The Players Are Revolting

[Coggo]

Nothing to see here. It's just fervent traditionalism. 

[Dave T]

56 minutes ago, phiggins said:

Yes, but bringing the situation forward to present day. The studies have been done, rule changes put forward and so on. If consultation with a players union sees that tweaked, maybe to get what players see as a better balance, or if a players union vote against rule changes, will that offer any extra protections for the RFL against lawsuits in the future, knowing due process was followed?

Being neither a lawyer or an insurer, I genuinely don't know.

Me neither mate, but if I'm honest, I think as the governing body, they have a responsibility to listen to the best experts and I don't think that means players. 

That isn't to be dismissive of them, I think instead of keep moaning about this stuff they should form a union and stick to it. 

[sam4731]

1 hour ago, LeytherRob said:

No idea how that would be such a controversial standpoint. It's ridiculous that we have 3 sets of rules(international, SL, NRL) at the top level and even more variances below at lower levels. It long overdue that the 3 main governing bodies come together and agree a universal rule set to be reviewed only as a whole.

We need a governing body which sets the rules of the game at every level. I would suggest 2 reps from NRL and SL, 1 rep from FRXIII and NZRL, and 1 rep to represent ERL and APRL.

[LeytherRob]

50 minutes ago, Coggo said:

Nothing to see here. It's just fervent traditionalism. 

Would you class the decision to abandon the new rules for this weekends WCC 'fervent traditionalism' from the governing body?

[up the robins]

Let's be honest most of the bans given out would of been the same last year. Its its the inconsistencies that is more damaging we have seen a few examples of one player been banned and another let off for offences which are very similar.

I think the leniency shown to the wigan offences is shocking and very damaging to the sport and is one of biggest factors in fans and players getting annoyed along with a very baffling Liam Watts charge.

With the tackling technique issues if we don't act on player safety the sport won't get insurance. 

How does the sport stand if players all signed wavers saying they accept the dangerous sport they are playing and acknowledge the potential for head injury or long term problems leading from head knocks and that they will not be able to seek any compensation for this. 

Not sure many will sign up for it so will have to accept to change the way they tackle.

[Josef K]

1 hour ago, gingerjon said:

He really wants the two point drop goal in Super League 

I’m surprised he hasn’t demanded that the RFL scrap playing with the ball foot. 

[Spidey]

The players have tried numerous times to set up a voice in the game but didn't stick at it, if they don't get a say now they have only themselves to blame

[iffleyox]

27 minutes ago, up the robins said:

 

How does the sport stand if players all signed wavers saying they accept the dangerous sport they are playing and acknowledge the potential for head injury or long term problems leading from head knocks and that they will not be able to seek any compensation for this. 

Red herring - people keep mentioning it but it's not how the law works. Waivers enforce some things, but they don't absolve one side totally either. There will always be a possible court case, most probably on the grounds of duty of care, and there will always be an existential threat therefore to governing bodies. 

The most worrying, and it's behind a paywall but I read it in the Times the other week, was a throwaway line in an article/letter from a group of doctors advocating the banning of rugby (both codes) for Under 18s. They wanted to do that on the grounds that Under 18s have no competency to decide to put themselves at such risk - *but* (and here's the stinger) they also said that *no one at all* has the competency to do so either really...

Now, that's extremism, but we come back to the point that 'sign something and crack on' isn't a panacea for the reason that like many simple and seductive things, it won't work.

Edited February 20 by iffleyox

[JohnM]

2 hours ago, EggFace said:

What will kill the game is players getting a yellow card for smashing opposing players head neck int theo the ground which can lead to injury and worse to being paralyzed and then dishing out a red for the Liam Watts tackle( Westerman was the first contact) and which should of being a yellow hence Wigan  running a mok hence the booing from fans and the outrage from the Tigers coaching staff, fans Tv Pundits.

Cool heads and a sensible approach from all sides need to happen.

Cool heads and a sensible approach

Amen to that... right here, right now....right here....right now.

smashing opposing players head neck  into the ground

being paralyzed

Wigan  running a mok (sic)

outrage 

Edited February 20 by JohnM

[Dave T]

5 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Cool heads and a sensible approach

Amen to that... right here, right now....right here....right now.

smashing opposing players head neck  into the ground

being paralyzed

Wigan  running a mok (sic)

outrage 

I must admit, the post you quoted did make me chuckle for the same reason.

[Dave T]

The more I think about this, the more I come to the conclusion that the players are being absolute A-holes. Let's be honest here - Watts is an absolute liability, ad as much as the mob at Cas have mastered the shocked face when he gets sent off (from the players to the coaching team) - it was a high tackle with the shoulder to the head. He will get whatever punishment he deserves. 

Same with McIlorum at Catalans. 

The Hull FC lad was an absolute idiot, and whilst the knee to the head one was more debateable, there was recklessness there, but it needs to play out at disciplinary.

I do have some sympathy with any criticism of the Harry Smith incident, but if that is leading to talking about players going on strike then they are just showing themselves up to be honest.

As was asked earlier, what exactly is it they are complaining about? "Not being consulted" is a lazy catch-all.

[Damien]

16 minutes ago, Dave T said:

The more I think about this, the more I come to the conclusion that the players are being absolute A-holes. Let's be honest here - Watts is an absolute liability, ad as much as the mob at Cas have mastered the shocked face when he gets sent off (from the players to the coaching team) - it was a high tackle with the shoulder to the head. He will get whatever punishment he deserves. 

Same with McIlorum at Catalans. 

The Hull FC lad was an absolute idiot, and whilst the knee to the head one was more debateable, there was recklessness there, but it needs to play out at disciplinary.

I do have some sympathy with any criticism of the Harry Smith incident, but if that is leading to talking about players going on strike then they are just showing themselves up to be honest.

As was asked earlier, what exactly is it they are complaining about? "Not being consulted" is a lazy catch-all.

I certainly think there is an element of playing up to the outraged on Twitter in all of this, similar to what we have seen previously when the game cracked down on high tackles

[Coggo]

26 minutes ago, Dave T said:

The more I think about this, the more I come to the conclusion that the players are being absolute A-holes. Let's be honest here - Watts is an absolute liability, ad as much as the mob at Cas have mastered the shocked face when he gets sent off (from the players to the coaching team) - it was a high tackle with the shoulder to the head. He will get whatever punishment he deserves. 

Same with McIlorum at Catalans. 

The Hull FC lad was an absolute idiot, and whilst the knee to the head one was more debateable, there was recklessness there, but it needs to play out at disciplinary.

I do have some sympathy with any criticism of the Harry Smith incident, but if that is leading to talking about players going on strike then they are just showing themselves up to be honest.

As was asked earlier, what exactly is it they are complaining about? "Not being consulted" is a lazy catch-all.

If you mean Alex Walmsley, you might want to read his article first.

[Damien]

Looking at this tweet, and others, the players were consulted and Jamie-Jones Buchanan, Jon Wells, Denis Betts, Garreth Carvell were on the panel. Obviously Carvell is the head of the Rugby League Players Association and represents the views of the players:

 

 

[graveyard johnny]

the players just want to play the game they grew up watching and playing and fell in love with - the forwards most likely want to emulate Burgess Morley and James  Graham  and many other great players - as  a fan I  want to watch them too- not players with bibs on - you know what your signing up for when you play "what used to be" the hardest fastest contact sport in the world 

[Dave T]

6 minutes ago, Coggo said:

If you mean Alex Walmsley, you might want to read his article first.

He doesn't really say anything too interesting. He wants consulting. His main gripe appears to be around the difference between the NRL and the UK game. So is his suggestion that we just have to fall in line with the NRL irrespective of what the RFL believe is right?

[M j M]

The main thing I think the RFL need to focus on is their transparency.

I'd go all out on this front - and this will also create content, albeit some might think it's a distraction.

The MRP should produce a video each week analysing players whose actions have been graded, properly explaining them in the context of the current laws and looking at why they have got the grading they have recieved. And perhaps explaining why other ones haven't been graded the same way. Any red or yellow cards which don't even get on the MRP minutes should also be addressed here.

The Tuesday night hearings should be recorded and highlights made available the following day.

[OriginalMrC]

I find it interesting that players are starting a union after one weekend with new rules bought in for their own benefit and for the long term future of the sport. This is all the while they've sat by idly while players have treated very poorly for years (multiple examples of clubs not honouring contracts etc). 

 

Ps. If they do start a union I recommend they call it the Rugby Football Union

Edited February 20 by OriginalMrC

[RigbyLuger]

2 minutes ago, OriginalMrC said:

I find it interesting that players are starting a union after one weekend with new rules bought in for their own benefit and for the long term future of the sport. This is all the while they've sat by idly while players have treated very poorly for years (multiple examples of clubs not honouring contracts etc). 

 

Ps. If they do start a union I recommend they call it the Rugby Football Union

Great point!!! Have all the Toronto players been paid up yet?

[Dave T]

7 minutes ago, OriginalMrC said:

I find it interesting that players are starting a union after one weekend with new rules bought in for their own benefit and for the long term future of the sport. This is all the while they've sat by idly while players have treated very poorly for years (multiple examples of clubs not honouring contracts etc). 

 

Ps. If they do start a union I recommend they call it the Rugby Football Union

Indeed - it's weird, and tbh a lot of it comes across as macho BS. Surely there are bigger things for players to focus on rather than this?

[Dave T]

8 minutes ago, M j M said:

The main thing I think the RFL need to focus on is their transparency.

I'd go all out on this front - and this will also create content, albeit some might think it's a distraction.

The MRP should produce a video each week analysing players whose actions have been graded, properly explaining them in the context of the current laws and looking at why they have got the grading they have recieved. And perhaps explaining why other ones haven't been graded the same way. Any red or yellow cards which don't even get on the MRP minutes should also be addressed here.

The Tuesday night hearings should be recorded and highlights made available the following day.

Now we have quality coverage of every incident, this is absolutely the kind of thing we should be looking at. 

[LeytherRob]

6 minutes ago, OriginalMrC said:

I find it interesting that players are starting a union after one weekend with new rules bought in for their own benefit and for the long term future of the sport. This is all the while they've sat by idly while players have treated very poorly for years (multiple examples of clubs not honouring contracts etc). 

 

Ps. If they do start a union I recommend they call it the Rugby Football Union

If it was just about the rules they'd have been kicking off weeks ago, pretty much every player who has spoken out in the last week has centred their comments on the consistency of the implementation of said rules rather than the rules themselves, and they have a point. The differences between ban lengths have been demonstably inconsistent.

[Coggo]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

He doesn't really say anything too interesting. He wants consulting. His main gripe appears to be around the difference between the NRL and the UK game. So is his suggestion that we just have to fall in line with the NRL irrespective of what the RFL believe is right?

‘This season, we are seeing more changes to the rules. We are speeding up the ruck, policing correct play the balls and having harsher punishments for high tackles. Rules, I think you could argue, are in proportion and will improve the game, but from next year the recommendation is that at all levels of the game, players will have to tackle on or below armpit height. If this is followed through, players across the game, including Super League and the Championship, will have to completely change their tackle technique, which will in turn alter the look of the sport for spectators.’

This is the key bit for me. I’m not sure some realise how big a change this is. 

I’ve had to make the change as a player and I totally understand where Walmsley is coming from.

He’s not saying we should slavishly follow the NRL but warning how diverging in this significant way will put Northern hemisphere sides at a disadvantage. 

[Dave T]

3 minutes ago, Coggo said:

‘This season, we are seeing more changes to the rules. We are speeding up the ruck, policing correct play the balls and having harsher punishments for high tackles. Rules, I think you could argue, are in proportion and will improve the game, but from next year the recommendation is that at all levels of the game, players will have to tackle on or below armpit height. If this is followed through, players across the game, including Super League and the Championship, will have to completely change their tackle technique, which will in turn alter the look of the sport for spectators.’

This is the key bit for me. I’m not sure some realise how big a change this is. 

I’ve had to make the change as a player and I totally understand where Walmsley is coming from.

He’s not saying we should slavishly follow the NRL but warning how diverging in this significant way will put Northern hemisphere sides at a disadvantage. 

But that is ignoring the reasons why we are doing it. I'd rather we have a joined up worldwide approach, but it's clear the RFL and Aussie game are not in the same place. We can't ignore that. 

But ultimately, if the NRL are not going that way and the RFL feel they have to, then it has to be done. 

[Damien]

Just on the topic title, it isn't just me that keeps thinking about the players being disgusting and sickening, rather than protesting, every time they see it?