England eye answers over 2024 Samoan test series

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, Damien said:

I'd say many RL fans don't notice either.

Agree, it's absolutely a niche point. 

It's not a real issue for the vast majority of existing fans, and there is no logic to it being an issue for a brand new fan. 

[Leyther_Matt]

The pitch markings moans will never stop being weird. And they clearly don’t recall when an offside decision at Old Trafford was analysed on Match of the Day in relation to the post-Grand Final markings. 

[BristolDevonCharlie]

3 hours ago, Dave T said:

I think it's fair enough as an RL fan being frustrated about stuff like this. 

But, please, explain to me again how this is any kind of issue for people watching their first RL game on TV, or Union fans, who also have no numbers or red lines. 

At what point do they get frustrated by things they won't even be aware of? 

Haha, I think you are getting hung up on this one point and not understanding the nuance of my point.

You actually summed it up really well a few days ago. So to save you arguing with yourself, I will leave it here.

Let's hope we have some decent internationals to watch in 2024! Roll on a strong Samoa team. 

 

[Dave T]

34 minutes ago, BristolDevonCharlie said:

Haha, I think you are getting hung up on this one point and not understanding the nuance of my point.

You actually summed it up really well a few days ago. So to save you arguing with yourself, I will leave it here.

Let's hope we have some decent internationals to watch in 2024! Roll on a strong Samoa team. 

 

You have repeatedly made the point that pitch markings are an issue ,but not been able to explain what the issue is and who it is an issue for.

There is nothing at all nuanced about making a point then refusing to back it up. 

If these people where you are from are complaining about International RL pitches, then I'm sorry, but I am questioning the honesty of what you are claiming. Look at the RUWC Final pitch markings, and look at the International RL pitch markings and explain why anyone would have an issue. 

 

[Big Picture]

2 hours ago, Dave T said:

You have repeatedly made the point that pitch markings are an issue ,but not been able to explain what the issue is and who it is an issue for.

There is nothing at all nuanced about making a point then refusing to back it up. 

If these people where you are from are complaining about International RL pitches, then I'm sorry, but I am questioning the honesty of what you are claiming. Look at the RUWC Final pitch markings, and look at the International RL pitch markings and explain why anyone would have an issue. 

What you're missing is that in other sports (major and minor sports alike), within a competition the fields/courts/rinks are always marked the same way.

The few variations which exist in those sports are in different competitions, e.g. the hash marks being further apart in NCAA gridiron than in the NFL, but always the same within the respective competition and always exactly as specified in their respective rule books.

RL's lack of consistency sticks out like a sore thumb as a sign of the game's small time way of doing things and therefore gives outsiders a bad impression of it.

Re the numbers, ever since the change to equidistant, solid lines 25-30 years ago, numbers are indispensable to help TV viewers know where on the field the play is because there aren't any other visual clues.  They also differentiate the game visibly from RU.

Hopefully this makes the issue clear for you.

Edited December 15, 2023 by Big Picture

[BristolDevonCharlie]

2 hours ago, Dave T said:

You have repeatedly made the point that pitch markings are an issue ,but not been able to explain what the issue is and who it is an issue for.

There is nothing at all nuanced about making a point then refusing to back it up. 

If these people where you are from are complaining about International RL pitches, then I'm sorry, but I am questioning the honesty of what you are claiming. Look at the RUWC Final pitch markings, and look at the International RL pitch markings and explain why anyone would have an issue. 

 

Honesty? Wow! Knickers in a twist much!

My point, as your point was, is about the 'thousand cuts' which mean a new audience may not take the sport seriously... Not sure I said anywhere that pitch markings on their own are likely to put anyone off. However, all bundled up together with poor crowds, non-neutral refs, unhelpful scheduling, and other confusing things, they conspire to put Rugby League in a position where it is difficult to win over new fans. Not to say it will not, or cannot. 

This is just my experience in the forgotten distant Rugby League provinces (although you will have to judge whether you think I am lying or not! )

[MattSantos]

21 hours ago, Gomersall said:

Not even when it appears the ref/VR is favouring his home nation?

No. Because they don't. They might make a bad decision now again, but that's sport.

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, Big Picture said:

What you're missing is that in other sports (major and minor sports alike), within a competition the fields/courts/rinks are always marked the same way.

The few variations which exist in those sports are in different competitions, e.g. the hash marks being further apart in NCAA gridiron than in the NFL, but always the same within the respective competition and always exactly as specified in their respective rule books.

RL's lack of consistency sticks out like a sore thumb as a sign of the game's small time way of doing things and therefore gives outsiders a bad impression of it.

Re the numbers, ever since the change to equidistant, solid lines 25-30 years ago, numbers are indispensable to help TV viewers know where on the field the play is because there aren't any other visual clues.  They also differentiate the game visibly from RU.

Hopefully this makes the issue clear for you.

You explain why you keep repeating it, but you don;t explain in the slightest why it is an issue.

I expect lack of pitch marking consistency is raised as a real issue by no more than a handful of people across the world, and we are lucky enough to have a couple of you here. 

It really isn't an issue that Hull mark their 10m and 30m line with dotted lines because they play on a football pitch. It isn't an issue that the Aussies mark the 40m and 20m line in red, whereas SL has a red and white line (or just white). 

It isn't an issue that Warrington play without numbers on their pitch, but people watching on the other side of the world in Canberra have numbers. 

People watched RL on TV without numbers for decades with no issue. People watch RL on TV now without numbers with no issue. People watch RU on tv without numbers with no issue.

There is no issue here, there is preference.  

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, BristolDevonCharlie said:

Honesty? Wow! Knickers in a twist much!

My point, as your point was, is about the 'thousand cuts' which mean a new audience may not take the sport seriously... Not sure I said anywhere that pitch markings on their own are likely to put anyone off. However, all bundled up together with poor crowds, non-neutral refs, unhelpful scheduling, and other confusing things, they conspire to put Rugby League in a position where it is difficult to win over new fans. Not to say it will not, or cannot. 

This is just my experience in the forgotten distant Rugby League provinces (although you will have to judge whether you think I am lying or not! )

TBH, when you have so few posts, and many of them are complaining about the sport, it does rather bring into question your intent here. So I'm happy to leave you to it. 

[BristolDevonCharlie]

44 minutes ago, Dave T said:

TBH, when you have so few posts, and many of them are complaining about the sport, it does rather bring into question your intent here. So I'm happy to leave you to it. 

Fair enough, you have outed me. Haha, whatever!

I don't complain nearly as much as you do my friend. The moaniest man on this forum  . 

I love Rugby League, it is a fantastic sport. I wish it was bigger in my part of the world. That is all. 

Sorry I offended you so much by being from Devon!

Edited December 15, 2023 by BristolDevonCharlie

[Dave T]

2 hours ago, Big Picture said:

 

The few variations which exist in those sports are in different competitions, e.g. the hash marks being further apart in NCAA gridiron than in the NFL, but always the same within the respective competition and always exactly as specified in their respective rule books.

 

Just on this point specifically:

You'll notice that the international laws are very light touch on the pitch markings:

Rugby League Laws of the Game (intrl.sport)

They have numbers on the pitch, but they also have all sorts of other arrows, writing and lines across the pitch too that are not to be included on the pithc. They have five notes on things like pitch dimensions, lines and corner flags. It doesn't explicitly state that the transversal lines must not be broken, although it does state they must go across the full pitch i.e. from touchline to touchline. It doesn't offer any commentary on numbers.

If you then go to the NRL Laws, you'll see that they add section 18, which are their competition guidelines on pitch markings. Here they highlight use of numbers, red lines for 20m and 40m (although it also says white for 20, so poorly written, or ignored) etc. 

nrl-international-rules-book-2023_web-version-1.pdf (playrugbyleague.com)

The RFL use the international laws on their website:

Laws of the Game (rugby-league.com)

 

So, whilst you keep claiming that what you are asking for is in the rules - actually isn't. It is the NRL brand guidelines. 

[Gomersall]

1 hour ago, MattSantos said:

No. Because they don't. They might make a bad decision now again, but that's sport.

That’s why I said appears. The outcry on here when the on field ref, Gerard Sutton and the VR Bernard Sutton,  ruled out a possible Ryan Hall try was huge.

[Gomersall]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

You explain why you keep repeating it, but you don;t explain in the slightest why it is an issue.

I expect lack of pitch marking consistency is raised as a real issue by no more than a handful of people across the world, and we are lucky enough to have a couple of you here. 

It really isn't an issue that Hull mark their 10m and 30m line with dotted lines because they play on a football pitch. It isn't an issue that the Aussies mark the 40m and 20m line in red, whereas SL has a red and white line (or just white). 

It isn't an issue that Warrington play without numbers on their pitch, but people watching on the other side of the world in Canberra have numbers. 

People watched RL on TV without numbers for decades with no issue. People watch RL on TV now without numbers with no issue. People watch RU on tv without numbers with no issue.

There is no issue here, there is preference.  

Hull don’t play on a football pitch. They play on a pitch in a shared stadium. 

[Big Picture]

3 hours ago, Dave T said:

You explain why you keep repeating it, but you don;t explain in the slightest why it is an issue.

I expect lack of pitch marking consistency is raised as a real issue by no more than a handful of people across the world, and we are lucky enough to have a couple of you here. 

It really isn't an issue that Hull mark their 10m and 30m line with dotted lines because they play on a football pitch. It isn't an issue that the Aussies mark the 40m and 20m line in red, whereas SL has a red and white line (or just white). 

It isn't an issue that Warrington play without numbers on their pitch, but people watching on the other side of the world in Canberra have numbers. 

People watched RL on TV without numbers for decades with no issue. People watch RL on TV now without numbers with no issue. People watch RU on tv without numbers with no issue.

There is no issue here, there is preference.  

I get that the lack of consistency isn't an issue for you and others who grew up with the game, it's what you've always known and accepted as a result.

@BristolDevonCharlieand I aren't talking about how you guys see that though, but about how outsiders to the game will see it.  And in our experience they see it as poor and second-rate, so it's an obstacle to getting them interested.

You're getting hung up on the subject of numbers on the field which is only part of the issue.

The lack of consistency is a bigger issue.  It's something unique to RL and its small time, make do, don't rock the boat way of doing things which testifies to the fact that consciously or not administrators don't think the game deserves equal treatment to what other sports get when booking venues.  It's simply not good enough.

[Dave T]

55 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

I get that the lack of consistency isn't an issue for you and others who grew up with the game, it's what you've always known and accepted as a result.

@BristolDevonCharlieand I aren't talking about how you guys see that though, but about how outsiders to the game will see it.  And in our experience they see it as poor and second-rate, so it's an obstacle to getting them interested.

You're getting hung up on the subject of numbers on the field which is only part of the issue.

The lack of consistency is a bigger issue.  It's something unique to RL and its small time, make do, don't rock the boat way of doing things which testifies to the fact that consciously or not administrators don't think the game deserves equal treatment to what other sports get when booking venues.  It's simply not good enough.

You're going on as though sometimes our pitches are blue, and other times we use netball goals instead of Rugby posts. 

We have consistency in SL. Any differences are so minor that people don't even notice. Most won't have a clue what you're talking about. 

[Big Picture]

12 minutes ago, Dave T said:

You're going on as though sometimes our pitches are blue, and other times we use netball goals instead of Rugby posts. 

We have consistency in SL. Any differences are so minor that people don't even notice. Most won't have a clue what you're talking about. 

As @BristolDevonCharlie explained above, you're mistaken.  Outsiders do notice because it sticks out like a sore thumb compared to every other sport they've seen before.

And when some fields are full length with all solid lines, others full length with a mix of solid and broken lines and still others not full length, then SL certainly does not have consistency. 

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, Big Picture said:

I get that the lack of consistency isn't an issue for you and others who grew up with the game, it's what you've always known and accepted... 

You know this is a nonsense take don't you? Watching RL doesn't mean you are isolated from everything else. We've all seen these examples of consistency you keep going on about in other sports. Many of us watch and follow other sports, for some RL won't even be first choice. 

But still, it just isn't an issue for most. And not because of small mindedness or what we've always known, just because, well, an RL pitch ain't complicated really. 

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, Big Picture said:

As @BristolDevonCharlie explained above, you're mistaken.  Outsiders do notice because it sticks out like a sore thumb compared to every other sport they've seen before.

And when some fields are full length with all solid lines, others full length with a mix of solid and broken lines and still others not full length, then SL certainly does not have consistency. 

Prove it. Nobody watching an RL game on BBC raised the issue that another game they watched weeks ago had a broken 10m line instead of a full one. 

It just isn't happening. 

[Leyther_Matt]

If anyone notices the differences then that means they’ve watched more than one game and means we have ’got’ them anyway, based on the old “we only need people to see one game” adage. 

[Leyther_Matt]

Btw from a playing point of view (in my dim and distant past), having broken and solid lines was way more helpful than trying to squint to see a number painted on the touchline 30m away. I’d say similar from a spectator and even TV point of view too as you can see exactly where the play is without having to look elsewhere (or not having that opportunity at all when the camera is zoomed in)

[Dave T]

6 minutes ago, Leyther_Matt said:

Btw from a playing point of view (in my dim and distant past), having broken and solid lines was way more helpful than trying to squint to see a number painted on the touchline 30m away. I’d say similar from a spectator and even TV point of view too as you can see exactly where the play is without having to look elsewhere (or not having that opportunity at all when the camera is zoomed in)

Despite disagreeing with BP on this, I do agree with the point that a nicely dressed pitch is a good thing. Where we disagree is on how big an issue it is, and I also have plenty pragmatism on the reasons why we can't paint all over pitches. 

[Lowdesert]

It would be interesting to see how many others on here have identified noticeable pitch discrepancies/ makings etc.

Any coach worth his salt would have already identified how to deal with them but I doubt the average fan would even be bothered.

 

[sam4731]

How far away from the point of the thread do we have to be before it's killed off?

[Tommygilf]

3 hours ago, Dave T said:

Despite disagreeing with BP on this, I do agree with the point that a nicely dressed pitch is a good thing. Where we disagree is on how big an issue it is, and I also have plenty pragmatism on the reasons why we can't paint all over pitches. 

I think what is disappointing to me about this is that it is another example of where the sport used to take these things seriously and put effort into it being professional to these things just slipping quietly off the radar.

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

I think what is disappointing to me about this is that it is another example of where the sport used to take these things seriously and put effort into it being professional to these things just slipping quietly off the radar.

Partly. If people like consistency, then back in the day it was even more stark differences as some grounds couldn't have the paint and some could. The lack of sponsors on the field now does bring more consistency. A lot of grounds over the years didn't allow for the paint. 

But where I don't think is an issue is when you look at other sports in the UK. They just don't have paint all over them either, both football and Union have more plain pitches than us and nobody bat's an eyelid. 

I think the use of the word professional is misplaced here. Paint on the pitch doesn't mean professional. 

Edited December 16, 2023 by Dave T