Brb there is more fighting in SL where players are red carded :lol:
As far as the on-field is concerned an automatic sin bin is NOT going to stop fighting, it's doubtful it's going to change the on-field product.
But I'm against the move non the less because I think it will prove pointless as far as the games image is concerned. What the likes of Bunniesman and Dave Smith can't appreciate is the dislike, ridicule and vitriol put to the game has f**k-all to do with our actual product. That's a media myth that they're repeating, one that if you inspect you find to be completely false. Dave Smith wouldn't understand that because he's from the class that perpetuates and is responsible for much of the issue.
Rugby union does not have an image problem, it's not the subject of widespread vitriol and dismissal as a sport for bogan scum, so why is rugby league. Is what happens on the rugby league field worse than what you find on the rugby field. Not really. You could argue that it's not a fair comparison as union isn't relevant in Australia, but in places where it is you'll find the point to be true.
Any thinking person should know that rugby league is hated for reasons beyond what the players get up to on the field. When we eradicate fighting is rugby league going to stop, all of a sudden, being ridiculed as a sport for bogans, champions, chavs or what have you? Does the NRL punish shoulder charges and fights and suddenly everyone is walking around thinking that the game pisses rainbows and shits gold?
Rugby league is a working class sport with, predictably, negative working class connotations. You go to countries where soccer is the working class sport in place of rugby league and non-soccer fans ridicule them for being knuckle draggers too. Soccer, the same sport the critics of rugby league in Australia put forward as the decent sport that's fit for their children to play.
These widespread criticisms of the game that are seen throughout society are predicated on the games history and socioeconomic standing, and nothing to do with what we're actually doing on the field.
Perhaps Bunniesman and David Smith could bring to the debate the evidence which shows immediately after the shoulder charge ban the number of children playing the game shot up. Or perhaps they can't, because it didn't happen. The shoulder charge was banned and nobody batted an eyelid, they just found another element of the game to use as excuse for their bigotry. Once the fights are gone they'll be saying the game is a thugs sport unfit for their kids because of another element of the game, probably tackling in itself. They'll always feel that way.
Didn't most of us say this in the shoulder charge debate? Ban the shoulder charge we said, watch these parents and absolute dickheads find some other reason to spite and look down upon the sport. Sure enough it's happened. And guess what? I'm saying the same thing now and I bet next season I'll be repeating myself for the third time when some other manufactured controversy pops up. Could be we'll go back to wrestling or cannonballs, or could be we see shoulder charges and fights continue at some level, in any of those cases you can be confident that the same people who spite the game now will be spiting the game then.
If Dave Smith wants to go down as a great administrator he'll come out with the data next year to show that the changes he's made towards the game have seen middle class participation sky rocket. He won't do, unfortunately, because it's not going to happen.
Ever since he's started Dave's been running around yes massa-ing the games enemies. It would be partly acceptable if what he was doing brought proven benefits to participation and perspective, but where's the evidence of this?
