11 a side Rugby League

[ocko]

so what position would we get rid of if it went down to 12 or 11 a side?

 

[Coastbloke]

On a scale of 1-10 as a great idea...??

Minus 5 billion.

This thread shouldn't even be existing.

What a joke.

There's 13 a side and 7 a side.

Thanks.

 

[TheManOnTheGrassyKnoll]

Jesus christ we have some utter spastics running the game don't we. Touch football has 7 a side and there ain't to much lateral movement in that. Jut dumping one off one off one off and trying to catch a player offside. LEAVE THE GAME AS IT IS

 

[Danish]

Well, personally I am sick of tries being scored from kicks.

Any one know the stats percentage wise that are scored directly from kicks?

That is why I do not watch Union

I think you will find next to no tries are scored from kicks in Union.

 

[Papa_smurf]

You obviously didnt read about Bill Harrigan's idea a few years back. It was to allow forward passes.

it was to allow SOME forward passes, like 2 or 4 per team per game.

dont represent things so negatively champ, its unfair

 

[East Coast Tiger]

it was to allow SOME forward passes, like 2 or 4 per team per game.

dont represent things so negatively champ, its unfair

Not being negative or unfair but that's still a terrible idea for a rule.

 

[PJ Marshal]

itd be the death of the prop

 

[macavity]

I think you will find next to no tries are scored in Union.

fixed your typo....

 

[Papa_smurf]

Not being negative or unfair but that's still a terrible idea for a rule.

i agree, only two people liked it, bill harrigan and his invisible friend

 

[Wests is Best]

11 a side? Well over 100 points a match? That would be cricket, not Rugby League

 

[RainMan]

it was to allow SOME forward passes, like 2 or 4 per team per game.

That already happens though...

 

[Copa]

This means rugby union can also drop 2 players to become rugby league.

 

[Mr Angry]

I think you will find next to no tries are scored from kicks in Union.

Not what I meant, they kick all the time in general play, and rarely run the ball.

 

[Danish]

Not what I meant, they kick all the time in general play, and rarely run the ball.

Fair enough.


Most tries in league are from running the ball. And even then tries from kicks can still be spectacular tries.

On top of that i believe eliminating 2 defenders would INCREASE the amount of tries scored from kicks.

2 less players in the line = far more chance of being in a one on one contest for the ball. And we all know that an attacking player on the run will 9 times out of 10 outleap a stationary defender with no one there to shepard for him.

 

[hitamn]

if they bring this change in (which i think they wont) they've lost me as a supporter.
i just cant understand there thinking this must be denis' idea because only someone like him could think of it

 

[Hazy]

If they bring this in - as well as changing some rules relating to kicking (into the in goal, bombs etc) - it would make for more attacking via running

 

[East Coast Tiger]

How many more attacking opportunities do sides need?
The number of attacking kicks that come before the last tackle is few and even then some sides still run the ball on the last, a very good ploy at times. All this rule might do is see more tries before the last tackle, more tries generally.

It will also blow margins out even more with the better sides likely to dominate even further. On that basis I can't see how this move could possibly make the game better to watch. A close contest no matter how low scoring is often far better than a high scoring but one-sided game.

 

[*Paul*]

Less players per team = smaller rosters = less player payments.. Sneaky Petes

 

[Raider_69]

if every bad idea was put into one section, and there had to be a worst idea of that bunch, this would be it

 

[The Engineers Room]

Firstly, the proposal to allow the markers to split is a much better proposal because it would force teams to not just keep attacking down a narrow corridor. Even if you reduce the number of players, it isn't going to force a more lateral game. What it will do is make the dummy half run more of an enticing option. Think about it. The forwards would be more fatigued and the gaps up the middle will be more.

The second issue is the sin bin/send off. At present a team must have 9 on the field or they forfeit. I can see a scenario that this could happen if they reduce to 11 players. Do we really want a game to finish in one team forfeiting?

Lastly, the defence and the determination of teams in goal line defence will be lost. I guarantee that any team the gets a full set in the oppositions 20 will almost always score (9 times out of 10).