Jump to content

Selling The Drama


Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, DC77 said:

Both codes are their own worst enemy.

Who on here cares if yawn is its own worst enemy? I find it intriguing how often that sport invades these pages to no real purpose.

I would rather watch football anytime and I have absolutely no interest in that. And they are not both codes, they're just one of many codes of football and as related to us as we are to the chimpanzees.

The selling of our drama should be the easiest thing in the world a compilation video of last minutes and theatrical moment from SL/NRL& Internationals at the end would do that in a moment. With one of those pithy three word phrases like "Never All Over!"

  • Like 1

2 warning points:kolobok_dirol:

#CorbynwasrightandFordesaidso!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


12 hours ago, DC77 said:

37 in 26...versus 23 in 29 (and for a top side). So it’s harder to score (not for a team, for individuals). With far less capacity for the individualist tries (Hanley, Offiah, Robinson, Tuigamala) scores are more spread out, more team based. 

Said previously, those four rampaging tries against England that made Lomu a star overnight, he ain’t scoring those tries today. Shut down, nullified in an increasingly attritional dominated game.

Both codes are their own worst enemy.

I am not disagreeing with your point that individual superstars are great for the game and the likes of Hanley, Offiah and Lomu were wonderful for their respective sports.

But I am not sure about the 'worst enemy' part.  Rugby players were always going to get stronger and faster as the focus on physical preparation evolved.  A player who is naturally gifted is not going to stand out as much as full time athletes put in the hours to get bridge the gap... it is a natural evolution of any sport.

The fact that modern teams score as many points as teams from previous era's show that despite the better organized defences, teams are skilful enough to score... and the fact we have the Makinson's, Addo-Carr's, Johnstone's and Papenhuyzen's of this world scoring tries with skill and pace shows that is not lost to the modern game.

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dunbar said:

I am not disagreeing with your point that individual superstars are great for the game and the likes of Hanley, Offiah and Lomu were wonderful for their respective sports.

But I am not sure about the 'worst enemy' part.  Rugby players were always going to get stronger and faster as the focus on physical preparation evolved.  A player who is naturally gifted is not going to stand out as much as full time athletes put in the hours to get bridge the gap... it is a natural evolution of any sport.

The fact that modern teams score as many points as teams from previous era's show that despite the better organized defences, teams are skilful enough to score... and the fact we have the Makinson's, Addo-Carr's, Johnstone's and Papenhuyzen's of this world scoring tries with skill and pace shows that is not lost to the modern game.

Worst enemy in the sense that what made (and still makes) players stars is being allowed to stand out in games, like Hanley, Offiah, Robinson (and in RU case, Lomu, Campese etc.), which they cannot do now. You constantly hear the question posed, “what can RL do to make the game more popular”, or “how do we create stars”...yet it’s never addressed. You get the like of Phil Caplan suggesting they appear on Question of Sport (and he was serious when he said it).

If players get “bigger, stronger, faster”...then you alter the game to ensure the platform afforded to players who became stars in the past is also given to players today. What the answer is? I don’t know. But no attempt is made to provide an answer. Someone posted a clip of Hanley tries for Leeds....good God the space he was afforded to run into, that space would not be there today. There wouldn’t be a Hanley clip rolled out if he played today. RU, the field is obscenely overcrowded now. Players twice as wide. France midfield: Bastereaxusd (or however that is spelt), an 18 stone limited bruiser, replaced Sella, 13 stone of flair/skill. They have also introduced 8 interchanges, which means the mammoth brutes only need to last 50 minutes, before they are replaced by another set of brutes for the last 30. Making them last 80 minutes they’d need to be much trimmer. In RL there needs to be more of a reward to attempt to make plays early in a set of six. Having four runs straight up runs through the middle, then one attempt at a play, before a kick. This conservatism is rampant. Throw in the wrestle imported from Australia, and you have yourself a different, attritional dominated game.

Edited by DC77
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Oxford said:

Who on here cares if yawn is its own worst enemy? I find it intriguing how often that sport invades these pages to no real purpose.

Take your point, but it is relevant in the sense they are following a similar trajectory with so much cross pollination between them. RU became much better defensively by importing RL coaches. Being better defensively might be good in terms of making it a tougher test, the problem is it’s to the detriment of attacking play, and at the end of the day it’s attacking play that generates most headlines, what people most want to see.

The Aussie bloke that was in charge of England. Imagine having to watch his teams play. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, DC77 said:

Worst enemy in the sense that what made (and still makes) players stars is being allowed to stand out in games, like Hanley, Offiah, Robinson (and in RU case, Lomu, Campese etc.), which they cannot do now. You constantly hear the question posed, “what can RL do to make the game more popular”, or “how do we create stars”...yet it’s never addressed. You get the like of Phil Caplan suggesting they appear on Question of Sport (and he was serious when he said it).

If players get “bigger, stronger, faster”...then you alter the game to ensure the platform afforded to players who became stars in the past is also given to players today. What the answer is? I don’t know. But no attempt is made to provide an answer. Someone posted a clip of Hanley tries for Leeds....good God the space he was afforded to run into, that space would not be there today. There wouldn’t be a Hanley clip rolled out if he played today. RU, the field is obscenely overcrowded now. Players twice as wide. France midfield: Bastereaxusd (or however that is spelt), an 18 stone limited bruiser, replaced Sella, 13 stone of flair/skill. They have also introduced 8 interchanges, which means the mammoth brutes only need to last 50 minutes, before they are replaced by another set of brutes for the last 30. Making them last 80 minutes they’d need to be much trimmer. In RL there needs to be more of a reward to attempt to make plays early in a set of six. Having four runs straight up runs through the middle, then one attempt at a play, before a kick. This conservatism is rampant. Throw in the wrestle imported from Australia, and you have yourself a different, attritional dominated game.

Fair enough, everyone is absolutely entitled to their opinions.  For mine, I would say the following:

(I am happy to discuss Union on the cross code forum but I don't care enough about it to worry about it).

I have to admit while I watch the Super League and more UK RL, my primary Rugby League fix is from the NRL these days as I think it is an outstanding competition.

I personally feel that the sport has got the right balance between flair and effort... yes, there is a lot of forward effort in a game of Rugby League but I think there should be an attritional element to the sport - you need to earn the right to score.  If we want a try every play or two we can watch 7's or 9's, personally that does nothing for me.

But after teams have earned the right to score then there are still plenty of flair and speed on show.  I cannot understand how anyone can watch even just one round of NRL and not be impressed by the skill and flair, there is loads to admire every week.

I think the 6 again law has also helped to limit the wrestle and this year we saw more of a collision sport than a wrestle and I think the spectacle benefited hugely from it.

I am the biggest fan of Hanley (the best player I have ever seen) and all the others you mention but I am very happy with what the sport dishes up these days.

Edited by Dunbar

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure why RU keeps being raised but RL is fundamentally different in nature and RL has evolved to get away from all the problems seen in RU. RL players can only get so big and strong before it has a detrimental affect of their game and performance. RU is a different kettle of fish completely and many of its issues simply don't apply in RL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DC77 said:

Take your point, but it is relevant in the sense they are following a similar trajectory with so much cross pollination between them. RU became much better defensively by importing RL coaches. Being better defensively might be good in terms of making it a tougher test, the problem is it’s to the detriment of attacking play, and at the end of the day it’s attacking play that generates most headlines, what people most want to see.

The Aussie bloke that was in charge of England. Imagine having to watch his teams play. 

Yawn got better defensively because of RL coaches ..... and then you woke up!

There should always be cross polination between all sports but it needs more than  a similar oval ball for it to be of any use.

There is already plenty of drama in RL and it only needs good marketing to make use of it .

  • Thanks 2

2 warning points:kolobok_dirol:

#CorbynwasrightandFordesaidso!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Damien said:

I'm not sure why RU keeps being raised but RL is fundamentally different in nature and RL has evolved to get away from all the problems seen in RU. RL players can only get so big and strong before it has a detrimental affect of their game and performance. RU is a different kettle of fish completely and many of its issues simply don't apply in RL.

Totally agreed I tried to watch a Union game that was on amazon prime recently but turned it off due to how slow the game play was. I appreciate they may have different skill sets with patience being their main one. When you watch the NRLs best tries/best long tries you realise how quick they really are when you watch it week in and out you get used to it but the Union build up play and rolling over each other is definitely something that's not for me. League, Footy, RL what ever you want to call it is definitely a different game. 

  • Like 1
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...