The Ghost of '99 wrote:
The fact that there are so many wielding pitchforks in response to a seriously misguided statement from Wakefield management means its even more important for at least someone to try and bring some facts to this place.
If that hurts the feelings of some Wakey fans so be it.
But you haven't really brought any facts. You've brought an opinion, which you're entitled to hold, but opinions aren't facts.
You disagree with MC's statement. Fine. I respect that. But MC will know much more about the problems with the game and those who run it, so if he is saying these things, they are not without foundation.
The game needs reform, but off the pitch and on high. The RFL rely on blind loyalty. The problem they will have is that over the last year, people have found other things to do, or got out of the habit. They need to win them back. Banning players for innocuous challenges because of strict adherence to tick-box disciplinary codes will not put bums back on the seats, and the RFL might have to work harder than they think.
I know how laws work, and I know when they work properly. The more prescriptive, the more detailed, the more unjustly they work. Rules that are more general in nature, that can be defined based around general principles and goals, allow flexibility and allow everything to be judged on their actual merit, rather than, "contact after the ball has been released is a category X, which means a ban of X".
We're in the entertainment business. We're not in the rule-making business.
