The game's gone soft?

[Dunbar]

A nice couple of tackles in here to help make a decison, Pangai on Klemmer and Watene-Zelezniak's on Matt Moylan make your teeth wobble just watching them...

https://www.nrl.com/news/2020/06/21/choose-who-should-win-tackle-of-the-week-round-6/

...and one attempted tackle on Maika Sivo by James Tedesco as well (although not quite as successful)

https://www.nrl.com/news/2020/06/21/choose-who-should-win-try-of-the-week-round-6/

[17 stone giant]

Tackle B because it stopped a try, and I felt it was slightly better than C. The big hits look good, but do they actually achieve that much? The players still retained the ball.

[Dunbar]

6 minutes ago, 17 stone giant said:

Tackle B because it stopped a try, and I felt it was slightly better than C. The big hits look good, but do they actually achieve that much? The players still retained the ball.

They may not achieve that much (although physical dominance is a part of the sport) but I love a big tackle... much more enjoyable than the wrestling.

[DavidM]

I know it’s your job , and  it failed but getting in the way of Sivo on the charge is courageous ! No hiding place for fullbacks

[Dunbar]

I have to say the last couple of rounds of the NRL has felt much more like the sport it used to be.

I don't know how much of an impact the new 6 again law has had or whether the game is just being played a little bit differently but it really does feels like the game is moving away from the wresting tactics and back towards the collisions that we used to see.

As well as 'proper' tackling being more entertaining than the three man wrestles, it also give the advantage of the game opening up a bit more as well.

I must admit I was getting to the point where I was finding things a little monotonous but It has been a good few years since I have enjoyed rugby day to day as much as I have the NRL in recent weeks - it is fast, hard and skillful.  Just as Rugby League should be.

[GeordieSaint]

Went for WZ on the tackle and the Sharks try...

... has Tedesco woken up yet?

[DavidM]

50 minutes ago, GeordieSaint said:

Went for WZ on the tackle and the Sharks try...

... has Tedesco woken up yet?

Has Moylan found his top set yet ? That one was a cracker . As Wally Lewis says “get that into ya like knowledge “

[Number 16]

3 hours ago, 17 stone giant said:

The big hits look good, but do they actually achieve that much? The players still retained the ball.

I'd be interested to see the stats in both attack and defence for a player for 5 / 10.. minutes after they've been monstered. My guess is the stats often take a downturn, even if often slight. 

[Marauder]

7 hours ago, 17 stone giant said:

Tackle B because it stopped a try, and I felt it was slightly better than C. The big hits look good, but do they actually achieve that much? The players still retained the ball.

After a big hit the rest of the teams defence is lifted in my experience not sure about yourself but I loved them

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

7 hours ago, DavidM said:

I know it’s your job , and  it failed but getting in the way of Sivo on the charge is courageous ! No hiding place for fullbacks

That's why I think Hardaker is good in back play. Big enough to at least slow anyone down. Trbojevic is the same

 

[Bring back the Boyd]

20 hours ago, Dunbar said:

I have to say the last couple of rounds of the NRL has felt much more like the sport it used to be.

I don't know how much of an impact the new 6 again law has had or whether the game is just being played a little bit differently but it really does feels like the game is moving away from the wresting tactics and back towards the collisions that we used to see.

As well as 'proper' tackling being more entertaining than the three man wrestles, it also give the advantage of the game opening up a bit more as well.

I must admit I was getting to the point where I was finding things a little monotonous but It has been a good few years since I have enjoyed rugby day to day as much as I have the NRL in recent weeks - it is fast, hard and skillful.  Just as Rugby League should be.

I fully agree with the sentiment of the last paragraph. I know professional sport is about results but it is also about entertainment. Over the last few years the game has become somewhat robotic—- 5 drives— including a couple of scoots— followed by a kick and hope for the best— in short, boring. Even when a team is losing, they stick to the same game plan. The new 6 again rule seems to have opened the game up again and I hope we will start to see more off the cuff rugby with flair players being encouraged to play what’s in front of them. The game’s still tough but I want to see excitement, not wars of attrition 

[unapologetic pedant]

On 22/06/2020 at 14:10, Dunbar said:

I have to say the last couple of rounds of the NRL has felt much more like the sport it used to be.

I don't know how much of an impact the new 6 again law has had or whether the game is just being played a little bit differently but it really does feels like the game is moving away from the wresting tactics and back towards the collisions that we used to see.

As well as 'proper' tackling being more entertaining than the three man wrestles, it also give the advantage of the game opening up a bit more as well.

I must admit I was getting to the point where I was finding things a little monotonous but It has been a good few years since I have enjoyed rugby day to day as much as I have the NRL in recent weeks - it is fast, hard and skillful.  Just as Rugby League should be.

Still waiting for someone to spell out clearly how "wrestling" differs from good tackling technique, and why they feel such an aversion to it. The game at elite level should never stray too far from how it`s played at grass roots. For younger juniors "wrestling" is part of the rough and tumble enjoyment of RL. Many of them would never be allowed to play if tackling were reduced to bashing each other.

If every play were a monster collision there would be far less variety and intelligence in RL defence. We would be more vulnerable to the charge that RL is not much more than big lumps smashing into each other. A player only has to get these attempted big shots slightly wrong to risk causing serious problems, as Adrian Morley regularly proved.

Also, too much is being read into the effects of six-again. If there were a paucity of big hits last year I must have been seeing things. My most common hallucination took the form of Jorge Taufua.

 

[Cerulean]

5 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said:

Still waiting for someone to spell out clearly how "wrestling" differs from good tackling technique, and why they feel such an aversion to it....

 

Tackling should, for many obvious reasons, be about putting the ball-carrier on the ground more or less as quickly and efficiently as possible. Wrestling techniques are used to delay the ball-carrying arm from touching the ground, so that once the player has been wrapped up, the defence can be set. Some of the results are:

1) the tackle is usually slowed down by the wrestle

2) the best way for the ball-carrier to defeat this is to get himself to the ground as quickly as possible, preferably on his front, stand and play the ball quickly, creating more runs from acting-halfback

3) more upright tackling, more head contact, more knee injuries as the weight of three tacklers eventually tips the player over

4) more penalties at the play-the ball

5) an “arms race” in recruitment, training, selection, for larger and stronger players

 

Each of these issues produce a cascade of other effects.

[Dunbar]

7 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said:

Still waiting for someone to spell out clearly how "wrestling" differs from good tackling technique, and why they feel such an aversion to it. The game at elite level should never stray too far from how it`s played at grass roots. For younger juniors "wrestling" is part of the rough and tumble enjoyment of RL. Many of them would never be allowed to play if tackling were reduced to bashing each other.

If every play were a monster collision there would be far less variety and intelligence in RL defence. We would be more vulnerable to the charge that RL is not much more than big lumps smashing into each other. A player only has to get these attempted big shots slightly wrong to risk causing serious problems, as Adrian Morley regularly proved.

Also, too much is being read into the effects of six-again. If there were a paucity of big hits last year I must have been seeing things. My most common hallucination took the form of Jorge Taufua.

 

As the successful clubs introduced jiu-jitsu experts into their coaching ranks, many of the techniques in the tackle became about winning the body position... both upright and on the ground. This meant much of the technique was about finding holds, grappling and using levers to find dominant positions. I won't bother linking them here but a 2 minute Google search will find you multiple videos on wrestling techniques and drills for Rugby League. 

Of course this was all about controlling the ruck speed which meant controlling the speed of the play the ball which meant a dominant defence. With success came imitation and therefore the techniques permeated around the game.

Of course there were still traditional tackles involved.  And what I mean by this is one or more players stopping the progress of the ball carrier with physical contact and the collision bringing the player to the ground. The more dominant the collision the greater reward for the defence.  In modern day Rugby, this tended to happen more on the edges where there was more space and less player congestion.  The middle tended to be where the wrestle prevalved. Your mention of George Taufua is testament to this.

I am not going to tell people what they should be enjoying but my preference was for when the tackle area was more focussed on collisions than wrestling. 

Now, I am not saying that magically everything is back to the style of play in the 1980's but what the six again call has done is introduce a punishment for teams that look to continually slow the ruck and so some of the wrestling will be removed. I advocate this as a good thing, but of course everyone is perfectly entitled to their own opinion. 

[Cerulean]

57 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

....I am not going to tell people what they should be enjoying but my preference was for when the tackle area was more focussed on collisions than wrestling....

You are right: we each enjoy witnessing different skills and attributes, and hope, when we watch a game, the aspects we find most entertaining are visible.

My feeling is that we focus too much on the collision aspect. The best tackler I ever saw was Peter Smith - Featherstone and Great Britain. His tackle was not a collision, but a perfectly executed manoeuvre usually around the legs, usually by himself, which put the man on the ground in a fraction of a second. And there are many examples, particularly smaller players who had wonderful tackling technique which was rarely a collision. Deryck Fox comes to mind, as an example.

[Dunbar]

51 minutes ago, Cerulean said:

You are right: we each enjoy witnessing different skills and attributes, and hope, when we watch a game, the aspects we find most entertaining are visible.

My feeling is that we focus too much on the collision aspect. The best tackler I ever saw was Peter Smith - Featherstone and Great Britain. His tackle was not a collision, but a perfectly executed manoeuvre usually around the legs, usually by himself, which put the man on the ground in a fraction of a second. And there are many examples, particularly smaller players who had wonderful tackling technique which was rarely a collision. Deryck Fox comes to mind, as an example.

Let me clarify my wording a little.

When I use the word 'collision', I am using it to differentiate from the wrestle style tackle which usually looks like two men holding and grappling a player around the arms/upper body before a third goes low to complete the tackle.

A collision tackle in my mind is one where a single or several players brings a player down quickly... this could be legs, waist or a 'big hit' but I am not saying every tackle has to be such a hit.  The tackles you describe above would fall into my category of collision.

[Cerulean]

2 hours ago, Dunbar said:

Let me clarify my wording a little.

When I use the word 'collision', I am using it to differentiate from the wrestle style tackle which usually looks like two men holding and grappling a player around the arms/upper body before a third goes low to complete the tackle.

A collision tackle in my mind is one where a single or several players brings a player down quickly... this could be legs, waist or a 'big hit' but I am not saying every tackle has to be such a hit.  The tackles you describe above would fall into my category of collision.

Apologies. I understood you use of the term: I was lazily using a portion of your post to highlight a point of my own. Sorry.

[unapologetic pedant]

19 hours ago, Cerulean said:

Tackling should, for many obvious reasons, be about putting the ball-carrier on the ground more or less as quickly and efficiently as possible. Wrestling techniques are used to delay the ball-carrying arm from touching the ground, so that once the player has been wrapped up, the defence can be set. Some of the results are:

1) the tackle is usually slowed down by the wrestle

2) the best way for the ball-carrier to defeat this is to get himself to the ground as quickly as possible, preferably on his front, stand and play the ball quickly, creating more runs from acting-halfback

3) more upright tackling, more head contact, more knee injuries as the weight of three tacklers eventually tips the player over

4) more penalties at the play-the ball

5) an “arms race” in recruitment, training, selection, for larger and stronger players

 

Each of these issues produce a cascade of other effects.

 As with all the rules of the game this is about finding the best balance between attack and defence. Just to run through your points.

1) I regard "the wrestle" as good technique, often following a good read and good footwork, and a well-deserved win for the defence. Clearly other posters don`t like it and, as they have said, this is a subjective judgement. 

2) There are ample ways for the attacking team to avoid the ball-carrier losing the initial contact with good play of their own. If they execute better plays, get their angles and timing right, the ball-carrier can squeeze between defenders and find his front more quickly. It`s the poor-standard one-out hit ups that are rightly punished by a hold-up and slow PTB.

Additionally, if despite losing the contact, the ball-carrier can get an offload away this has more value in a 3-man tackle than in a 1-man tackle. The ban on more-than-one-tackler ball-stealing specifically recognises and encourages this.

3) Have to admit this is a powerful point. There are more times these days where you notice the ball-carrier`s leg in an awkward position and wince as all the weight comes down. Would still say though that a smart player can limit the danger. It happens more at lower levels of the game where less experienced players allow themselves to get flat-footed.

4) Not necessarily. If multiple tacklers have total control and thus the ruck is slower, the PTB is likely to be cleaner with less need for the ref`s attention. Conversely, even a good one-on-one tackle, unless it`s dominant and wraps the upper body, leads to the ball-carrier finding the floor and then rising more quickly. If the tackler does not instantly release (having made a good tackle he feels entitled to hold on), then a mess and a penalty ensues.

 

[Cerulean]

4 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said:

 As with all the rules of the game this is about finding the best balance between attack and defence. Just to run through your points.

1) I regard "the wrestle" as good technique, often following a good read and good footwork, and a well-deserved win for the defence. Clearly other posters don`t like it and, as they have said, this is a subjective judgement. 

2) There are ample ways for the attacking team to avoid the ball-carrier losing the initial contact with good play of their own. If they execute better plays, get their angles and timing right, the ball-carrier can squeeze between defenders and find his front more quickly. It`s the poor-standard one-out hit ups that are rightly punished by a hold-up and slow PTB.

Additionally, if despite losing the contact, the ball-carrier can get an offload away this has more value in a 3-man tackle than in a 1-man tackle. The ban on more-than-one-tackler ball-stealing specifically recognises and encourages this.

3) Have to admit this is a powerful point. There are more times these days where you notice the ball-carrier`s leg in an awkward position and wince as all the weight comes down. Would still say though that a smart player can limit the danger. It happens more at lower levels of the game where less experienced players allow themselves to get flat-footed.

4) Not necessarily. If multiple tacklers have total control and thus the ruck is slower, the PTB is likely to be cleaner with less need for the ref`s attention. Conversely, even a good one-on-one tackle, unless it`s dominant and wraps the upper body, leads to the ball-carrier finding the floor and then rising more quickly. If the tackler does not instantly release (having made a good tackle he feels entitled to hold on), then a mess and a penalty ensues.

 

Thank you. An interesting, detailed, careful analysis.

It all seems - to me - too much emphasis on arcane details of the collision, the end of the tackle, and the play-the-ball, to the detriment of more thrilling aspects. But that’s my view: the game I enjoyed has gone and isn’t coming back, and that’s no one’s concern but mine.

Is the game becoming too soft? - the title of the thread - I believe it has become far too hard, the celebration of the impact, the wrestling which requires enormous amounts of gym work, “bulking up”, extreme strength, weight, power (all attributes, not skills), the shock of the collision, the increasing worry about whiplash and brain damage. It may be putting off youngsters who would enjoy running and passing and catching, and evading, and reading the field. Certainly, the numbers of kids starting and continuing the sport should be an enormous worry to those who care about the sport.