BrisbaneRhino wrote:
This discussion ignores the nature of the two games. RL is generally far more unforgiving on the scoreboard when a 'better' team plays a 'weaker' one. There is no place to hide. You cannot aim for scrums, lineouts and penalties and starve the opposition of possession. You score a penalty, you give the ball back for 6 tackles. Against Australia just one set is quite possible to lead to a try against minnows even when starting from their own line.
If the sport wants to become genuinely more competitive across a bigger range of countries we'd have to look at bringing back genuine contests for possession - stripping the ball, allowing tacklers to strike at the PTB, not to mention proper scrums.
This simply won't happen because this isn't what RL is nowadays - contests for possession have been removed to make the game faster and cleaner. Which is fine when teams are relatively evenly matched but a fatal flaw when they're not.
Agree with that. I think for a thriving future of the sport we have to go back and reintroduce some of the elements we got rid, even if only in a very mild fashion.
I'd have proper scrums. I totally understand people being against this but I don't think it'd turn into Union style scrums (which have been hugely cleaned up in the last year or so) and I think they'd genuinely give "lesser" teams another chance at competing. Get some tackle-hungry backrowers and a couple of big props and a good kicking half back and suddenly a team has a way of making a better opposition have to work. Because the lesser team can kick downfield and then potentially win the scrum.
Smokey had some decent suggestions on a previous thread of possibly changing the 40-20 to a 30-30 or changing the game to 4 quarters instead of 2 halves.
I'm not advocating going back to rucks, mauls and lineouts but just a few ways to help teams compete.