Rugby league-could some lessons be learned from cricket?

[Smudger06]

Is it possible to play one game of nines for say 4 x 15 minute quarters??? With only like 13 or 14 players per side including interchanges (exhaustion wise). Its normally 9 minutes each way and 10 minutes each way in a final....

I have no idea never tried it nor seen it......

[Smudger06]

1 minute ago, Smudger06 said:

Is it possible to play one game of nines for say 4 x 15 minute quarters??? With only like 13 or 14 players per side including interchanges (exhaustion wise). Its normally 9 minutes each way and 10 minutes each way in a final....

I have no idea never tried it nor seen it......

Because nines is a day or weekend format, so isn't at present our answer to IPL / the Hundred as these are still home & away formats of cricket. 

[Tommygilf]

I don't think the short format is what we can take from the Hundred, though I think there are 3 key areas that are perhaps relevant.

Firstly, free to air is a key part of this. Cricket went even more down the pay TV route (and therefore behind a Paywall) than RL. Working out a balance to that is something RL is far closer to getting right -though I think we should be doing more international games and less club games as they are more widely relevant than club cup competitions.

Secondly, Women's sport being placed in a prominent position. Women's sport is the single biggest growth area for both cricket and RL. If you're seeking to grow interest and awareness, recognising that half the population is a potential market is a simple start.

Finally, the Hundred is the simple rationalisation of the number of Cricket teams in this country. 18 first class counties, more than in India or Australia where interest in cricket is far higher than the UK, is not sustainable commercially, especially when competing with the likes of the IPL. The T20 Blast was/is nice but ultimately because of the county championship structure enforcing 18 teams it can never grow to the level of the IPL or Big Bash. There isn't enough money to go round for that and it is still fundamentally tied to the Sky Sports paywall and Cricket's general image problem. The Hundred is distinctly different to that on purpose.

With regards to RL then, its telling that the first two points particularly are being taken on by the World Cup organisers, and to a lesser extent by Super League and the RFL.

We may very likely be facing a problem like the third point very soon. Indeed the current super league chairman thought we were already at that point half a decade ago. Will RL rationalise in a way that makes sense at least like The Hundred has attempted to though? Or will it just be musical chairs?

[Tommygilf]

40 minutes ago, ATLANTISMAN said:

I get that TG but we have something called the Vitality BlastT/Twenty which does the job already:)

 

Paul

It does and it doesn't though. The Blast is good for some areas and teams but not all - and there's fundamentally too many teams sharing the money. It is not comparable to either the IPL or Big Bash which are in countries with far higher levels of interest in Cricket yet still have fewer first class teams than us. So the Blast doesn't give access to the best players like the IPL or now the Hundred is aiming to do - its just the same county players wearing a different kit for the most part. Because of that, it generated all the media interest that the county championship does - that is to say not loads. So whilst crowds in many grounds were ticking up nicely, it still felt a bit like cricket for cricket fans.

I think if they could have reduced the Blast to a first and Second division, or just 8 teams in the comp like the Hundred, they'd have done it. Now we've got 2 t20 comps (effectively) and no first class 50 over games.

[Smudger06]

Can take away the central contracting of players and the draft from the hundred. The draft would cause absolute uproar amongst existing fans and thus create interest both new and renewed.......

[lucky 7]

I can see the benefits of playing a Super League 9's competition before the start of the season in Spain where there is a large expat community like the Costa Blanca. Played in warm weather compared to what you would get in the UK at the time of year, but with covid with us for the foreseeable future it will be hard to come up with a plan that will suit everybody

[gingerjon]

2 hours ago, Dave T said:

I notice a lot of their marketing is based around dirt cheap ticket prices. Something RL gets lambasted for. 

The prices are low and the majority of tickets for some games are give aways.

[Damien]

2 hours ago, Dave T said:

I notice a lot of their marketing is based around dirt cheap ticket prices. Something RL gets lambasted for. 

Much of the lambasting is when it comes to our few premium events such as internationals and finals. I don't think anyone would describe this as a premium event in Cricket.

If we had a 9s event in Newcastle along the lines of Magic I don't think anyone would complain about free tickets or offers. That would be more akin to this.

[Hela Wigmen]

The thing we can learn from Cricket is when they do a new format, they stick to it and let it’s profile build over time. Rugby League, we give things 2-3 years, sometimes less, and then bin a new league structure, a new play-off format etc before it’s had any change to develop into anything. 

 

[Hela Wigmen]

26 minutes ago, lucky 7 said:

I can see the benefits of playing a Super League 9's competition before the start of the season in Spain where there is a large expat community like the Costa Blanca. Played in warm weather compared to what you would get in the UK at the time of year, but with covid with us for the foreseeable future it will be hard to come up with a plan that will suit everybody

Nothing screams “Bargain Loving Brits Abroad” more than that. 

[Magic XIII]

4 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

All cricket have done is chop out the boring bits , of which there were loads of in cricket , even one day matches , so the only way to do the same in RL would be to reformatt the rules 

So start every set with a drop out from your sticks , meaning every set becomes an attacking one , you receive the ball on half way , if you don't score with a set of six , you then go back to your line and drop out the ball giving the opposition a set in your half 

Sorted 

How about keep the same rules but reduce from 6 tackles to 5 or even 4 ~ that would be punchy and they'll would need to be promoted a lot more

 

[Damien]

6 minutes ago, Magic XIII said:

How about keep the same rules but reduce from 6 tackles to 5 or even 4 ~ that would be punchy and they'll would need to be promoted a lot more

 

It's not really much of a point of difference is it? There's nothing to market and nothing really different about the game to an outsider. 

[londonrlfan]

The problem with these events is the novelty soon wears off and no one cares eventually. I wouldn't be surprised if it doesn't exist in 2 years. 

[LeeF]

1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

It does and it doesn't though. The Blast is good for some areas and teams but not all - and there's fundamentally too many teams sharing the money. It is not comparable to either the IPL or Big Bash which are in countries with far higher levels of interest in Cricket yet still have fewer first class teams than us. So the Blast doesn't give access to the best players like the IPL or now the Hundred is aiming to do - its just the same county players wearing a different kit for the most part. Because of that, it generated all the media interest that the county championship does - that is to say not loads. So whilst crowds in many grounds were ticking up nicely, it still felt a bit like cricket for cricket fans.

I think if they could have reduced the Blast to a first and Second division, or just 8 teams in the comp like the Hundred, they'd have done it. Now we've got 2 t20 comps (effectively) and no first class 50 over games.

The Blast got record crowds the season before COVID struck. The fixture list was correct after much messing around and the counties bought into it.

Meanwhile England are World Champions in the 50 over game so the ECB devalue that domestic competition for The Hundred that isn’t required and adds what exactly?
 

BTW the domestic 50 overs comp is still “List A” status so technically first class despite some counties being without 11 or more players….

 

[Hela Wigmen]

17 minutes ago, londonrlfan said:

The problem with these events is the novelty soon wears off and no one cares eventually. I wouldn't be surprised if it doesn't exist in 2 years. 

Twenty20 cricket is laughing at you. 

[DC77]

6 hours ago, M j M said:

Cricket is addressing once more the fundamental difficulties of what was its core product - that it takes too long. 

Trying to adopt another sport's solution to its own problems makes little sense.

100%.

The five day format was built for the Victorian era, a much slower paced time. They’ve had no option but to speed things up and cater for the much shorter attention spans.

Early days but this new 100 ball format seems to be working. 

RL doesn’t have anywhere near as much room to manoeuvre in terms of changing the game. When you go down to nine a side it makes scoring too easy (think basketball). Perhaps 11 is an option? 13 is fine if it’s a more open game. In the case of RU 15 is far too many. Overcrowded field full of mammoth gym monkeys which means space/gaps are at a premium, games are largely attritional arm wrestle contests. 15 a side was fine when the players were regular sized which was the case from the Victorian era up to a few decades back, but with their bigger bulk than RL they could trim to 11 per side. 

 

 

[GUBRATS]

2 hours ago, Smudger06 said:

Is it possible to play one game of nines for say 4 x 15 minute quarters??? With only like 13 or 14 players per side including interchanges (exhaustion wise). Its normally 9 minutes each way and 10 minutes each way in a final....

I have no idea never tried it nor seen it......

Why ?

[GUBRATS]

2 hours ago, Johnoco said:

The possibility of scoring off every ball in cricket is novel and in the case of when Garfield Sobers hit 36 in one over historic. But scoring on almost every set in RL would not be that good to see. 

Does every team score every time they receive the ball on the half way line ? 

[DC77]

4 hours ago, Johnoco said:

One criticism of RL is that trys are too common and many of them are not hard earned. (Not saying it's true btw) Not sure how the possibility of scoring every 2 minutes changes that aspect. 'You score we score' is of limited appeal I suspect.

Concur that few want to see back and forth easing scoring (it would kill the elation of scoring with it being so easy). I think it’s the manner of scoring that is important. A length of the field passage of play is exhilarating, the bread and butter in close scoring much much less so. 

[Smudger06]

12 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Why ?

Because I keep seeing comparisons between RL9s & limited overs cricket, a 9s game lasts 18 minutes and a limited overs cricket game lasts longer than a full RL game. The two don't compare.

To me RU is like one day (50 overs) and RL is the T20 version of rugby football already. 

[Smudger06]

1 hour ago, Hela Wigmen said:

The thing we can learn from Cricket is when they do a new format, they stick to it and let it’s profile build over time. Rugby League, we give things 2-3 years, sometimes less, and then bin a new league structure, a new play-off format etc before it’s had any change to develop into anything. 

 

Fully agree. 

[GUBRATS]

1 minute ago, Smudger06 said:

Because I keep seeing comparisons between RL9s & limited overs cricket, a 9s game lasts 18 minutes and a limited overs cricket game lasts longer than a full RL game. The two don't compare.

To me RU is like one day (50 overs) and RL is the T20 version of rugby football already. 

Exactly my point over and over and over again every time this nonsense us suggested , originally cricket probably lasted a few hours , then they got better at it and it ended up potentially lasting days , now they're trying to bring it down to a football/rugby event , that isn't a problem we have , our problems are different and don't require any shortening of time or numbers 

[gingerjon]

43 minutes ago, LeeF said:

The Blast got record crowds the season before COVID struck. The fixture list was correct after much messing around and the counties bought into it.

Meanwhile England are World Champions in the 50 over game so the ECB devalue that domestic competition for The Hundred that isn’t required and adds what exactly?

Yes.

The "problem" that The Hundred solves is the governing body not having complete control over and ownership of the franchises in its league.

Nothing else.

[GUBRATS]

What happens to the ' hundred ' when it rains all August ?

[redjonn]

Have to step back from the technical aspect of the game and identify what the underlying benefits the cricket 100 brings to the overall sport.   It seems to me its FTA coverage (takes limited broadcast time for the TV companies), shortened game and a format they can tinker with to maintain its real or imaginary excitement.  Plus a change of style or perceived style as in different than the more traditional game - namely colour and maybe under lights plus it doesn't require people to take time off to attend during the week and hence different week days covered.

Of course what I list above can be debated as to if some of it exist in some other formats of cricket or not.

It seems to me we already have most of the aspects in our primary game, although some can be tinkered with.

As someone says we have the Challenge Cup, surely this can be the part of the game that is focused on as our FTA side of the sport to have similar impact... Doing things slightly different to adjust to suit...

Adapting the Challenge Cup with maybe some more radical thinking.

Especially as the Australians have nothing to compare with too...