2021 Re start

[phildog]

Me too Rog, hence my new pic on the forum!

[phildog]

Maybe they'll do the squad numbers tomorrow as a build-up prop to the game...would make sense. I don't doubt that the players will already know, whoever it was who suggested so.

[DOGFATHER]

5 hours ago, Keep The Faith said:

John loves playing down the middle at times so nothing will change... we shall see 

The same could be said for pretty much every team in the game. The recent interpretations and rule changes seem to have systematically turned the game into a battle of 13 big blokes running as hard as they can at each other until one of them tires, or makes a mistake. There seems  to be little room for skill and guile, and might be part of the reason the uptake for streaming is so small. Let's hope the powers that be see sense and finally speed the ptb up.

[DOGFATHER]

8 minutes ago, phildog said:

Maybe they'll do the squad numbers tomorrow as a build-up prop to the game...would make sense. I don't doubt that the players will already know, whoever it was who suggested so.

Double post

[DOGFATHER]

Does it really matter Phil? If they announce them tomorrow, or 1 minute before kickoff of the first proper game, what difference would it make?

[Keep The Faith]

7 minutes ago, DOGFATHER said:

The same could be said for pretty much every team in the game. The recent interpretations and rule changes seem to have systematically turned the game into a battle of 13 big blokes running as hard as they can at each other until one of them tries or makes a mistake. There seems  to be little room for skill and guile, and might be part of the reason the uptake for streaming is so small. Let's hope the powers that be see sense and finally speed the ptb up.

The play the ball was speed up in super league when the game was restarted I think 13 big blokes will struggle without scrums 

[distantdog]

25 minutes ago, DOGFATHER said:

The same could be said for pretty much every team in the game. The recent interpretations and rule changes seem to have systematically turned the game into a battle of 13 big blokes running as hard as they can at each other until one of them tries or makes a mistake. There seems  to be little room for skill and guile, and might be part of the reason the uptake for streaming is so small. Let's hope the powers that be see sense and finally speed the ptb up.

I think that the issue for streaming is that all of those who attend as family groups will be watching the one stream rather than paying individually on the gate. If most did that, it will drastically cut the gate.

On running as hard as they can at each other, it was a tactic I based my short but illustrious career on as a member of the RL player production line that was, and is, St John Fishers School in Dewsbury!

[DOGFATHER]

56 minutes ago, Keep The Faith said:

The play the ball was speed up in super league when the game was restarted I think 13 big blokes will struggle without scrums 

I really hope you are right and it is cascaded down to our division and we see some broken play for a change.

All I saw in SL last year, were drives up the middle, with the defending side laying on in the tackle to slow the ptb down as long as they could and the officials rarely doing anything to stop it. 

Give me back the days of a quick ptb, or a quick tap any day of the week. 

 

[DOGFATHER]

1 minute ago, distantdog said:

I think that the issue for streaming is that all of those who attend as family groups will be watching the one stream rather than paying individually on the gate. If most did that, it will drastically cut the gate.

On running as hard as they can at each other, it was a tactic I based my short but illustrious career on as a member of the RL player production line that was, and is, St John Fishers School in Dewsbury!

Me too, but not at SJF. However, I was never big or hard enough to be effective at it. I certainly didn't have the silky skills of some of my opponents back in the day, like Lawford, Chapman or Flynn. The only time I think had the pace to make it, was generally when I was running out of the way. 

[Piggy's mate]

13 hours ago, distantdog said:

I think that the issue for streaming is that all of those who attend as family groups will be watching the one stream rather than paying individually on the gate. If most did that, it will drastically cut the gate.

Defo the reason DD, as all Dewsbury fans are related due to chronic inbreeding they've only bought 2 passes between them...

[Blind side johnny]

23 hours ago, DOGFATHER said:

The same could be said for pretty much every team in the game. The recent interpretations and rule changes seem to have systematically turned the game into a battle of 13 big blokes running as hard as they can at each other until one of them tires, or makes a mistake. There seems  to be little room for skill and guile, and might be part of the reason the uptake for streaming is so small. Let's hope the powers that be see sense and finally speed the ptb up.

Isn't this the logic of the "six again" rule?

[DOGFATHER]

1 hour ago, Blind side johnny said:

Isn't this the logic of the "six again" rule?

It is, but it is very subjective.

Problem is, it always seems to be arbitrary when refs decide to blow them up.

My problem with it is, It gives the referees an even greater opportunity to influence results, which I hate.

I'd much prefer it, if the rule was more black and white, using something akin to the shot clock. If the defender(s) still have any sort of  contact with the attacker 3 seconds after the ref shouts held, then it's 6 again. That would force defenders to get out the way and stop laying on.

[colinb]

1 hour ago, DOGFATHER said:

It is, but it is very subjective.

Problem is, it always seems to be arbitrary when refs decide to blow them up.

My problem with it is, It gives the referees an even greater opportunity to influence results, which I hate.

I'd much prefer it, if the rule was more black and white, using something akin to the shot clock. If the defender(s) still have any sort of  contact with the attacker 3 seconds after the ref shouts held, then it's 6 again. That would force defenders to get out the way and stop laying on.

The referee is a constant target for a lot of speccies.....so counting to 3....would not help them....but the 9oyl would....1.....2......3.

[distantdog]

1 hour ago, DOGFATHER said:

It is, but it is very subjective.

Problem is, it always seems to be arbitrary when refs decide to blow them up.

My problem with it is, It gives the referees an even greater opportunity to influence results, which I hate.

I'd much prefer it, if the rule was more black and white, using something akin to the shot clock. If the defender(s) still have any sort of  contact with the attacker 3 seconds after the ref shouts held, then it's 6 again. That would force defenders to get out the way and stop laying on.

Isn't that the way it is now? And always has been? Referees manage the game in a certain way. They are human and clearly have their own way of controlling the game. I often think that the most successful teams are those who manage the ref, and therefore the game best.

[DOGFATHER]

1 hour ago, colinb said:

The referee is a constant target for a lot of speccies.....so counting to 3....would not help them....but the 9oyl would....1.....2......3.

Very true. Although, I don't think the refs are particularly helped by a lot of the interpretations that have crept in to the game over the years.

Most of the interpretations seem to have left the refs open to calls of unfairness and makes an already difficult job, even harder.

By making the rules, actual rules, rather than guidelines, would make things clearer for everyone.

A little bit like the ruling brought in about making an "attempt" to play the ball with the foot. What is an attempt? Why not make the rule simple, the foot has to touch the ball.

It's bad enough for us that have watched the game for a while, but it must be really hard to figure out if you are new to the game. 

59 minutes ago, distantdog said:

Isn't that the way it is now? And always has been? Referees manage the game in a certain way. They are human and clearly have their own way of controlling the game. I often think that the most successful teams are those who manage the ref, and therefore the game best.

I don't disagree, it is an area we have struggled with for as long as I can remember, regardless of who has been in the starting line up or coaching us. We always look like rank amateurs in terms of game management, compared with teams like Sheffield for example.

I totally agreed with your earlier post, I thought they managed the ruck speed far better than we did today.

[Blind side johnny]

11 hours ago, distantdog said:

Isn't that the way it is now? And always has been? Referees manage the game in a certain way. They are human and clearly have their own way of controlling the game. I often think that the most successful teams are those who manage the ref, and therefore the game best.

I agree. We wouldn't want to see the game go further down the lines of American Football, would we?

I would recommend people to watch a couple of videos of games in the 70's and 80's where the referees were far less picky and the game flowed much better (aside from the scrums, that is) in my opinion.

[Blind side johnny]

10 hours ago, DOGFATHER said:

Very true. Although, I don't think the refs are particularly helped by a lot of the interpretations that have crept in to the game over the years.

Most of the interpretations seem to have left the refs open to calls of unfairness and makes an already difficult job, even harder.

By making the rules, actual rules, rather than guidelines, would make things clearer for everyone.

A little bit like the ruling brought in about making an "attempt" to play the ball with the foot. What is an attempt? Why not make the rule simple, the foot has to touch the ball.

It's bad enough for us that have watched the game for a while, but it must be really hard to figure out if you are new to the game. 

I don't disagree, it is an area we have struggled with for as long as I can remember, regardless of who has been in the starting line up or coaching us. We always look like rank amateurs in terms of game management, compared with teams like Sheffield for example.

I totally agreed with your earlier post, I thought they managed the ruck speed far better than we did today.

I know that you like clarity so it is the play the ball, not ruck, according to the laws, not rules, of the game.

HTH

[Bill H]

12 hours ago, DOGFATHER said:

Very true. Although, I don't think the refs are particularly helped by a lot of the interpretations that have crept in to the game over the years.

Most of the interpretations seem to have left the refs open to calls of unfairness and makes an already difficult job, even harder.

By making the rules, actual rules, rather than guidelines, would make things clearer for everyone.

A little bit like the ruling brought in about making an "attempt" to play the ball with the foot. What is an attempt? Why not make the rule simple, the foot has to touch the ball.

It's bad enough for us that have watched the game for a while, but it must be really hard to figure out if you are new to the game. 

I don't disagree, it is an area we have struggled with for as long as I can remember, regardless of who has been in the starting line up or coaching us. We always look like rank amateurs in terms of game management, compared with teams like Sheffield for example.

I totally agreed with your earlier post, I thought they managed the ruck speed far better than we did today.

The hardest thing for newcomers might be working out why certain players are called hookers.

You make some good points, by the way.

 

 

[Batley Bob]