Sun 1st Oct: NRL Grand Final: Penrith Panthers v Brisbane Broncos KO 9.30am BST (Sky) Merged Threads

[graveyard johnny]

bet all the headline writers were ready with "wham bam thankyou MAM" before Cleary spoiled their fun 

[JohnM]

It's at times like this, watching this brilliant  game, listening to the commenatsors, hearing the crowd, seeing the winners presentation, the whole package, that I wish the NRL would take over running SuperLeague.

[DavidM]

Tremendous game , top quality , and tremendous spectacle and presentation. That was an occasion . They are light years ahead with the whole package tbh. I thought Brisbane were gonna crush them in that 3rd quarter , Penrith looked shot . And really they should have put that to bed , they’ll be gutted they didn’t . Mam was great ,  Herbie had that moment but otherwise was really good . Walsh took a long time getting into it but the Broncos were running downhill . I didn’t see Penrith coming anywhere close but that’s a champion side . In fact one of the all time great sides with the main man cementing his place as one of the all time great players 

[north yorks trinity]

3 hours ago, Dunbar said:

I think if the referee's are lenient all year the coaches and players will take advantage of it and we would see a lot of spoiling play.  We know teams push the laws to the breaking point already.

Being more lenient in one or two games a year is OK but the whole year would produce something else for us to complain about no doubt.

Agreed. But the leniency here is already to allow slow play the balls and occasionally give 6 again. Given that the players are highly trained athletes, their reaction times to the words, "held" and "move" are surprisingly sluggish.

[Dunbar]

2 minutes ago, north yorks trinity said:

Agreed. But the leniency here is already to allow slow play the balls and occasionally give 6 again. Given that the players are highly trained athletes, their reaction times to the words, "held" and "move" are surprisingly sluggish.

In the spirit of conversation (rather than argument) I disagree with the premise, I don't think the play the balls in Super League are slower than the NRL. In fact, I think they are quicker.

[north yorks trinity]

45 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

In the spirit of conversation (rather than argument) I disagree with the premise, I don't think the play the balls in Super League are slower than the NRL. In fact, I think they are quicker.

Fair enough I don't have Sky (more than my marriage is worth ) so I probably just made a wrong assumption. I don't necessarily think a slow play the ball makes for a bad game as long there is a good level of intensity. The really quick play the balls of several years ago (can't remember exactly which era they were in vogue) made for some one dimensional games. Personally wouldn't mind experimenting with much quicker play the balls (players letting go and getting off as soon as the tackle is complete) and a five metre gap between teams. I wouldn't go to great lengths to defend the idea but I wouldn't mind seeing what effect it would have.

[Dunbar]

49 minutes ago, north yorks trinity said:

Fair enough I don't have Sky (more than my marriage is worth ) so I probably just made a wrong assumption. I don't necessarily think a slow play the ball makes for a bad game as long there is a good level of intensity. The really quick play the balls of several years ago (can't remember exactly which era they were in vogue) made for some one dimensional games. Personally wouldn't mind experimenting with much quicker play the balls (players letting go and getting off as soon as the tackle is complete) and a five metre gap between teams. I wouldn't go to great lengths to defend the idea but I wouldn't mind seeing what effect it would have.

I agree. We have an obsession with speeding up the game, which usually leads to sloppy play the balls and a penalty lottery. 

The days when it was fall on your front and 5 scoots in a set were horrible.

I think we would benefit from slowing the game down a little and let skill unlock a defence. 

Edited October 1, 2023 by Dunbar

[meast]

How come there's no moaning and whinging about the referee or decisions that went against certain teams etc.

How refreshing to read a match thread with positive stuff about what the players are doing.

Or maybe it's just the referees in UK that get the stick?

Or failing that, how about the NRL got on with playing rugby league and not trying to wrestle and mess around trying to win penalties?

Maybe it's the players to whinge about after all?

Edited....

Edited October 1, 2023 by meast

[GUBRATS]

1 minute ago, meast said:

How come there's no moaning and whinging about the referee or decisions that went against certain teams etc.

How refreshing to read a match thread with positive stuff about what the players are doing.

Or maybe it's just the referees in UK that get the stick?

 

Maybe because on the whole we are all neutral on here with regards the Aussie final 

[Bamboozle]

Will Ezra mam declare for the kumuls?

[JF1]

I was glued to the game today.

I think I spotted 11 empty seats.

[The Rocket]

5 hours ago, graveyard johnny said:

bet all the headline writers were ready with "wham bam thankyou MAM" before Cleary spoiled their fun 

Clearly the Best.

[UTK]

8 hours ago, meast said:

How come there's no moaning and whinging about the referee or decisions that went against certain teams etc.

How refreshing to read a match thread with positive stuff about what the players are doing.

Or maybe it's just the referees in UK that get the stick?

Or failing that, how about the NRL got on with playing rugby league and not trying to wrestle and mess around trying to win penalties?

Maybe it's the players to whinge about after all?

Edited....

We have a dreadful ref-blaming culture down here too don't worry about that.

The Grand Final yesterday was IMO one of the best officiating performances I have seen in a big game, Gee was brilliant and has been all year. I'm personally not one to criticise refereeing anyway but Gee's performance has been overwhelmingly received similar responses to mine from most fans here (obviously there's still a handful of partisan morons), something which I would note is extremely rare to observe as referees are very rarely appreciated for their performances.

One comment I would make on this response is the fact that the 9 commentary repeatedly applauded decisions made by Gee throughout the match, rather than nitpicking and disputing correct calls as they usually do. Ref-blaming culture starts with the media that delivers the game to the masses, several NRL commentators over the years has been notorious for slandering refereeing throughout the game and it is frankly disgraceful.

Phil Gould is the absolute worst of all in this regard and regularly personally attacks the integrity and character of officials on air. Coincidentally he wasn't part of the main call last night and such attacks weren't then perpetuated throughout the game, I've no doubt his absence had a direct impact on how the public received the game.

[dkw]

3 hours ago, UTK said:

We have a dreadful ref-blaming culture down here too don't worry about that.

The Grand Final yesterday was IMO one of the best officiating performances I have seen in a big game, Gee was brilliant and has been all year. I'm personally not one to criticise refereeing anyway but Gee's performance has been overwhelmingly received similar responses to mine from most fans here (obviously there's still a handful of partisan morons), something which I would note is extremely rare to observe as referees are very rarely appreciated for their performances.

One comment I would make on this response is the fact that the 9 commentary repeatedly applauded decisions made by Gee throughout the match, rather than nitpicking and disputing correct calls as they usually do. Ref-blaming culture starts with the media that delivers the game to the masses, several NRL commentators over the years has been notorious for slandering refereeing throughout the game and it is frankly disgraceful.

Phil Gould is the absolute worst of all in this regard and regularly personally attacks the integrity and character of officials on air. Coincidentally he wasn't part of the main call last night and such attacks weren't then perpetuated throughout the game, I've no doubt his absence had a direct impact on how the public received the game.

Would you say the final was refereed differently to the majority of games in the NRL this season, as far as I could tell it definitely was as a lot of the more finicky penalties were basically ignored, while a shot to the head that could have seen a sin binning in a regular game only lead to penalty for example.

[Harry Stottle]

13 hours ago, Dunbar said:

In the spirit of conversation (rather than argument) I disagree with the premise, I don't think the play the balls in Super League are slower than the NRL. In fact, I think they are quicker.

Completely and totally disagree Dunny, just in the spirit of conversation mind let's have this discussion over the next 2 weeks.

[UTK]

26 minutes ago, dkw said:

Would you say the final was refereed differently to the majority of games in the NRL this season, as far as I could tell it definitely was as a lot of the more finicky penalties were basically ignored, while a shot to the head that could have seen a sin binning in a regular game only lead to penalty for example.

Definitely, and this tends to happen in most GFs and Origins too but it was certainly noticeable yesterday. 

I believe there was only 1 6-again all match and a 3-2 penalty count with the Broncos conceding 2 via dropouts.

In a sense you can't really do this all season as by the time you reach the final there would seemingly be no laws, but it's certainly done to enhance the spectacle of the individual game.

[Damien]

14 hours ago, JohnM said:

It's at times like this, watching this brilliant  game, listening to the commenatsors, hearing the crowd, seeing the winners presentation, the whole package, that I wish the NRL would take over running SuperLeague.

Granted they do a great job and the difference is night and day. However if they did run SL there is absolutely no guarantee that any of this would happen in SL or that the NRL would fund it.

The NRL can do these things largely because it gets a bumper TV deal that facilitates them. It's also the number 1 sport in many places with a media that treats the sport like Soccer here. Granted they do a great job in many areas but money and the place the sport has in the sporting landscape makes everything easier.  Before the SL war Rugby League was always the sport with the best TV deal in Australia and with News Limited gone for the last decade or so the NRL is getting back to where it should be on a number of fronts.

I'm a huge fan of most of what the NRL has done but put them of charge of SL with less than £20m a year to play with, with the vast majority of that going to clubs, and its a different story. That's not to say we shouldn't do a lot of things better, we undoubtedly should, but I am far from convinced the NRL running things would make anything better. Unless they were going to pump in £20m of their own money each year that is.

[JohnM]

I understand, but I did start my post with "at times like this "

Edited October 2, 2023 by JohnM

[Damien]

32 minutes ago, dkw said:

Would you say the final was refereed differently to the majority of games in the NRL this season, as far as I could tell it definitely was as a lot of the more finicky penalties were basically ignored, while a shot to the head that could have seen a sin binning in a regular game only lead to penalty for example.

I certainly think it was refereed differently and the game was allowed to flow more. As you say there were a number of incidents that were ignored. Interestingly Gee has received widespread praise for letting the game flow.

[DavidM]

13 hours ago, Dunbar said:

We have an obsession with speeding up the game, which usually leads to sloppy play the balls

Yes . Although sloppy is a kind word . They’re a joke . I don’t know if we have the genuine attempt to play the ball rule but we should , the NRL nailed that rule in about a week . From next year everyone should be playing the ball with the foot or it should be a penalty . It really isn’t difficult and the ruck gets a bit more stabilised , slowed down a fraction and less of a mess .  Like quite a lot of things we choose not to focus on we let it disintegrate if we say it’s not important 

[Harry Stottle]

12 hours ago, Dunbar said:

I think we would benefit from slowing the game down a little and let skill unlock a defence

If you want to "let skill unlock a defence" there is no need to artificially slow the game down - the only way I consider what you mean is to slow down the ruck by allowing tacklers an age to break away? - I suggest we "let skill unlock a defense" naturally by two simple rule changes

Reduce the number of interchanges.

Bring the defensive line back to 5 yards.

Reduce the number of interchanges to say a max of 3 this will let fatigue play a role, obviously the reduction on interchanges would be in the forwards, doing so would greatly reduce fresh bodies coming on to the field allowing them or others to target  those who do "unlock the defence" i.e. the  playmakers, reducing the interchanges would also have another effect as the game proceeds and fatigue develops, those wide running forwards will be required in the middle to shore up the defence instead of being employed in the centres for the whole game as is usual now thus creating more space on the outsides.

A 5 meter defensive line would also promote the attacking team to employ deep attacking line's where with greater space on the outsides we would have more contests of centre v centre and winger v winger, and the playmakers far more room to operate.

I cannot see how just by slowing the game down as you suggest will bring more skill to the fore, you are in fact giving the defense more time to organise, kindly explain.

Employing both these rules changes would also have another added bonus, it would rid the game of the 15 minute behemoth interchanges they would be replaced with more agile, faster player's with big aerobic capacities.

[Dunbar]

2 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

If you want to "let skill unlock a defence" there is no need to artificially slow the game down - the only way I consider what you mean is to slow down the ruck by allowing tacklers an age to break away? - I suggest we "let skill unlock a defense" naturally by two simple rule changes

Reduce the number of interchanges.

Bring the defensive line back to 5 yards.

No.  Just ensure the ball is played correctly will be enough.  That is not artificial, just applying the laws of the game.

2 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

I cannot see how just by slowing the game down as you suggest will bring more skill to the fore, you are in fact giving the defense more time to organise, kindly explain.

That's the point, a more organised defence requires more skill to unlock it.

We are always saying we don't have the skilful half backs and ball playing forwards from previous years (not an opinion I 100% endorse) but today we allow teams to roll upfield with fast (incorrect) play the balls.  I would be happy to see a slightly slower play the ball if it meant that teams had to show skill to unlock the defensive line. 

[Harry Stottle]

14 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

We are always saying we don't have the skilful half backs and ball playing forwards from previous years (not an opinion I 100% endorse) but today we allow teams to roll upfield with fast (incorrect) play the balls.  I would be happy to see a slightly slower play the ball if it meant that teams had to show skill to unlock the defensive line. 

I would say we did have more skilful halfbacks, but they played under the rule changes I am suggesting and the benefits they bring, no reason at all that today's playmakers could not emulate those very skilful halfbacks/playmakers of yesteryear.

I notice that you haven't commented on the effects that I have suggested those rule changes would bring, but also agree with you in playing the ball properly.

Edited October 2, 2023 by Harry Stottle

[Wolford6]

The Broncos lost the game but Lee Briers was a winner with his attacking system.

In the end, the Broncos were dead on their feet. It cost them the game, a reminder of the time  when RL didn't have multi-substitutions.

Tired Rugby was a vital factor in the game pre-Superleague. We can't go back to playing on heavy pitches in winter but we can go back to limited substitutions. Bring back the rule that, once you are subbed, you are off for the game..

[Dunbar]

34 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

I would say we did have more skilful halfbacks, but they played under the rule changes I am suggesting and the benefits they bring, no reason at all that today's playmakers could not emulate those very skilful halfbacks/playmakers of yesteryear.

I notice that you haven't commented on the effects that I have suggested those rule changes would bring, but also agree with you in playing the ball properly.

I would be happy to some experiments on the changes that you specify.

On the 5 metre law.  I am not convinced that a deeper backline is any more relevent than the backlines we see today, the skill in shift plays is still evident and passing at the line requires just as much skill as a deeper line - perhaps more so.  But, as I say, I am not against the idea.

On the interchange.  I agree that introducing ratigue and having forwards who can play 80 minutes is a good thing.  I think 3 is a little too low, maybe reduce down to 6 or so.  We do need to provide the opportunity for players to recieve treatment for injury and return and 3 would push that out probably.