Presentation of team line ups.

[marklaspalmas]

Here's a visual presentation of Leeds' team last night.

Familiar though it may be to diehards, does it really help fans understand how the team appear on the field? Note how the whole three quarter line is listed in the wrong order to how they line up on the field. It's always written right to left, but of course if you start at FB, on the field they go left to right. The forwards are listed in scrum formation (obsolete) and the subs line up is always random. Hlafbacks always listed side by side in a way they never appear on the field. Forwards before backs, is this a rugby union thing?

All in all, pretty unhelpful in terms of player identification on the park. Throw in squad numbers to the confusion.

I think it could be done much better

 

 

**And yes, this thread follows on from another thread which got a bit sidetracked by mischeivous little so and so's saying how hookers should be renamed quarterbacks. This is what I really want to talk about, the major issue of our times.

[fighting irish]

Yes mate I agree. 

[Tommygilf]

I'd have them "lined up" with the FB behind the 12 other men in the line. 

[Hela Wigmen]

It’s how Sky have shown sides for 20+ years. I’m not exactly sure why it needs to change or why now it’s being addressed. 

[RigbyLuger]

What about the clubs who do it in alphabetical order?

[Dunbar]

Now that we have squad numbers rather than positional numbers I struggle to see how any newcomer could understand the positions and where they play. 

Yes, we could produce a better graphic but unless you know literally every player and where they play you are going to be lost as soon as the game starts.

I have been watching RL for 35 years and watch pretty much every SL TV game and yet I am at a loss to know where some of the players are lining up in when there are a lot of non regulars playing.

Give me the NRL with numbers 1 to 17 taking the pitch every day of the week.

[Man of Kent]

I like the way the BBC do it. Full back to front row, left to right. More understandable to the non-hardcore fan.

[Damien]

48 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

I like the way the BBC do it. Full back to front row, left to right. More understandable to the non-hardcore fan.

I was going to say this too. The BBC have it right in my opinion. 

[EastLondonMike]

I'm sure theres something much more interesting they could do with presenting the teams. Rather than just list them like this.

[marklaspalmas]

1 hour ago, Man of Kent said:

I like the way the BBC do it. Full back to front row, left to right. More understandable to the non-hardcore fan.

Can't watch the beeb. How's it done?

[hindle xiii]

This is always compared to football that has a formation. In rugby it would be 12 names in a line if using defence or 12 names in a slightly wonkier line for lining up in attack.

Either list them or learn them.

[Man of Kent]

57 minutes ago, marklaspalmas said:

Can't watch the beeb. How's it done?

 

[marklaspalmas]

8 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

 

Yes. Better than sky, but can be improved.

[Chris Taylor]

Absolutely with you here.

The graphics should be try line corner to corner. Starting on the left wing and finishing on the right, with players set how you would see them in the attacking line.

[Gerrumonside ref]

16 minutes ago, Chris Taylor said:

Absolutely with you here.

The graphics should be try line corner to corner. Starting on the left wing and finishing on the right, with players set how you would see them in the attacking line.

This

[Barry Badrinath]

1 hour ago, Man of Kent said:

 

thats the same thing, only sideways

[Spidey]

2 minutes ago, Barry Badrinath said:

thats the same thing, only sideways

I thought that... 

[Barry Badrinath]

I'd be in favour of showing them lined up when defending, at least then you've got a good idea of where someone will be stood on the field for half the time and then tv coms can say this person is a half back, they defend out wide to not knacker themselves out, the big boys are in the middle.

 

That looks tidy, and somewhat serves a purpose, i must admit, start of game, or whenever someone important gets subbed in a game i'm at, i'll check to see who's defending where, or who's been moved around which gives me a clue of what position they're supposedly playing in.

 

 

The front to back positions like that is only informative in a perfect world where props dont take the first hit up from a scrum, hookers dont pack down at the base in attack and full backs dont in defence.

[Man of Kent]

9 minutes ago, Barry Badrinath said:

thats the same thing, only sideways

It's a good way for non-tragics to understand IMO, particularly football fans. Looks a bit like a football formation, with two extra players.

 

[Barry Badrinath]

Just now, Man of Kent said:

It's a good way for non-tragics to understand IMO, particularly football fans. Looks a bit like a football formation, with two extra players.

 

its a landscape version of what sky do, how is that any more effective?

[Man of Kent]

9 minutes ago, Barry Badrinath said:

its a landscape version of what sky do, how is that any more effective?

Not quite the same is it. It looks more football-ish. Full back number 1 (like a goalkeeper) behind a ‘flat back four’ of three-quarters (rather than diagonally)

Forwards 8, 9, 10 upfront. And so forth. 

[Damien]

17 minutes ago, Barry Badrinath said:

its a landscape version of what sky do, how is that any more effective?

Well its the way you watch a game on TV for a start. The backs are broadly were they would be on the field. The forwards are clumped together like a pack. Its obviously not exactly how they line up on a field, but that would broadly end up looking like a team list which would be pretty pointless in my opinion.

[Barley Mow]

4 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

I'd have them "lined up" with the FB behind the 12 other men in the line. 

I'd vary that slightly so that although the other 12 were in a line, it would be off-set a bit so that the forwards were slightly further forward than the backs.

[marklaspalmas]

36 minutes ago, Barry Badrinath said:

thats the same thing, only sideways

The improvement I spotted was that this has left side players on.... the left side. Which is an improvement on Sky.

The arrangement of forwards is pointless though.

Looks better landscape for some reason.....

[marklaspalmas]

Defensively, on a very basic level, I assume teams still coached to a left (4 players) middle (4 players) and right (4 players) structure.

I realise this depends on many things, like where the PTB is.