Jump to content

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, Dunbar said:

I wonder how new people to our sport are supposed to understand the player positions and their responsibilities if we can't agree.

It does bring me back to one of my real bugbears though which is the squad numbers rather than positional numbers we use now.

Growing up I would watch as much Rugby League as I could and even though I didn't know all the players I would be able to see the contribution and tactics based on the numbers.

I would watch the 6 link with the backs and provide the skill and invention in the team and I began to learn what made up a great stand off. This is lost to newcomers who don't know what position a with player 22 or 35 on their back is supposed to be playing.

It was also lost when players numbered 14, 15, 31 or 40 came off the bench in the days of the numbers 1-13 matching the positions within a team.  The game needs a numbering system where everyone's number relates to the parts of a team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 103
  • Created
  • Last Reply
15 hours ago, Blind side johnny said:

The actual difference is in the number of fluid ounces in a pint - 14 in theirs and 16 in ours. In this modern day and age all USA children know that there are two pints to a litre, so that may make things simpler for them. It will no doubt become a part of our new trade deal with the USA come 2021.

No, no, no.  20 fluid ounces in a pint.  A gallon is 10 lbs of water, which is 160 oz.  8 pints in a gallon, so 20 ounces in a pint.

"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Big Picture said:

It was also lost when players numbered 14, 15, 31 or 40 came off the bench in the days of the numbers 1-13 matching the positions within a team.  The game needs a numbering system where everyone's number relates to the parts of a team.

Why ?

"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Griff said:

No, no, no.  20 fluid ounces in a pint.  A gallon is 10 lbs of water, which is 160 oz.  8 pints in a gallon, so 20 ounces in a pint.

Yes, sorry. Pints and pounds getting mixed up in my addled locked down brain.

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Griff said:

Why ?

I presume you're asking why the subs' numbers should also relate to the positions within a team?  The answer is that so newcomers to the game will know where those players normally play easily once they understand the numbering system and not be left guessing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Rupert Prince said:

Standing off the scrum half...

No, one half at the scrum and one standing off it.

Sorry if this appears stand-offish.

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Big Picture said:

I presume you're asking why the subs' numbers should also relate to the positions within a team?  The answer is that so newcomers to the game will know where those players normally play easily once they understand the numbering system and not be left guessing.

Not just the subs, no.  In fact the subs would be the most pointless.

Well, now we don't have scrums - temporarily at least - I'm baffled to understand how anyone could draw conclusions from the numbers on players' backs, let alone "easily".

"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We all want more people to enjoy our game and yet we are almost deliberately going out of our way to make it hard for them to understand the positions and the tactics and responsibilities that come from their roles.

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

"If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

We all want more people to enjoy our game and yet we are almost deliberately going out of our way to make it hard for them to understand the positions and the tactics and responsibilities that come from their roles.

Exactly. It's messy and confusing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Dunbar said:

We all want more people to enjoy our game and yet we are almost deliberately going out of our way to make it hard for them to understand the positions and the tactics and responsibilities that come from their roles.

Do you need to do that to enjoy the game ?

Do you believe that everyone does ?

Why not just sit back and watch the running and tackling ?  

You don't need to be an analyst.

"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Griff said:

Do you need to do that to enjoy the game ?

Do you believe that everyone does ?

Why not just sit back and watch the running and tackling ?  

You don't need to be an analyst.

Everyone will have a different way of enjoying the sport.

Some will just enjoy watching people run and tackle while others will want to see how the game plan and the tactics unfold. For the latter, understanding the role of each position and their responsibilities is important. 

The squad numbers, rather than the positional numbers, don't really help people to understand the roles and the responsibilities of each player.

I am ok because I have played and watched Rugby League for 35 years and I know almost all the players and what positions they play. I am thinking about those who are new to the game and want to learn more (i.e. me 35 years ago).

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

"If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.