The Players Are Revolting

[EggFace]

4 hours ago, Click said:

You say that like there wasn't a whole thread at the time with people debating whether it should be a red or yellow for either of those incidients.

Just because YOU think one incident should be a red and one should be a yellow doesn't make it so.

Castleford fans should have spent the game booing their players for not being able to hold onto a ball.

###### just looking at the feed back on X...etc looks like your in the minority.

[Coggo]

4 minutes ago, Dave T said:

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. 

The RFL is doing this to get the insurance premium down, Dave. Your morals aren’t needed here. 

The NRL won’t go down this road because they don’t need to financially, nor do they have Mr Magoo-like vision. They will surely know it will result in a penalty & milking-penalty fest. 

 

[LeytherRob]

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?

Isn't that exactly what is happening this weekend anyway? If the RFL truly believed in this they could take a stand and get the refs enforce the rules in the WCC.

[Dunbar]

1 hour ago, Coggo said:

The NRL won’t go down this road because they don’t need to financially

The only difference that will make is how much money you have to pay in a case or settle.  The more money an organisation generates, the bigger the penalty. 

If the NFL has to change because of the financial impact, you can rest assured the NRL will.

The difference is the RFL is reacting sooner.  The NRL will eventually. 

[JohnM]

2 hours ago, graveyard johnny said:

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 

Well they can't  .

[Coggo]

38 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

The only difference that will make is how much money you have to pay in a case or settle.  The more money an organisation generates, the bigger the penalty. 

If the NFL has to change because of the financial impact, you can rest assured the NRL will.

The difference is the RFL is reacting sooner.  The NRL will eventually. 

How did the NFL change? Did they ban tackles above the armpit?

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, LeytherRob said:

Isn't that exactly what is happening this weekend anyway? If the RFL truly believed in this they could take a stand and get the refs enforce the rules in the WCC.

Not quite. A clear alternative is that the game isn't staged. 

But if you can make a change that you believe is right for 99%+ of games or for 0%, you'd be silly to choose the latter.

[Dave T]

2 hours ago, Coggo said:

The RFL is doing this to get the insurance premium down, Dave. Your morals aren’t needed here. 

The NRL won’t go down this road because they don’t need to financially, nor do they have Mr Magoo-like vision. They will surely know it will result in a penalty & milking-penalty fest. 

 

There is nothing about morals here. I understand why the RFL are doing it, maybe the critics need to understand too.

[Dunbar]

13 minutes ago, Coggo said:

How did the NFL change? Did they ban tackles above the armpit?

Here is a good site showing the changes over the years.

Don't worry, it didn't take me long... I used Google.

https://www.nfl.com/playerhealthandsafety/equipment-and-innovation/rules-changes/nfl-health-and-safety-related-rules-changes-since-2002

[Coggo]

4 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

Here is a good site showing the changes over the years.

Don't worry, it didn't take me long... I used Google.

https://www.nfl.com/playerhealthandsafety/equipment-and-innovation/rules-changes/nfl-health-and-safety-related-rules-changes-since-2002

Bit snotty but I’ll let it pass. Could you summarise? Any tackle height changes, perhaps?

[Dunbar]

Just now, Coggo said:

Bit snotty but I’ll let it pass. Could you summarise? Any tackle height changes, perhaps?

I apologies for being snotty.

But no, I can't summarise.  It is well known that the NFL has made significant adaptations to both training and game play to adjust the game because of ex players bringing legal cases against the sport.  These are obviously detailed and complex. 

Again, without being snotty, these are not exactly the same changes as Rugby League as they are two different sports and I simply don't have the inclination to make a detailed comparison of the two for you.

[Dunbar]

3 hours ago, graveyard johnny said:

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 

I watched Morley, Burgess and Graham and the best things they did on a pitch are still possible today.  Perhaps with the exception of the shoulder charge which Morley and Burgess were known to execute.  But that has been banned for a while now.

I didn't watch them because they could smack a guy around the head, I watched them because they were tough as nails and could play the game hard even when they were playing fair.

Next year may be a bit different, we will see, but if these three were playing in Super League in 2024, they would still be stars.

Did you really think the best things they did were foul play?

[Coggo]

2 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

I apologies for being snotty.

But no, I can't summarise.  It is well known that the NFL has made significant adaptations to both training and game play to adjust the game because of ex players bringing legal cases against the sport.  These are obviously detailed and complex. 

Again, without being snotty, these are not exactly the same changes as Rugby League as they are two different sports and I simply don't have the inclination to make a detailed comparison of the two for you.

You invoked the NFL as some sort of evidence that rugby league must follow but now they are different. Hmmm.

I wonder if your disinclination is because you know damn well the NFL has not banned tackles above the armpit and their action has largely focused on direct contact with the head. Something which rugby league has already, er, tackled. 

As far as I can tell, the armpit rule is primarily about the RFL’s financial weakness. It is not clear that the NRL will inevitably follow.

[Dunbar]

3 minutes ago, Coggo said:

You invoked the NFL as some sort of evidence that rugby league must follow but now they are different. Hmmm.

I wonder if your disinclination is because you know damn well the NFL has not banned tackles above the armpit and their action has largely focused on direct contact with the head. Something which rugby league has already, er, tackled. 

As far as I can tell, the armpit rule is primarily about the RFL’s financial weakness. It is not clear that the NRL will inevitably follow.

Let me ask you a question.

Do you believe that the NFL has adapted training and game play due to the legal proceedings brought by former players?

[N2022]

36 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

I watched Morley, Burgess and Graham and the best things they did on a pitch are still possible today.  Perhaps with the exception of the shoulder charge which Morley and Burgess were known to execute.  But that has been banned for a while now.

I didn't watch them because they could smack a guy around the head, I watched them because they were tough as nails and could play the game hard even when they were playing fair.

Next year may be a bit different, we will see, but if these three were playing in Super League in 2024, they would still be stars.

Did you really think the best things they did were foul play?

Agree, a good point that it's possible for players to be tough, dish out and take big tackles time after time without dropping anyone on their head, lazily leading with a shoulder to the head, or swinging a forearm at the face of someone held on the floor.

[Worzel]

I mean, the players could always stop smashing their shoulders into their colleagues heads at speed. There’s always that option.

We need insurance. We need disciplinary rigour to get it. 

[ATLANTISMAN]

At this rate the biggest sponsor the RFL will have is FINES:(

[RigbyLuger]

41 minutes ago, Worzel said:

I mean, the players could always stop smashing their shoulders into their colleagues heads at speed. There’s always that option.

We need insurance. We need disciplinary rigour to get it. 

But Liam Watts is being hard done by!!!

[graveyard johnny]

9 hours ago, Dunbar said:

I watched Morley, Burgess and Graham and the best things they did on a pitch are still possible today.  Perhaps with the exception of the shoulder charge which Morley and Burgess were known to execute.  But that has been banned for a while now.

I didn't watch them because they could smack a guy around the head, I watched them because they were tough as nails and could play the game hard even when they were playing fair.

Next year may be a bit different, we will see, but if these three were playing in Super League in 2024, they would still be stars.

Did you really think the best things they did were foul play?

they would have been getting sent off and serving long bans a lot more - Burgess would have gone to RU  earlier and prob stayed there disillusioned 

[OriginalMrC]

1 hour ago, graveyard johnny said:

they would have been getting sent off and serving long bans a lot more - Burgess would have gone to RU  earlier and prob stayed there disillusioned 

Not sure if you've watched any RU lately but its rules around head contact are much stricter than RL.

Good players adapt to changes. If players want to blame the new rules for their own poor technique or stupid decision making then it's up to them. It's not like the changes weren't publicised well in advance of the start of the season. 

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, OriginalMrC said:

Not sure if you've watched any RU lately but its rules around head contact are much stricter than RL.

Good players adapt to changes. If players want to blame the new rules for their own poor technique or stupid decision making then it's up to them. It's not like the changes weren't publicised well in advance of the start of the season. 

I didn't want yo bring Union into it, but it is a perfect example. Plenty don't like it, but the game is carrying in with packed grounds. 

I do like the yellow/red review system they use too. 

[JohnM]

2 hours ago, graveyard johnny said:

they would have been getting sent off and serving long bans a lot more - Burgess would have gone to RU  earlier and prob stayed there disillusioned 

Mere negative speculation based on your personal and in my view uninformed predjudice.  

How do you stand on seatbelts, smoking bans, immunisation like MMR? 

Edited February 21 by JohnM

[Coggo]

11 hours ago, Dunbar said:

Let me ask you a question.

Do you believe that the NFL has adapted training and game play due to the legal proceedings brought by former players?

You're moving the goalposts now but yes, and reducing contact time in day-to-day training seems eminently sensible.

It doesn't follow that the NRL has to follow the RFL's armpit rule change because of the NFL changes.

[Worzel]

9 hours ago, RigbyLuger said:

But Liam Watts is being hard done by!!!

Watts has a poor prior disciplinary record eh. That's how the tariffs work, I've no idea why people don't understand that. Whereas players like Pele have just got off the plane so have a clear record as far as the RFL us concerned (much as I'd like an FC player to be banned for months  )

[Dunbar]

13 minutes ago, Coggo said:

You're moving the goalposts now but yes, and reducing contact time in day-to-day training seems eminently sensible.

It doesn't follow that the NRL has to follow the RFL's armpit rule change because of the NFL changes.

I am not moving any goalposts.  All I said was that the NFL had to change because of the financial impact.

I didn't specify what those changes were and you brought in the height of the tackle in NFL as if that mattered.

The point is simple.  The NFL is orders of magnitude richer than the NRL and had to change due to the pressures applied to them around head injuries and I make this point because you said the NRL wasn't under financial pressure to change.  It will be.

All the rest of our conversation is just stuff you have added to muddy the waters.