Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
The Future is League

6 again rule and 1 ref a big hit for the NRL

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Celt said:

"The likes of..."

You got some other examples?

If so I would love to see them.

Trent's piece was brilliant, and I have saved it and use it to show people about RL etc etc, but it seems to be trotted out all the time by people.... And I can't find much comparable stuff from other coaches.

If you could give me a few more examples it would be really helpful.

 

I've seen Ian Watson do a very good piece before. I agree that some players are better than others (Brough I seem to recall is pretty good)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DoubleD said:

I've seen Ian Watson do a very good piece before. I agree that some players are better than others (Brough I seem to recall is pretty good)

Thanks - will have a root about for Watson's one.

As we can see from your response, these nuggets are few and far between. 

This kind of reinforces the stereotype that RL is a simple game for simple people etc etc.


Rugby League: Alive and Handling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Dunbar said:

Matt Elliot does a reasonable job in the 'coaches corner' part of the NRL.com website.

https://www.nrl.com/tv/shows/coaches-corner/

He does indeed mate. Thanks. I didn't' mention his stuff, as he is miles behind Trent i find (in terms of detail), and also it seems to have died a death since last year.

Still - worth a mention i agree.


Rugby League: Alive and Handling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Celt said:

Thanks - will have a root about for Watson's one.

As we can see from your response, these nuggets are few and far between. 

This kind of reinforces the stereotype that RL is a simple game for simple people etc etc.

The best analyst to regularly appear on TV here was Brian Smith who, when he coached Hull FC, partnered Clive Tyldesley on Granada`s RL coverage. This was about 30 years ago and I have not heard anything as good since.

Trent Robinson at the touch screen is more illuminating than in a general discussion because of the specific visual illustration of his analysis. For the same reason a forensic pundit on TV commentaries can be similarly effective, but the lead commentator has to also be clued up to make it so.

There was a brief period in the nineties when Clive moved to the BBC for Soccer coverage. Which had me dreaming of his becoming their RL commentator. What a difference that could have made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, DoubleD said:

It doesn't help that the commentators over here are not very articulate or knowledgeable

The philosophical argument put by philologists is that the more extensive your vocabulary, the better your understanding of the world around you. A narrow vocabulary limits the ability to recognise, and the desire to look for, greater complexity. 

Even our more experienced, successful players and coaches struggle to communicate their knowledge. It could be a sound investment if the RFL sent the more prominent ones back to college.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Celt said:

He does indeed mate. Thanks. I didn't' mention his stuff, as he is miles behind Trent i find (in terms of detail), and also it seems to have died a death since last year.

Still - worth a mention i agree.

Jonny Lomax pieces are usually good. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Phil Gould nails it:

 
Quote

 

 
Same rules for these two teams as every other team. Same with Panthers and Storm last night. No blowouts in either game. No easy points. Great attack and desperate defensive efforts. Can’t blame rules for big scores. Blame sub-standard teams.

 

 
  • Like 1

?

Quote

The dominant ideas in society are always and everywhere the ideas of the ruling class. And always and everywhere they portray us as stupid, untrustworthy with bad motives. Show us respect sir. We gave you everything progressive there is. We gave you democracy. We demand some too.

 
Eddie Demsey RMT
 
Quote

There were 17.4m people who voted to leave the European Union.

"Any attempt to try to cast their vote aside, as if they didn’t mean it or didn’t understand the consequences, whereas everybody else did, is a bit of a slur on the individuals who took the time to vote, many of them for the first time

Ian Lavery - Labour party chair  - 29th March 2019

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/06/2020 at 18:38, DoubleD said:

I've seen Ian Watson do a very good piece before. I agree that some players are better than others (Brough I seem to recall is pretty good)

Kevin Brown was always good when i saw him do it.. 

If you watch the NFL coverage on SKY and a bit on the BBC highlights they are really good at showing the intricate nature of plays and would love to see that more ( i know there is more time to look at these things in an NFL show with the stop start nature of the game but their analysis is fantastic)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, RP London said:

Kevin Brown was always good when i saw him do it.. 

If you watch the NFL coverage on SKY and a bit on the BBC highlights they are really good at showing the intricate nature of plays and would love to see that more ( i know there is more time to look at these things in an NFL show with the stop start nature of the game but their analysis is fantastic)

There`s an element of Parkinson`s law about NFL coverage. That is, with an hour of action spread across 3 to 4 hours, the perceived intricacy expands to the level required to fill the available time. American sports, like their entertainment industry, are brilliant at projecting themselves. Would NFL analysts be as plausible if they spoke like Barrie McDermott?

Not saying the emperor has no clothes. Just not quite so elaborately attired.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, unapologetic pedant said:

There`s an element of Parkinson`s law about NFL coverage. That is, with an hour of action spread across 3 to 4 hours, the perceived intricacy expands to the level required to fill the available time. American sports, like their entertainment industry, are brilliant at projecting themselves. Would NFL analysts be as plausible if they spoke like Barrie McDermott?

Not saying the emperor has no clothes. Just not quite so elaborately attired.

While i agree with part of that (as i pointed out pretty much what you said in my original post, the stop start nature of the game lends itself to heavy analysis) the game is also an intricate game with the different plays designed specifically and each player with a job to do within it. For me there are still good and bad pundits within the coverage and Osi and Jason Bell are much better than some of those on SKY, they are also extremely charismatic and explain it with great detail but also zeal. With regards talking like Barrie McDermott i find him difficult because i dont think he explains it well so no they wouldnt be as plausible if they didnt explain it well, if we're talking accent then i think they would, there are plenty that do within RL circles. 

The point of me bringing NFL in is they use technology well, they have charismatic people explaining intricate plays etc. We wouldnt need to do it as much as they do as we dont have the space to fill (as i previously said) but we need charismatic people doing it, we need them explained well. The BBC can do this for the NFL and do it well, I dont understand why those producing the RL highlights show dont do it better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, RP London said:

While i agree with part of that (as i pointed out pretty much what you said in my original post, the stop start nature of the game lends itself to heavy analysis) the game is also an intricate game with the different plays designed specifically and each player with a job to do within it. For me there are still good and bad pundits within the coverage and Osi and Jason Bell are much better than some of those on SKY, they are also extremely charismatic and explain it with great detail but also zeal. With regards talking like Barrie McDermott i find him difficult because i dont think he explains it well so no they wouldnt be as plausible if they didnt explain it well, if we're talking accent then i think they would, there are plenty that do within RL circles. 

The point of me bringing NFL in is they use technology well, they have charismatic people explaining intricate plays etc. We wouldnt need to do it as much as they do as we dont have the space to fill (as i previously said) but we need charismatic people doing it, we need them explained well. The BBC can do this for the NFL and do it well, I dont understand why those producing the RL highlights show dont do it better.

Broadcasters are locked into an unshakeable view that RL is simple and hence not susceptible to analysis. This stems from the culture of our heartland communities not the game itself. The NFL`s "charismatic people" are products of American society. Our ex-player pundits have all the charisma of a sausage roll.

Mark Chapman presents both RL and NFL for the BBC. His assumption of the complexity of NRL is reinforced by their ex-players, his assumption of the simplicity of RL is reinforced by our ex-players.

An instance in the 2017 challenge cup final encapsulates this. The first try came from a Tommy Leuluai kick on play 5. Had it been play 6, it would have been straight down the Hull winger`s throat, but with this player still up in the line, the kick found grass, was reclaimed by Wigan, and Bateman scored. The key tactical point of the kick, the reason why it resulted in a try, was that it was on play 5. The commentary team, and the half-time pundits, neither mentioned nor even noticed it (apart from a brief, tentative comment from Jonathan Davies). All we had was John Kear wittering about backspin on the ball. Can you imagine NFL commentators being unaware of the significance of whether a play was third or fourth down?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, RP London said:

While i agree with part of that (as i pointed out pretty much what you said in my original post, the stop start nature of the game lends itself to heavy analysis) the game is also an intricate game with the different plays designed specifically and each player with a job to do within it. For me there are still good and bad pundits within the coverage and Osi and Jason Bell are much better than some of those on SKY, they are also extremely charismatic and explain it with great detail but also zeal. With regards talking like Barrie McDermott i find him difficult because i dont think he explains it well so no they wouldnt be as plausible if they didnt explain it well, if we're talking accent then i think they would, there are plenty that do within RL circles. 

The point of me bringing NFL in is they use technology well, they have charismatic people explaining intricate plays etc. We wouldnt need to do it as much as they do as we dont have the space to fill (as i previously said) but we need charismatic people doing it, we need them explained well. The BBC can do this for the NFL and do it well, I dont understand why those producing the RL highlights show dont do it better.

I used to think it was all about each team just picking a play randomly and going with it, then I watched some programme in the lead up to a superbowl and the expert went over plays in the semi finals, showing how each play was set to lead to another then another with an aim to exploit some defensive weakness they had identified with the player talking about their role, the detail was incredible, each player had a specific role in each play, then about 7 downs later they got the touchdown it had all been planned for. I was gobsmacked just how much information the players had to handle, down to which shoulder to lead with in the tackle, which way to move them, even one of them had to contact a player, move him a certain way then release him to make them think they had the run on him. Honestly it was mind blowing and I've a new appreciation of the sport.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't want to start a new thread for this so adding here.

We are definitely seeing teams more prepared to concede a six again early in the tackle count as the penalty is less severe (i.e. fewer repeat tackles than conceding later in the count) and the ability to slow a team down and gain some ascendency in defence.

But what is a bit of an anomaly is conceding six again on the first play of a 7 tackle set from a 20 metre restart.

As the first tackle is tackle zero then a team conceding 6 again are not being penalized at all... i.e. the first tackle on a six again is tackle 1 and the second tackle of a 7 tackle set is also tackle 1. So exactly the same outcome with or without the six again call.

As a fast 20m restart is often a good play as the defence is broken then every team will surely slow the first tackle down and concede the six again as they will not suffer any negative consequences

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

Didn't want to start a new thread for this so adding here.

We are definitely seeing teams more prepared to concede a six again early in the tackle count as the penalty is less severe (i.e. fewer repeat tackles than conceding later in the count) and the ability to slow a team down and gain some ascendency in defence.

But what is a bit of an anomaly is conceding six again on the first play of a 7 tackle set from a 20 metre restart.

As the first tackle is tackle zero then a team conceding 6 again are not being penalized at all... i.e. the first tackle on a six again is tackle 1 and the second tackle of a 7 tackle set is also tackle 1. So exactly the same outcome with or without the six again call.

As a fast 20m restart is often a good play as the defence is broken then every team will surely slow the first tackle down and concede the six again as they will not suffer any negative consequences

Somewhere in the vast tangled undergrowth of the six-again, set restart related threads, someone did point out this special case anomaly.

It`s one for the sin bin. No other option. Wish people would say "zero tackle", not "7-tackle set".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, unapologetic pedant said:

Wish people would say "zero tackle", not "7-tackle set".

Why is that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

Why is that?

I`ve been through this before, but I`ll plough through it again.

For reasons of recognition and consistency, I think it`s important to preserve the number 6 in RL terminology. When we are looking to establish around the world a clear identity, distinct from RU, conveying the nature of the PTB and limited possession is crucial. If we muck around with the figure, it potentially blurs the message.

Also, it keeps the Tackle game in line with non-contact forms, Tag and Touch, which I see as useful development tools in building mass participation and awareness. The sort which will happen under the aegis of RL clubs, rather than separately as is mostly the case currently.

And, when a team regather after an opposition error and use the ball extensively, we don`t describe it as a "7-tackle set". We say "zero tackle". No reason why that term can`t be used for a 20m restart. Most Aussie and NZ refs already say "zero coming" at the point of the tap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, unapologetic pedant said:

I`ve been through this before, but I`ll plough through it again.

For reasons of recognition and consistency, I think it`s important to preserve the number 6 in RL terminology. When we are looking to establish around the world a clear identity, distinct from RU, conveying the nature of the PTB and limited possession is crucial. If we muck around with the figure, it potentially blurs the message.

Also, it keeps the Tackle game in line with non-contact forms, Tag and Touch, which I see as useful development tools in building mass participation and awareness. The sort which will happen under the aegis of RL clubs, rather than separately as is mostly the case currently.

And, when a team regather after an opposition error and use the ball extensively, we don`t describe it as a "7-tackle set". We say "zero tackle". No reason why that term can`t be used for a 20m restart. Most Aussie and NZ refs already say "zero coming" at the point of the tap.

OK.  I think you are personally overstating the value of this language and consistency but I understand your logic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the moment it seems our refs have a distinct reluctance to use this rule 


"Freedom without socialism is privilege and injustice, socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality" - Mikhail Bakunin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/06/2020 at 08:27, dkw said:

I used to think it was all about each team just picking a play randomly and going with it, then I watched some programme in the lead up to a superbowl and the expert went over plays in the semi finals, showing how each play was set to lead to another then another with an aim to exploit some defensive weakness they had identified with the player talking about their role, the detail was incredible, each player had a specific role in each play, then about 7 downs later they got the touchdown it had all been planned for. I was gobsmacked just how much information the players had to handle, down to which shoulder to lead with in the tackle, which way to move them, even one of them had to contact a player, move him a certain way then release him to make them think they had the run on him. Honestly it was mind blowing and I've a new appreciation of the sport.

I used to play Gridiron, and people used to look at me in disbelief when I described it as "chess with people"....the further you get into it, the more you see that it's a true analogy.

 

As for set restarts, I'm still catching up with watching all the recorded NRL games (think I'm up to around mid-july) but it seems to work very well....still some slugfest games but overall much more free-flowing, and yellow cards handed out for professional fouls when needed, something that needs to happen more in SL IMHO.

 

In contrast, the SL games so far look to still have much messier rucks and are slower...     

  • Like 1

cru....Cru.....CRUSADERS!!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watching Leeds v Saints and screaming at the screen “six again ffs!!!”

Why aren’t our refs using it? 


"Freedom without socialism is privilege and injustice, socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality" - Mikhail Bakunin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The positives outweigh the negatives , the pace and flow of the game really are something . It’s like it’s on FF at times . I still think at times if there’s a restart in zero tackle or tackle 1 it’s no real penalty at all , and in front of the sticks and you’re level or 2 in front you see holding down and backing the defence with no chance to kick at goal 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Phil said:

Watching Leeds v Saints and screaming at the screen “six again ffs!!!”

Why aren’t our refs using it? 

They are. You just don't agree with their decisions. Is this also new?


Sport, amongst other things, is a dream-world offering escape from harsh reality and the disturbing prospect of change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DavidM said:

The positives outweigh the negatives , the pace and flow of the game really are something . It’s like it’s on FF at times . I still think at times if there’s a restart in zero tackle or tackle 1 it’s no real penalty at all , and in front of the sticks and you’re level or 2 in front you see holding down and backing the defence with no chance to kick at goal 

It looks good on TV but I feel that it gives too much advantage to the team with the slight edge. The adoption of this rule combined with the removal of scrums will pretty well eliminate any chances of surprise outcomes, reinforcing a criticism of the sport compared with such as soccer.


Sport, amongst other things, is a dream-world offering escape from harsh reality and the disturbing prospect of change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Blind side johnny said:

They are. You just don't agree with their decisions. Is this also new?

Nah I’m a neutral in that game, I just think the Aussies are using it more 


"Freedom without socialism is privilege and injustice, socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality" - Mikhail Bakunin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There’s a few whispers starting in the NRL about the 6 again rule and pace of play contributing to injuries . I don’t know about the correlation there but it is getting mentioned . Are we seeing more injuries due to the rule changes or is it just the nature of the game 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...