To scrum or not to scrum, that is the question

[The Rocket]

3 minutes ago, unapologetic pedant said:

 

The "simple game" notion is one that people want to believe. Not just from outside the game, inside too. It suits various cultural and media agendas.

If six-again and/or no scrums do produce more one-sided scorelines, this "simple game" problem will get worse. Already in the UK when a player is asked to account for a win, the "we wanted it more than them" platitude is often the best they can manage. Which does rather invite the conclusion that they "didn`t want it", should they lose the following week.

The distorted emphasis on the physical over the cerebral in RL ( because it`s a "simple game") makes people think that when their team loses the players aren`t trying hard enough. They are given no other frame of reference to understand what they`ve watched. If the margins of defeat become wider, greater will be the disgust at the lack of effort. The NRL, and even more so the RFL, are playing with fire if they go down this route without educating fans to appreciate the game in more depth.

This is mirrored in RL journalism. If someone has uncritically accepted that "League is a simple game...", their copy is easier to fill. An RL journalist is not required to understand the game, since it`s assumed there`s nothing much to understand by their employers. Thus, with no obligation to look more deeply, the crass negativity can flow unchecked. The stories about teams or individuals, being uncommitted, hapless, dissolute, inane, etc write themselves.

 

I honestly think that the problem over here just stems from the fact the vast majority of league players have a limited education and may not express themselves  as well as others. No matter how many Peter Sterlings or Cam Smiths or Daley Cherrry-Evans we put up, the vast majority of league players who front the cameras allow people to make these generalisations. And if they have an axe to grind with our sport it is an easy and cruel line to trot out.

As I said in my post to Prosenko for the comment that he made, that it in fact it says more about him and he does himself no favours to talk like that. There was an article by fitfzsimmons recently where  he described League players as "DUMB DUMB DUMB" like can you believe that. These things filter all the way down to even the kids who play the game.

And lets face it, is soccer or afl any more complicated than League , of course not.

There was a funny thing on the Footy show here today, with Freddy Fittler, who is a classic case of a bloke who is not stupid but just who has limited education was making a hash of the word `hypothesis` and last week he was getting mixed up with astrologers and astronomers who work at the Park`s Observatory.

Unrelated or maybe not unrelated note: Brian Smith used to provide the expert analysis on ABC Grandstand Rugby League for several years , 10 hours on saturdays and 8 on sundays of the best League coverage I have heard in my whole life. He was followed by Warren Ryan who was equally as good . And I should mention Brian Morrow the caller. ABC League coverage has gone border line `light entertainment` now and does not help the afore mentioned stereotype. I miss those fellows dearly on weekends.

 

 

[unapologetic pedant]

6 minutes ago, The Rocket said:

I honestly think that the problem over here just stems from the fact the vast majority of league players have a limited education and may not express themselves  as well as others. No matter how many Peter Sterlings or Cam Smiths or Daley Cherrry-Evans we put up, the vast majority of league players who front the cameras allow people to make these generalisations. And if they have an axe to grind with our sport it is an easy and cruel line to trot out.

As I said in my post to Prosenko for the comment that he made, that it in fact it says more about him and he does himself no favours to talk like that. There was an article by fitfzsimmons recently where  he described League players as "DUMB DUMB DUMB" like can you believe that. These things filter all the way down to even the kids who play the game.

And lets face it, is soccer or afl any more complicated than League , of course not.

There was a funny thing on the Footy show here today, with Freddy Fittler, who is a classic case of a bloke who is not stupid but just who has limited education was making a hash of the word `hypothesis` and last week he was getting mixed up with astrologers and astronomers who work at the Park`s Observatory.

Unrelated or maybe not unrelated note: Brian Smith used to provide the expert analysis on ABC Grandstand Rugby League for several years , 10 hours on saturdays and 8 on sundays of the best League coverage I have heard in my whole life. He was followed by Warren Ryan who was equally as good . And I should mention Brian Morrow the caller. ABC League coverage has gone border line `light entertainment` now and does not help the afore mentioned stereotype. I miss those fellows dearly on weekends.

 

 

I`ve mentioned Brian Smith`s punditry on a number of threads as the best I`ve ever heard on UK TV. It was when he was Hull FC coach (St. George was his next job), so about thirty years ago. Opened my eyes, even though I`d been watching the game by then for about a decade.

Curiously, his brother talks RL in a manner which is, let`s say, not quite as impressive.

[rlno1]

5 hours ago, The Rocket said:

One of their writers Adrian Prosenko said yesterday that ` League is a simple game played by simple men ` I fired him off a comment that even though they won`t put up I hope still goes over his desk.

Funny that such a simple game played by simple men could provide rugby union with so many coaches for their complex game.

I wonder what they see in the simple game.

[unapologetic pedant]

6 hours ago, The Rocket said:

I subscribe to the Herald on line and I didn`t even read that story because I think the Herald is having a bit of a two way bet with the League at the moment. `Cheif` sports writer that `#####` webster` spends as much time writing negative articles about League as positive ones. The sooner he goes the better,  Micheal Chamas is good.

But getting back to the articles , I don`t know what the exact stats are but as someone who watches and listens to a lot of League there are more than enough close games each week. So I think they are being a bit mischievous.

One of their writers Adrian Prosenko said yesterday that ` League is a simple game played by simple men ` I fired him off a comment that even though they won`t put up I hope still goes over his desk.

I don`t know if you aimed any pejoratives at Proszenko, but you could accept my advice about using eccentric alternatives.

When shallow nincompoops are flummoxed, it can hold their attention for longer than more prosaic vituperation.

[Man of Kent]

I like the no scrum rule but if they have to come back then perhaps they should only be an option - an option, not mandatory - to the attacking team in the opposition half. No scrums, for example, on your own 20m after a kick to touch. 

[unapologetic pedant]

1 hour ago, Man of Kent said:

I like the no scrum rule but if they have to come back then perhaps they should only be an option - an option, not mandatory - to the attacking team in the opposition half. No scrums, for example, on your own 20m after a kick to touch. 

Not for me. You don`t say whether teams would restart on their own 20m line with a tap or a PTB. I would be especially against the former. There`s something unattractively routine about a simple tap restart, where the player taking it meanders into contact against a full and fully-set defensive line. With a scrum, even if the first play is unambitious, there remains the different pattern afforded as it breaks up. This variety can still be evident on tackles 2 and 3.

[Man of Kent]

7 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said:

Not for me. You don`t say whether teams would restart on their own 20m line with a tap or a PTB. I would be especially against the former. There`s something unattractively routine about a simple tap restart, where the player taking it meanders into contact against a full and fully-set defensive line. With a scrum, even if the first play is unambitious, there remains the different pattern afforded as it breaks up. This variety can still be evident on tackles 2 and 3.

‘Throw in’ and tap seems more logical, to be honest. 

A scrum after a kick to touch is an anachronism in these days of uncontested scrums. 

[unapologetic pedant]

In games which don`t affect the top 8, the NRL are trialling rules this week that allow only nominated forwards to pack down, and replacing a scrum after a kick into touch with a handover.

"Pack down" is of course something of a misnomer. "Stand and bow their heads a bit in a designated area of the field" would be more accurate.

There was an alternative identified in this thread which could be summarised as - Non-feeding team barred from striking, only permitted to push. Half feeds own hooker, ball must make contact with hooker`s foot before it can be channelled out. - It`s mystifying why NRL administrators, officials, coaches, players, ex-players can`t convene to devise and trial something along these lines.

The new rule on nominated forwards is aimed ostensibly at "restoring credibility". It will do no such thing, since it`s clearly artificial. It ought to be apparent that rules which keep the ball in the scrum longer are the only authentic way to force teams to put enough weight into it.

[The Rocket]

5 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said:

In games which don`t affect the top 8, the NRL are trialling rules this week that allow only nominated forwards to pack down, and replacing a scrum after a kick into touch with a handover.

"Pack down" is of course something of a misnomer. "Stand and bow their heads a bit in a designated area of the field" would be more accurate.

There was an alternative identified in this thread which could be summarised as - Non-feeding team barred from striking, only permitted to push. Half feeds own hooker, ball must make contact with hooker`s foot before it can be channelled out. - It`s mystifying why NRL administrators, officials, coaches, players, ex-players can`t convene to devise and trial something along these lines.

The new rule on nominated forwards is aimed ostensibly at "restoring credibility". It will do no such thing, since it`s clearly artificial. It ought to be apparent that rules which keep the ball in the scrum longer are the only authentic way to force teams to put enough weight into it.

oh Ped, over here on your own, trying to do the right thing by using the correct thread.

Had a letter published in the LoveRugbyLeague mailbox today, have been in contact with the Editor over there, loves the idea, also knows the bloke who owns TouchTagRugby,  next stop Bill Harrigan and I need a contact at RLIF.

[Dunbar]

10 minutes ago, The Rocket said:

oh Pedo

!

[unapologetic pedant]

2 hours ago, Dunbar said:

!

I think several !s are called for here, Dunbo.

2 hours ago, The Rocket said:

oh Pedo, over here on your own, trying to do the right thing by using the correct thread.

Had a letter published in the LoveRugbyLeague mailbox today, have been in contact with the Editor over there, loves the idea, also knows the bloke who owns TouchTagRugby,  next stop Bill Harrigan and I need a contact at RLIF.

Oh Rocko, you came close to this a while back with "Ped", which set an alarm bell faintly a-ringing, knowing the Aussie fondness for nicknames. Maybe an edit might be in order, if possible.