied far more on individual enforcers. Professionalism clearly has meant it has been trained more as there was so much to gain here.

 

13 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

Yep the changes we have seen in the rules have largely been a response to the evolution of players and tactics rather than any real proactive attempt to change the game.

The old games have their charms but to a modern eye defensive lines are slow, defensive discipline is appalling and its shocking how many breaks are just players being beaten for speed rather than going through any sort of gap. 

You can change all the rules back to whatever era you want, physically and tactically the game has evolved so much it would still look entirely different to how it did now. 

Sounds a lot like what Cas did to SL defence's for a couple of season's not to long ago, Mr Powell changed the stereo type play but as you say teams have managed to annul that type of expansive play, does it make for a better spectacle I am not to sure it does.

I was having a discussion not to long ago on these pages, comparing the present day style of play between the Championship and SL, whilst I will concede hands down that SL clubs would beat their Champ opponents on a very regular basis, I find the Championship to be an aesthetically better game to watch, and the main reason is that it is a yard slower than SL.

Edited by Harry Stottle
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

Things have moved on and professionalism has undoubtedly made physicality and defensive organisation more influential. 

For me the biggest change has undoubtedly been the interchange rule on the physicality front, and putting that one rule back to just 2 substitutes from 15 player's as was the case 30 years ago, would result in the game being faster and more expansive.

Edited by Harry Stottle
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

 

Sounds a lot like what Cas did to SL defence's for a couple of season's not to long ago, Mr Powell changed the stereo type play but as you say teams have managed to annul that type of expansive play, does it make for a better spectacle I am not to sure it does.

I was having a discussion not to long ago on these pages, comparing the present day style of play between the Championship and SL, whilst I will concede hands down that SL clubs would beat their Champ opponents on a very regular basis, I find the Championship to be an aesthetically better game to watch, and the main reason is that it is a yard slower than SL.

I think Cas and more recently Saints are good examples of how teams have brought in more creative attacking structures successfully in the modern era - not necessarily off the cuff but well drilled and skilful with ball in hand. In a slightly different vein Leeds under McDermott were another team who opposition players and coaches remarked were difficult to play against as they were hard to analyse and predict what they would do in attack. There's also a major caveat to that Cas side of 2017 particularly. They only won 5 more games than second placed Leeds in that season, and 4 of those wins were against the similarly attacking minded Leeds. 

Clearly all 3 examples are in contrast to a safety first approach which obviously some coaches go for firstly to protect their jobs and because they don't think the players they have available are capable enough of playing a more expansive style against modern defences.

There's also the critical point that all coaches will say you have to earn the right to play expansive and flashy, and that cannot be done without that commitment to defend the modern game demands in spades.

2 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

For me the biggest change has undoubtedly been the interchange rule on the physicality front, and putting that one rule back to just 2 substitutes from 15 player's as was the case 30 years ago, would result in the game being faster and more expansive.

The interchanges is a fair comment. In Australia they have certainly had an attitude to reducing the number and this is starting to happen over here. However, I still would say that defensive structure is the most critical change of the past 40 years, in tandem with the growth in physicality that full time professionalism brought. Teams nowadays are just better at defending and this is true for almost all sports, as that was the area from which the most was to be gained. They're also better at defending against teams that are better at attacking both through pace, physicality and athleticism. I think to see the change to the interchange rule you suggest would be interesting, but would imagine the professional teams would adapt to any such change.

The yard slower is an interesting point and its something which from my experience is true of the handling codes to an extent. Amateur RU, whilst clearly nowhere near as skilful as the top division, is far more exciting to watch imo; mainly because you don't have to be as good to do well. 

There's a really interesting podcast out at the moment by sky interviewing Rob Lowe, one of the co founders of the sports stats agencies Opta, who began in RL. I think its particularly good at looking at where stats have helped teams and where perhaps people are too focussed on. https://www.skysports.com/rugby-league/news/12196/11966932/listen-golden-point-podcast-episode-9-with-rob-lowe-and-sam-tomkins 

One point I specifically remember, the team at the bottom of the league is almost invariably the team that has missed the most tackles. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

 

Yep, and after the trials it never caught on, so bin it.

IIRC it was more a nod to the heat/humidity rather than a trial but going on what others at Broncos told me.

My wife complains I selfishly stop her fulfilling her true ambition -

she really wants to be a rich widow

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

Nah to be honest mate I'm not convinced it would, passing at the line has and always will be the best way of holding a defence in place so you can play around it. Thats true of 10m, 5m and no retreating defensive lines. I'm not convinced by the creativity argument either, as others have pointed out the lack of defensive cohesion and organisation, in tandem with a reduced fitness seems to have made space more available. A miss pass confounds half the opposition for example.

I don't blame the players for the quality and standard, its clearly of its time and as you state the number of training sessions are going to make attacking the primary focus. Things have moved on and professionalism has undoubtedly made physicality and defensive organisation more influential. It can be seen in various sports so RL is by no means alone.

Thats not to say players aren't great or anything, but they are, like everything, of their day.

Why would you always want to hold a defence in place and play around it...like playing with one arm. There was an art in bring a defence onto you and exploiting the space behind, and it was a great spectacle with vastly more ball movement. Take a look at some more pre 96 matches and look at the depths of the attacking lines....there was good reason for this.All in the depths of winter too.

The main gripe I have with the thinking of the last 10 years at least is that has gone to pretty much coaching by numbers. There is little to no originality. Sometimes you could swaps the shirts on either team with noticing a difference in how they play.  And that is from youth up to SL. Talking to some youth coaches the frustration is apparent but they daren't/won't go against the Groupthink.

It is all out the back to the full back to do his miss pass to the wing (or to Sneyd to kick to opposite corner if you are Hull). I personally think it is so easy to counteract and defend against if you have a decent, thinking, coach. Everyone knows whats coming and many teams just play on mistakes. There is little risk taking or original thought. 

With regards creativity I think you are miles out.  Even going back to just pre SL days all teams had original moves which they used getting on for every set. Many teams/coaches used to come out with something different every week . You don't even see a run around now and just forget any moves from a scrum. We used to practice these for a large part of the training sessions. Nowadays I could sit and predict what is going to happen set to set, tackle to tackle, kick chase to kick chase. If something unpredictable does happen it's a big occasion! All teams play very similarly and the ones that have broken the mould as mentioned elsewhere the Cas team of couple seasons ago, Leeds and Saints have had great success which you would have thought would embolden other coaches but it sadly hasn't.  Playing and coaching by numbers is not the way RL is going to crack it.

Depth and creativity from only 94.

 

 

Edited by Marty Funkhouser
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, scotchy1 said:

The speed of the defensive line would easily be on the first receiver as he got the ball unless he was stood really deep in which case the defensive line would be already set and passed the gain line before he has even received the ball.

Just think about what you are saying and how that works. Thinking is so stifled because the game is currently played a certain way.  

Attacking line - deep. Defensive line - initially straight but further they all have to move they more ragged they become - watch any RL game to observe this. Entropy in action.

A good player/team playing this way wants them to come on quickly hence the art of drawing a defence to you. They might get to the first man quickish but we are talking about half backs been first man not props and they will not get to the 2nd or 3rd or more man quickly at all hence we now have a ragged defensive line with gaps to be exploited. Occasionally defence wins and you lose yards, this happened countless times in pre SL days, watch games for the evidence.  However mostly the attack will make similar amounts as they do now or come up with line breaks and tries but from far more differing points on the field.

One of the  greatest tries I have seen was Cliff Lyons at Old Trafford in 1990, he got the ball initially at perhaps 3rd man having started 20 yards back from the play the ball before it went through countless hands before getting back to him to finish. The try could never have happened with a flat attacking line.

Some other examples contained herein:

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Marty Funkhouser said:

Why would you always want to hold a defence in place and play around it...like playing with one arm. There was an art in bring a defence onto you and exploiting the space behind, and it was a great spectacle with vastly more ball movement. Take a look at some more pre 96 matches and look at the depths of the attacking lines....there was good reason for this.All in the depths of winter too.

The main gripe I have with the thinking of the last 10 years at least is that has gone to pretty much coaching by numbers. There is little to no originality. Sometimes you could swaps the shirts on either team with noticing a difference in how they play.  And that is from youth up to SL. Talking to some youth coaches the frustration is apparent but they daren't/won't go against the Groupthink.

It is all out the back to the full back to do his miss pass to the wing (or to Sneyd to kick to opposite corner if you are Hull). I personally think it is so easy to counteract and defend against if you have a decent, thinking, coach. Everyone knows whats coming and many teams just play on mistakes. There is little risk taking or original thought. 

With regards creativity I think you are miles out.  Even going back to just pre SL days all teams had original moves which they used getting on for every set. Many teams/coaches used to come out with something different every week . You don't even see a run around now and just forget any moves from a scrum. We used to practice these for a large part of the training sessions. Nowadays I could sit and predict what is going to happen set to set, tackle to tackle, kick chase to kick chase. If something unpredictable does happen it's a big occasion! All teams play very similarly and the ones that have broken the mould as mentioned elsewhere the Cas team of couple seasons ago, Leeds and Saints have had great success which you would have thought would embolden other coaches but it sadly hasn't.  Playing and coaching by numbers is not the way RL is going to crack it.

Depth and creativity from only 94.

 

 

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 03/04/2020 at 19:25, Hela Wigmen said:

Seen that he’s proposing that once the isolation is lifted, we change to a game of four fifteen minute quarters in order to get more games in and for adverts to fill more slots. 

If it brings more money in then it’s a great pragmatic temporary measure to bring more money into the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

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.

Tommy to your good self and Scotchy, what it seems you desire from an on-field spectacle is a bland defensive orientated structure exhibited by both teams, a lot like Bennet's recent "completion rate" no mistake brand of boring football.

What you both describe works, because the other team are usually aware of what is coming next, BUT there are times when it falls down for the defending team, that is when a team who is behind and decides to do something that had been given the name of "Champagne Football" which happens basically when the offensive team puts in a deeper attacking line, have a second and third phase supporting and they keep the ball alive, a lot of the time this throws a defence into disarray and tries are quite often scored resulting from a tactic "away from the norm" why should that be the case if a well structured defence can annul quite easily an expansive type of football as you both claim?

If both teams play to the same tactics which is the norm these days it results in a borefest, as you say modern day coaches are fearful for their livelihood and that shouts in volumes to me when I watch todays game in SL, their teams are seemingly fearful of making mistakes and backs are mainly passenger's just making up the number's in today's forward orientated game - that is why coaches play 4 forwards on the bench - the teams with the best 10 forwards to choose from each week usually wins.

 

Edited by Harry Stottle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Tommy to your good self and Scotchy, what it seems you desire from an on-field spectacle is a bland defensive orientated structure exhibited by both teams, a lot like Bennet's recent "completion rate" no mistake brand of boring football.

What you both describe works, because the other team are usually aware of what is coming next, BUT there are times when it falls down for the defending team, that is when a team who is behind and decides to do something that had been given the name of "Champagne Football" happens basically they put in a deeper attacking line, have a second and third phase supporting and they keep the ball alive and a lot of the time this throws a defence into disarray and tries are quite often scored resulting from a tactic "away from the norm" why should that be the case if a well structured defence can annul quite easily an expansive type of football?

If both teams play to the same tactics which is the norm these days it results in a borefest, as you say modern day coaches are fearful for their livelihood and that shouts in volumes to me when I watch todays game in SL, their teams are seemingly fearful of making mistakes and backs are mainly passenger's just making up the number's in today's forward orientated game - that is why coaches play 4 forwards on the bench - the teams with the best 10 forwards to choose each week usually wins.

 

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

An change to 60mins may actually do that as sides are neither relying on nor worried about defensive fatigue as much 

Exactly what I have been saying Scotchy re  the number of interchanges, they are utilised for defensive purposes, the shear number's of bringing on 'fresh' player's is stifling attacks, fatigue is important in the games offensive tactics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I have certainly said however that defence is now significantly more important and trained.

I will go along with trained more in the defence's aspect, but still the overriding factor which allows for the formulation and manipulation of defencive structures from those of yesteryear is the number of allowed interchanges, to coin a phrase "it is a completely different ball game" they could not possibly use the same tactics and strategies with just 2 substitutions, can you not comprehend that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...