Re: SL RD 17 | Wakefield Trinity (A) : Sun Jun 02, 2019 3:44 pm  

Seth wrote:

Lolohea missing indefinitely as it appears Scott Murrell has eaten him?

Really enjoyed that game, but of a throw back to an earlier era, but much more enjoyable than most of what SL has served up for the last few years.

Re: SL RD 17 | Wakefield Trinity (A) : Sun Jun 02, 2019 3:49 pm  

Enjoyed the contest, quality was pretty average but yeah there's a fine line between developing the full time athletes and the defensive structure/wrestle that's stifled the game.

Re: SL RD 17 | Wakefield Trinity (A) : Mon Jun 03, 2019 12:30 am  

Watching the NRL nowadays I think you can make a genuine case for moving to 12 a side. Defensive control of the ruck is so extreme its really hard to make space properly because defences are generally well set almost the whole time. The sad thing is that there are some incredible wingers around but you rarely get to see them in full flight because the covering players are so quick now that even when they get half a gap its normally gone in a few strides.

Re: SL RD 17 | Wakefield Trinity (A) : Mon Jun 03, 2019 6:09 am  

BrisbaneRhino wrote:

Watching the NRL nowadays I think you can make a genuine case for moving to 12 a side. Defensive control of the ruck is so extreme its really hard to make space properly because defences are generally well set almost the whole time. The sad thing is that there are some incredible wingers around but you rarely get to see them in full flight because the covering players are so quick now that even when they get half a gap its normally gone in a few strides.

Yep. I’ve thought this for a few years as the defences/wrestle have got so good. It doesn’t matter how good a half you are or what line you run as a back rower there are the gaps there that there used to be and they’ve now learnt how to survive set after set on their own line.

I also think there’s a couple of smaller changes we can make as a game to open things up more. We could stop defences moving up until the acting half back picks the ball up rather than on the foot of the tackles player. Might seem like a small move but it would give attack’s an extra second before the line moves up.

We could also change the rule for going in touch from a scrum to the opposition to a play the ball for the attacking team 5m in from touch. This would turn encourage teams to attack down the wings more and effectively open up space on the pitch that is a bit dead at the moment because wingers don’t want to get pushed in touch and lose possession.

Re: SL RD 17 | Wakefield Trinity (A) : Mon Jun 03, 2019 7:07 am  

The last one you could only have that way if within the opposition's 20 - you'd want to reward good defence elsewhere?

Whilst RL has shown a willingness to tinker with rules to make things flow better, from an entertainment perspective we might be nearing the point where more fundamental changes are needed. The only other tinkering changes that might have a real impact would be further reductions in interchanges.

There are always unintended consequences, but there are some other radical changes I'd like smarter people than me to look at - how about disabling the wrestle by not letting more than 2 players get involved in a tackle for example?

To me the entertainment angle of RL is simply less than it was (that's no the same as 'better' in terms of which teams from which era would win). There should be no universe where defending teams are happy to give away penalties in their own 20m because they are confident of defending it. The balance between attack and defence is completely wrong if that's the case (excluding Leeds of course!)

Re: SL RD 17 | Wakefield Trinity (A) : Mon Jun 03, 2019 7:37 am  

BrisbaneRhino wrote:

The last one you could only have that way if within the opposition's 20 - you'd want to reward good defence elsewhere?

Whilst RL has shown a willingness to tinker with rules to make things flow better, from an entertainment perspective we might be nearing the point where more fundamental changes are needed. The only other tinkering changes that might have a real impact would be further reductions in interchanges.

There are always unintended consequences, but there are some other radical changes I'd like smarter people than me to look at - how about disabling the wrestle by not letting more than 2 players get involved in a tackle for example?

To me the entertainment angle of RL is simply less than it was (that's no the same as 'better' in terms of which teams from which era would win). There should be no universe where defending teams are happy to give away penalties in their own 20m because they are confident of defending it. The balance between attack and defence is completely wrong if that's the case (excluding Leeds of course!)

The better first start would be to re-eductate referrees in the rules of the game, instead of incorrect interpretations. They don't work to the rules at all, and the game has been completely ruined as a result.

The biggest start they could make over all, and they did it in the NRL is make them play the bloody ball properly. Literally nobody in our competition anymore actually play the ball at all. In a hell of a lot of cases, they don't even mimick the foot movement, but just simply roll it backwards. This is unacceptable, and part of the reason so much wrestling goes on at the play the ball.

Re: SL RD 17 | Wakefield Trinity (A) : Mon Jun 03, 2019 7:56 am  

To be honest I think the lack of entertainment, if it exists, would be down do the lack of real quality players than anything else.

Reducing interchanges might be beneficial on a number of levels.

I think it's important not to over-complicate rules, or introduce too much interpretation to referees who are already struggling it seems to me. For example, if a defending team is loading more than two players into a tackle, it's up to the attacking team to play quickly at the edges and keep them honest IMO.
The ruck is a mess though - but that's not a new thing.

Re: SL RD 17 | Wakefield Trinity (A) : Mon Jun 03, 2019 1:52 pm  

Gotcha wrote:

The better first start would be to re-eductate referrees in the rules of the game, instead of incorrect interpretations. They don't work to the rules at all, and the game has been completely ruined as a result.

The biggest start they could make over all, and they did it in the NRL is make them play the bloody ball properly. Literally nobody in our competition anymore actually play the ball at all. In a hell of a lot of cases, they don't even mimick the foot movement, but just simply roll it backwards. This is unacceptable, and part of the reason so much wrestling goes on at the play the ball.

Completely agree with this, no more "interpretations" or pre-season rule negotiations with clubs and coaches, let's just play to the rules:

[b]10. The play-the-ball shall operate as follows.

Release tackled player immediately (a) The tackled player shall be immediately released and shall not be touched until the ball is in play.

Regain feet (b) The tackled player shall without delay regain his feet where he was tackled, lift the ball clear of the ground, face his opponent’s goal line and drop or place the ball on the ground in front of his foremost foot.

Player marking (c) One opponent may take up the position immediately opposite the tackled player.

(d) The tackled player may not play the ball before the players effecting the tackle have had time to clear the ruck.

Play with foot (e) When the ball touches the ground it must be heeled (i.e. backwards) by the tackled player. The ball must not be kicked or heeled by the player marking him. The ball is in play when it has been played backward.



With regards to (d) it really annoys me to see a defender knelt just pushing down on a tackled player while looking at the referee waiting to be told to release the attacker.

Re: SL RD 17 | Wakefield Trinity (A) : Mon Jun 03, 2019 6:55 pm  

Holmes wrote:

Completely agree with this, no more "interpretations" or pre-season rule negotiations with clubs and coaches, let's just play to the rules:

[b]10. The play-the-ball shall operate as follows.

Release tackled player immediately (a) The tackled player shall be immediately released and shall not be touched until the ball is in play.

Regain feet (b) The tackled player shall without delay regain his feet where he was tackled, lift the ball clear of the ground, face his opponent’s goal line and drop or place the ball on the ground in front of his foremost foot.

Player marking (c) One opponent may take up the position immediately opposite the tackled player.

(d) The tackled player may not play the ball before the players effecting the tackle have had time to clear the ruck.

Play with foot (e) When the ball touches the ground it must be heeled (i.e. backwards) by the tackled player. The ball must not be kicked or heeled by the player marking him. The ball is in play when it has been played backward.



With regards to (d) it really annoys me to see a defender knelt just pushing down on a tackled player while looking at the referee waiting to be told to release the attacker.

And let's have 1 set of rules for the whole sport. Not 1 for over here, 1 for NRL and 1 for international.

Re: SL RD 17 | Wakefield Trinity (A) : Mon Jun 03, 2019 7:03 pm  

Looks like Golding playing second hooker this week.

Johnson, Trout, Mcclelland all playing for Fev in midweek cup match. So all overlooked again. Interestingly Albert also on dual reg.