Why dont teams inside the 40 attack from the get go?

[Different kind of Rabbit]

Rugby League is and always has been a game of risk.

It, more than any other game, punishes you badly for your errors.

This is why coaches play the numbers. It's very hard to sustain a game plan whereby you continually play attacking football, considering the more you attack, the more likely you are to make an error and gift the opposition the ball and a leg up. We all know that in the modern era, possession is king and teams with less than 50% of the ball very seldom win games. This is because defense is such a drain.

Of course, if you're losing anyway then all of this goes out the window and you can afford a more attacking structure as you essentially have nothing to lose. In this situation, the team in front with the predictable game plan is the one that's at a disadvantage.

 

[GW.]

Parra 09 is a bad example. In 09 there forwards were going forward hard and fast, allowing offloads and for the likes of hayne to play against defences on the backfoot. Come season 2010 the forwards weren't getting forwards hard and fast, the offloads became ineffective and hayne had a mixed year.

Teams behind with 5 minutes to go do throw the kitchen sink at the opposition, and it is exciting, but on most occasions the teams that are playing that do or die football fall short.

The balance of defence and attack is what makes rugby league so good. If we tamper with it and artificially make attack more easily then it dilutes the game imo. A game with a 18-16 scoreline is almost always more exciting and tense then a game with a 34-32 scoreline.

Diego,
Parra 09 isnt a bad example, I remember in the semi in 09 against us, they were throwing the ball around, even the ball was going to grass at times, but they were definitely trying to keep the ball alive at every moment. Daniel Anderson did something similar half a decade earlier at the warriors. Teams have trouble defending it when it isnt the norm.

Also, I hear you on your final point re: balance of defence and attack. However, 12 a side would not be doing that, nor would expansive play. The defence still has all their balance with them. The difference is, you'll see the bootlace tackles again, teams running and chasing down making heroic tackles such as slattery on flannery in GF '04.Or Cronk on Teddy in origin.

 

[Snappy]

I always come up with good ideas before everyone else. I'm awesome. I can also piss further than you.

 

[GW.]

Rugby League is and always has been a game of risk.

It, more than any other game, punishes you badly for your errors.

This is why coaches play the numbers. It's very hard to sustain a game plan whereby you continually play attacking football, considering the more you attack, the more likely you are to make an error and gift the opposition the ball and a leg up. We all know that in the modern era, possession is king and teams with less than 50% of the ball very seldom win games. This is because defense is such a drain.

Of course, if you're losing anyway then all of this goes out the window and you can afford a more attacking structure as you essentially have nothing to lose. In this situation, the team in front with the predictable game plan is the one that's at a disadvantage.

Correct, no ones denying this. Why do we collectively contend with such conservative gameplay? We need to make the game appealing to reward teams for more than just holding the ball.


around 2011, when the wrestle was in, things were soslow, we lost alot of fans. The game is considered objectively better when we took baby steps to reduce this, stamping out the chicken wing, reduce interchange etc.

 

[DiegoNT]

Parra 09 where getting forward first. Yes they chucked the ball around and offloaded but the were getting forward first.
Parra 10 were trying the same throw the ball and offload style football and it failed miserably. The difference to 09? They weren't getting forward first. They weren't getting teams on the backfoot first.

 

[BM1979]

You just need to watch more Super league although even that is getting a lot more structured nowadays. Superleague is not as quick as NRL but at least they do try and play football and it's not 4 hitups a decoy play and a kick for the winger

 

[Frank Discussion]

Parra 09 where getting forward first. Yes they chucked the ball around and offloaded but the were getting forward first.
Parra 10 were trying the same throw the ball and offload style football and it failed miserably. The difference to 09? They weren't getting forward first. They weren't getting teams on the backfoot first.

I think people forget how good Fui Fui was for them that year. Almost every set started with him charging into the line at 1000 miles an hour and getting a quick ptb.

 

[OVP]

4. Violence gets things done, when theres no other option, we need to level the playing field or culturally, we are bullied and eradicated. Thats why countries have armies, thats why police carry guns. Lets chat more in 4C if you want to divert off topic.

Thats exactly why i can't take you seriously. You have absolutely no experience of what its like to live under a fascist regime. There is no living. There is only blindly following old men's rules so you dont get murdered by your own government. Constant fear for your own life for simply having an opinion. You want that here ? You'll never get it.

 

[GW.]

Thats exactly why i can't take you seriously. You have absolutely no experience of what its like to live under a fascist regime. There is no living. There is only blindly following old men's rules so you dont get murdered by your own government. Constant fear for your own life for simply having an opinion. You want that here ? You'll never get it.

I would much rather have a democratic dictatorship than the system we have here where nothing gets done and polioticians pander to vocal minorities, no matter how ridiculous things get.
However, he would need to be a righteous figure for it to work. I'd want a trump, not a Saddam. I know there is strong inherent risk which may deem it not workable. There is consequences to a soft democracy though.

Also note, that cultural pacifism means none of us would be here.Crusades were won in the past that paved the way to our society.

Cultures, can, and have been wiped out when they dont defend themselves.
Likewise for animals that became extinct because they couldnt survive against the predators.

 

[Pig Champion]

All I know is GW and T Boon are currently in a relationship.

 

[SBD82]

I would much rather have a democratic dictatorship than the system we have here where nothing gets done and polioticians pander to vocal minorities, no matter how ridiculous things get.
However, he would need to be a righteous figure for it to work. I'd want a trump, not a Saddam. I know there is strong inherent risk which may deem it not workable. There is consequences to a soft democracy though.

Also note, that cultural pacifism means none of us would be here.Crusades were won in the past that paved the way to our society.

Cultures, can, and have been wiped out when they dont defend themselves.
Likewise for animals that became extinct because they couldnt survive against the predators.

Wow. That escalated quickly.

In answer to both your theories on international politics and your understanding of rugby league may I suggest that Sun Tzu's "the art of war" may be a good place for you to begin to expand your understanding?

 

[T-Boon]

Parra 09 where getting forward first. Yes they chucked the ball around and offloaded but the were getting forward first.
Parra 10 were trying the same throw the ball and offload style football and it failed miserably. The difference to 09? They weren't getting forward first. They weren't getting teams on the backfoot first.

Sorry but that is not true.
The turn around for Parra's 09 season (we had a typically horrid start to the season) came on the exact weekend after I gave the season up. I can tell you for certain that the coach addressed the players through the week and said words to the effect of "here is what we are doing from here on in" - and it had nothing to do with the nuts and bolts of the game like "hitting it up harder" (wow why didn't we think of that earlier?). It came from the coach saying lets just go mad house with off loads and play some football. The players were blind pigging it just throwing reckless offloads out the back. I recall Ennis saying at one point "they have no respect for the football".
Its off that platform the the hit ups become more effective.

 

[T-Boon]

Parra 09 where getting forward first. Yes they chucked the ball around and offloaded but the were getting forward first.
Parra 10 were trying the same throw the ball and offload style football and it failed miserably. The difference to 09? They weren't getting forward first. They weren't getting teams on the backfoot first.

Incorrect, Parra had made some big offseason signings and spent the offseason deciding we need to play with a bit more structure...Ando actually said it in an interview "we will play that way but with a bit more structure" (I guess meaning discipline).... that totally stuffed it. The key to success was total free-ball.
Anderson spent an offseason over thinking it and lost the magic.

 

[DiegoNT]

Sorry but that is not true.
The turn around for Parra's 09 season (we had a typically horrid start to the season) came on the exact weekend after I gave the season up. I can tell you for certain that the coach addressed the players through the week and said words to the effect of "here is what we are doing from here on in" - and it had nothing to do with the nuts and bolts of the game like "hitting it up harder" (wow why didn't we think of that earlier?). It came from the coach saying lets just go mad house with off loads and play some football. The players were blind pigging it just throwing reckless offloads out the back. I recall Ennis saying at one point "they have no respect for the football".
Its off that platform the the hit ups become more effective.

The coach didn't have to say 'run harder'. When guys like moi moi and even cayless hit good form they were able to play of the back of it. If throw the ball and do what you what is so succesful then why did the eels fail so miserably with the exact same team the next year and have failed to make the finals since?

 

[GW.]

The coach didn't have to say 'run harder'. When guys like moi moi and even cayless hit good form they were able to play of the back of it. If throw the ball and do what you what is so succesful then why did the eels fail so miserably with the exact same team the next year and have failed to make the finals since?

It's called economics, teams adapted and a new line was drawn, Hayne also fm didn't hit the same heights personally.

By economics,

If Diego identified that Redfern didn't sell any chicken anywhere, and he sold chicken to the locals, you'd make a motza.

When other competitors see you, they will enter and take a slice till there's an equitable market demand.
Eels shocked the system with their jungle ball play (like the Warriors did earlier) and capitalised. Then teams caught up, Anderson tinkered with the formula and key players were sluggish and that was that.

 

[El Diablo]

i have an erection

should i ring Todd Greenberg?

 

[lazza]

My 2 cents is to have more multi-positional ball handling players rather than just the 2 halves (aka the Roosters). Penrith is a good example

- Peter Wallace - hooker used to be a half back
- Matt Moylan - full back played 5/8 for NSW
- Nathan Cleary and Bryce Cartwright as the halves

If their lock (Merrin) was like a Brad Fittler 5/8 ball handler you could have potentially 5 halves playing in multi positions.

Then add forwards who could grubber, you would very much throw out the scouting reports of players when attacking in the opposition 40.

 

[Danish]

Your first post was about lack of speed in rugby league. Shane Whereat was fast, so was Lee Oudenryn and Darren Clark. Speed don't mean shit if you can't do the basics. Give me skill over speed anyday.

Damned straight.

Cliffy Lyons will keep strapping on the boots every weekend till a week after he is dead because he can just destroy defensive lines with his skill set. Out and out speedsters breal down in their late 20s once their hammys start to play up

 

[Pete Cash]

I am lolling at the image of a play coming to a halt while a prop runs 15m to pick the ball up at dummy half.

 

[Pete Cash]

It's called economics, teams adapted and a new line was drawn, Hayne also fm didn't hit the same heights personally.

By economics,

If Diego identified that Redfern didn't sell any chicken anywhere, and he sold chicken to the locals, you'd make a motza.

When other competitors see you, they will enter and take a slice till there's an equitable market demand.
Eels shocked the system with their jungle ball play (like the Warriors did earlier) and capitalised. Then teams caught up, Anderson tinkered with the formula and key players were sluggish and that was that.

But the market wasn't flooded by eel copycats. In fact the dragons won in 2010 and that was hardly "jungle ball"

So uhh what the f**k is this shit about economics and market saturation.