Jump to content

Rugby league-could some lessons be learned from cricket?


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, DC77 said:

Disagree with women’s RL. I thoroughly enjoyed a game a while back (watched as there was a Leeds woman playing who sometimes appears on forty20 podcast, great lass). They played an open attacking game that was reminiscent of how men’s RL used to be, according to Phil Caplan. 

Regarding women’s football, it generally is pretty average (trying to be diplomatic here). And I mean average by women’s standards when you see what women can do in tennis and increasingly in golf. The difference with tennis though is that women have been able to develop over the same time period as the men, while women’s football was basically blocked around the 1930s despite its popularity. So a debt is owed to women who should be given time to develop. 

Throwing a ball any able bodied person can do as we use our hands in everyday life, kicking a ball from A to B is a different story. It is easier to take up a hand based sport than a foot based one, hence the women RL players are able to put in long passing sequences while the female footballers struggle. In RL the ball generally isn’t passed that far either, so a woman can pull that off, whereas executing a hard 40, 50, 60 yard cross field pass with your foot (or a goal kick that needs to reach at least halfway), very few women can do that. There’s also an issue with goalkeeper height as the gap is too big with the 8 ft crossbar, so they get lobbed a lot. The field dimensions/goal posts were set up for men, so for the women I’d lower the crossbar and shorten the field that way it’s more suited to them. The one major thing women’s rugby doesn’t have is the rugged power, so you don’t get the same attritional stuff, which is a plus in many ways. 

In relation to the topic, rather than look for some RL variant, why not try to get the 13 man game more open like it used to be. Those turnstile defences actually make play more eyecatching. RL purists might like the grinding, defensive stuff but it’s those long runs past three and four players that grab the most attention. Amazes me whenever this topic comes up and people ask “what can we do”. The answer can be seen in what goes viral. Attacking play, flair...always has done. The Rangi Chase behind the back pass a notable example. RU has to hark back to Lomu for the eye catching stuff. We’ve just had a Lions series, instantly forgettable. Messi has been called a “tourist attraction” for the city he plys his trade and the reason for that is the eye catching stuff. He’s a global superstar because he’s in a skill based sport that allows him to showcase his talent to the full.

People follow a sport for two main reasons: 1.they have a team in it, so will watch them and their competition (so, the entire league) 2.they follow an individual (I was glued to the screen watching Ronaldo (Brazilian) when he was at Barcelona). It’s very hard to follow a RL club side as they are based in towns that are detached from outside. It’s very geographic specific, regional, thus hard to connect/identity with. Therefore it’s even more imperative it has eye catching players, and in the case of RL (and RU) its players who make those runs/make dummy passes. Players who light up a game. The way RL is played today with much tighter defences, the wrestle, bigger players etc. it’s infinitely harder to really stand out. 

Completely agree , so what do you suggest we do ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


12 hours ago, Johnoco said:

So the sum total of RL is that it amounts to tackling? Sounds like a really interesting game. 
 

Oh and it wasn’t born as a professional sport, the only payments were for bona fide loss of earnings. 

Not the ' sum total ' , no , I didn't say that , but it is a vital part in my opinion 

Not going to get involved in minutiae of RLs birth , but it is the hardest most physical team sport played on the planet 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Damien said:

I'm not sure the point of completely ignoring the context and quoting half a sentence just to make a lazy comparison.

Lazy it might be , but as you say , it is ' comparable ' , sorry but I just don't get this shortening of our game to compare it with a different sport that takes longer than our original game 

An equivalent to a RL nines 8 team comp would be an 8 team 20 ball cricket comp , not a 200 ball match played over 3/4 hours 

Nothing like it 

What we can learn from Cricket is you can chuck tens of millions at a comp , and it will probably still fail and disappear in a year or two 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

Completely agree , so what do you suggest we do ?

The only thing I can think of is those who run the game/make the rules are able to analyse plays that have gone viral (eye catching runs/dummies etc.) and figure out how they can be a common feature in the game. I know it’s of no concern on here but RU I think would be much easier to solve as it’s main issue is obvious, namely player bulk is out of control. Two sets of XV pretty regular sized blokes on a field afforded players some space to run, now thanks to their mammoth size it’s completely overcrowded with space at a premium. This combined with the tighter defensive structures that are now in place have also made it infinitely harder to make a line break. What made Lomu a star, those rampaging runs in open space with opposition players hanging off him, he’d get completely shut down in todays game. I used to watch lots of Ireland, mainly to see O’Driscoll. Much like the rest of RU they are now unwatchable. It’s an attrition dominated game. South Africa’s bish bash RU was limited to them, now it’s the norm. RL the defences look to have got better, to the detriment of the attacking stuff. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

Not the ' sum total ' , no , I didn't say that , but it is a vital part in my opinion 

Not going to get involved in minutiae of RLs birth , but it is the hardest most physical team sport played on the planet 

Getting something as basic as the fact that RL was not ‘born a professional sport’ is not minutiae, it’s a pretty basic fact.

Full on physical tackling is a vital part of 13 a side RL, yes. But I don’t see why other variations on that, that could well be a gateway to the full game are such a no no for you. 

Most football players will have a game of 5 a side, in which many basics of 11 a side football are not allowed, without rubbishing it, in fact they enjoy it. As do thousands of other people, fat, thin, short and tall in various work sides. They may be useless but they still enjoy it and it’s this social aspect that RL misses out on.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Johnoco said:

I've just seen some of this on TV and the main thing I would say that RL could learn from it is to get several hours coverage on BBC 2 on an evening. 

And we already know how to do that.

Internationals and Challenge Cup get FTA coverage. Build those up and we'll get *more* FTA coverage.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, DOGFATHER said:

🤣 So no then?

It hasn't really had an opportunity in this country. 

Until we have spare millions lying around, it will always look like some variation of the above.

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

really enjoyed that 100 thing last night and so did the mrs! the only thing it has against a prolonged success is that it is going to be exactly the same thing every single time and how much they can gleam out of the format before it becomes 3 hours of repeating the same old same old is questionable 

did the bloke who invented the phrase "one hit wonder" invent anything else?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gingerjon said:

And we already know how to do that.

Internationals and Challenge Cup get FTA coverage. Build those up and we'll get *more* FTA coverage.

Whilst I agree with you in theory, how do you know that the coverage would automatically follow? Do you think BBC2 would cover live RL on an evening multiple times? ie not just the odd one off like has already happened. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Johnoco said:

Whilst I agree with you in theory, how do you know that the coverage would automatically follow? Do you think BBC2 would cover live RL on an evening multiple times? ie not just the odd one off like has already happened. 
 

I don't know specifically about midweeks but the evidence we have from the past 20 or so years shows that they will cover it if it's there to be covered and they get the chance.

There is zero evidence, for example, that they would show a 9s tournament at any time.

Given the comparison, which would it make sense to invest our meagre resources in if the priority is FTA coverage?

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

I don't know specifically about midweeks but the evidence we have from the past 20 or so years shows that they will cover it if it's there to be covered and they get the chance.

There is zero evidence, for example, that they would show a 9s tournament at any time.

Given the comparison, which would it make sense to invest our meagre resources in if the priority is FTA coverage?

I do agree with you in the main (no, seriously it had to happen sometime)  But one match might take up 2 hours, possibly less if they were pushed, maybe 90 minutes (good evening, here’s the match…) 

These 100 things are getting some serious coverage for several hours at a time on what you might loosely term ‘prime time’ tv. I seriously doubt they would repeatedly put 3+ hours of RL on an evening, I aren’t sure they would do it once tbh. I just don’t think RL has the ear of the schedulers or enough friends in the right places to make that happen. 

Anyway things like that don’t have to be either/or. There could be a social version of RL that isn’t televised nor for spectators. I know various versions do exist but they certainly aren’t pushed much. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Johnoco said:

There could be a social version of RL that isn’t televised nor for spectators. I know various versions do exist but they certainly aren’t pushed much. 

This is another area where we constantly seem to be reinventing the wheel. There have been tag/touch/roll in the hay versions of rugby league for as long as I've been watching and I am very old. Just stick with them.

A few years ago the RFL - with Sport England support - did seem to be stronger on pushing the social/recreational side of non-tackle/short form versions. I'm not sure why that dwindled.

  • Like 1

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gingerjon said:

And we already know how to do that.

Internationals and Challenge Cup get FTA coverage. Build those up and we'll get *more* FTA coverage.

Agree, but also Superleague. At the top end, it's the best product we have, so we need at least a handful of SL games on terrestrial. I'd favour 4-5 games over a condensed period rather than one popping up every 6 weeks. Doesn't the new mini-contract allow some terrestrial coverage, or is it just YouTube? 

On a related point, the Grand Final absolutely has to be on terrestrial, even if the bulk of the rest of the competition isn't. Both the Hundred finals will be, the Champions League final is free on the BT app. One night won't be a dealbreaker for Sky and it's a question of believing in our product: if we don't go out of our way to share the biggest night of our year, why would people think SL is something to take an interest in? 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

there are complants springing up in USA that MLB games are taking too long and on average how long do their games take ? 3 hours.  If you look at NFL games on TV when it gets down to the last 5 minutes which usually takes about a half hour the stadiums by the are almost half empty fro. Being full 

 Soon we will be dancing the fandango
FROM 2004,TO DO WHAT THIS CLUB HAS DONE,IF THATS NOT GREATNESSTHEN i DONT KNOW WHAT IS.

JAMIE PEACOCK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

This is another area where we constantly seem to be reinventing the wheel. There have been tag/touch/roll in the hay versions of rugby league for as long as I've been watching and I am very old. Just stick with them.

A few years ago the RFL - with Sport England support - did seem to be stronger on pushing the social/recreational side of non-tackle/short form versions. I'm not sure why that dwindled.

Yeah I seem to remember Barrie McDermott, not that long ago, either promoting or just being involved with senior non tackle RL (just don’t tell Gubby) The one where you had different coloured shorts? Just as one instance but they never seem to last. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, fieldofclothofgold said:

there are complants springing up in USA that MLB games are taking too long and on average how long do their games take ? 3 hours.  If you look at NFL games on TV when it gets down to the last 5 minutes which usually takes about a half hour the stadiums by the are almost half empty fro. Being full 

A lot depends on the game. In the last five minutes, it's possible for teams to just 'chew the clock' for around 2:30 if they're in position and in the lead so yeah, people walk out. 

NFL RedZone on the other hand is brilliant and such a good way to watch the NFL - especially if you're not that into the sport and just watching more casually, as they just cut to the game(s) where teams look as if they are in scoring or game-changing positions. 

Edited by whatmichaelsays
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, graveyard johnny said:

really enjoyed that 100 thing last night and so did the mrs! the only thing it has against a prolonged success is that it is going to be exactly the same thing every single time and how much they can gleam out of the format before it becomes 3 hours of repeating the same old same old is questionable 

There’s definitely a novelty factor but if they get half a million watching and 10% of them decide to become either actively attend cricket games or become somehow attached to a club then it’s a result.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, fieldofclothofgold said:

there are complants springing up in USA that MLB games are taking too long and on average how long do their games take ? 3 hours.  If you look at NFL games on TV when it gets down to the last 5 minutes which usually takes about a half hour the stadiums by the are almost half empty fro. Being full 

I didn't realise Wigan played in the NFL ? , I knew Leeds have recruited from there of course 😉

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Johnoco said:

Yeah I seem to remember Barrie McDermott, not that long ago, either promoting or just being involved with senior non tackle RL (just don’t tell Gubby) The one where you had different coloured shorts? Just as one instance but they never seem to last. 

That's because they are rubbish 😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Johnoco said:

There’s definitely a novelty factor but if they get half a million watching and 10% of them decide to become either actively attend cricket games or become somehow attached to a club then it’s a result.

Then they turn up at their first game , and it rains , so they don't bother again 

It'll be gone inside 3 years , replaced by the ' Twenty ' , a shortened version of the hundred with 8 a side playing mini tournaments mid week , which will last one year and then that'll be gone 

5 day test matches will remain , as I suggested earlier , maybe that's what we should copy from cricket , forty hour games of RL , it's the future 😁

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Then they turn up at their first game , and it rains , so they don't bother again 

It'll be gone inside 3 years , replaced by the ' Twenty ' , a shortened version of the hundred with 8 a side playing mini tournaments mid week , which will last one year and then that'll be gone 

5 day test matches will remain , as I suggested earlier , maybe that's what we should copy from cricket , forty hour games of RL , it's the future 😁

It doesn't matter if this goes or not, they are attracting new and future fans that will be cricket fans in the future. 

You can mock all you like, RL is missing out. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Johnoco said:

It doesn't matter if this goes or not, they are attracting new and future fans that will be cricket fans in the future. 

You can mock all you like, RL is missing out. 

They are ( might be ) attracting new ' 100 ' fans , who will disappear as quickly as the ' 100 ' does 

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...