18th club, whose next?

[The Penguin #6.]

Obsessive calling of forward passes/obstructions/knock-ons is our equivalent of Union refs finding things to call in their shambolic rucks. We really need to get on top of this if we want to remain the indisputably "more attractive less dour code". Easily done - just instruct officials to give the benefit of the doubt to the attacking team and Play On

Could not agree more, I do fear though sometimes that our officials are heading down the union path where they seem to love seeing themselves on the big screen being important and how brilliant they are by never missing a thing and knowing every bloody rule in the book.

 

[Perth Red]

You aren’t a true rl fan unless you feel threatened by afl

A bit simplistic but I won’t disagree with you

 

[Perth Red]

Could not agree more, I do fear though sometimes that our officials are heading down the union path where they seem to love seeing themselves on the big screen being important and how brilliant they are by never missing a thing and knowing every bloody rule in the book.

Alas due to our ridiculous media and commentators, and whinging coaches, they are terrified of making human error, hence why they’ve become super conservative and we are blighted with the bunker.

 

[The_Wookie]

A) ratings are reflective of the relative popularity of the two codes. Obviously there is a clear winner

Ratings are reflective of the relative TV popularity of the two codes as adjudged by a limited survey size. If you think its this simple, you really have no business in the discussion.

B) going forward can afl keep it up ? Probably not the fundamentals don’t support it.

History shows that they have always improved their previous deals. "the fundamentals dont support it" isnt backed by history.

You can’t patch over declining ratings especially in nsw and qld. And lack of any further expansion options

Theyve been doing it since the 90s. I wouldnt discount it...and as Ive had to say repeatedly its simply not just about the raw ratings.

 

[Dark Corner]

Could not agree more, I do fear though sometimes that our officials are heading down the union path where they seem to love seeing themselves on the big screen being important and how brilliant they are by never missing a thing and knowing every bloody rule in the book.

Thats so true of Rugby Union ref's apart from Nigel Owens as he let the games flow.

 

[The Great Dane]

In todays Australian :

"IF there was any doubt about the decline of New Zealand rugby, it was washed away by a dominant French team"

"The All Blacks became bereft of ideas as the French defence squeezed them into multiple errors and turnovers. Kiwi fans’ fears that this team was eroding in ability and ruthlessness materialised.

"The signs have been there since they were bundled out in the 2019 World Cup semi-final by England, and have proceeded to lose a host of key games they otherwise used to win comfortably.

"It’s now clear to see that they are no longer the force they used to be.

"It’s a stark reality for Kiwis to accept, but a definitive shift in the world game.

"While New Zealand attempted to play with flair, the boring version of rugby got the better of them.

"The All Blacks continue to make themselves vulnerable, caught between trying to remain the world’s best attacking team and adapting a territory-focused approach."

Does make you wonder how the Kiwi population will react if a} their team does continue to slide down the world rankings, and b) are forced to adopt the god-awful boring territorial approach to union that is played in the northern hemisphere and seems to be dominating the game now.
Certainly you would think it leaves the door open for a more attractive less dour code that is on their doorstep to make its` move.

It's almost the exact same factors that slowly strangled RU in Australia.

Admittedly a little oversimplistic, but a boring, regressive, style of play became dominant in the early 00s, and it murdered interest in the sport here where there were strong competitors in the contact football market (NRL and AFL).

The aforementioned , allowing SR to remain behind an ironclad pay wall, and the fact that most average punters didn't (and still don't) give two shits about most matches played against ZA, NZ, and later JPN, ARG, etc, teams, which made more than half the SR season dead rubbers commercially, made it harder to attract and retain talent, which further hurt the Wallabies standings in international competition, which killed the ARU's profitability in turn making things even worse, and the rest is history.

It's unlikely that there'll ever be a more favourable time for the NRL to expand in NZ than right now. They should strike while the iron is hot and announce NZ as the preferred location for the 18th NRL side as soon as possible.

 

[The Great Dane]

Could not agree more, I do fear though sometimes that our officials are heading down the union path where they seem to love seeing themselves on the big screen being important and how brilliant they are by never missing a thing and knowing every bloody rule in the book.

Thats so true of Rugby Union ref's apart from Nigel Owens as he let the games flow.

IDK what competition you guys are watching, but it isn't the NRL.

ATM NRL referees actively ignore most of the rulebook most of the time, only to pull the whistle out almost at random, or when it'll seemly have the largest impact on the game.

They ignore the vast majority of forward passes, offside (it's to the point that "good line speed" has become a synonym for offside most of the time), not square at marker, wrestling, etc, etc, that go on in a game. They take way, way, waaay to long to call tackled on average, which is seeing things like f**king mauling return to the game out of necessity and a rise in dangerous tackling technics that had been more or less eradicated from the game about a decade ago.

There're other rules that exist for very good reason that they blatantly ignore, like e.g. voluntary tackle, loss of forward momentum constituting held, attacking players lifting the elbow/forearm, etc, etc, and others that they only pull out in certain areas of the pitch, obstruction being the best example, which is almost totally ignored unless it's in a try scoring opportunity in the redzone.

Then every now and again they'll pull out a rule that's been ignored for years or even decades, and when they do it's almost always during the most crucial period of the game and f**ks a team over, which, whether true or not, gives the impression that that is the intention of pulling said rules out of their arse.

The most insidious thing about it is that it seems to affect certain teams more than others. Any genuine person who watches a lot of NRL (especially if they attend games) will tell you that there're things that certain teams can get away with that others simply can't, and that there's a definite corelation between the "good" and "bad" teams based on how much leniency they're given by the referees on average in the ruck, line speed, etc, etc.

The truth is that the standard of refereeing over the last 5 or so years, give or take, is easily the worst of the professional era, and the NRL's refusal to genuinely attempt to do anything about it structurally (except arguably introducing the 6 again rule, which made the problems much worse) is impacting the game, and will have worse impacts the longer it goes on.

 

[Wb1234]

Ratings are reflective of the relative TV popularity of the two codes as adjudged by a limited survey size. If you think its this simple, you really have no business in the discussion.



History shows that they have always improved their previous deals. "the fundamentals dont support it" isnt backed by history.



Theyve been doing it since the 90s. I wouldnt discount it...and as Ive had to say repeatedly its simply not just about the raw ratings.

What are you on about

ratings are indicative of how many fans rugby league has

if you think the methodology to calculate ratings is bad why have you defended it in the past

more so why spend so much time colllating them if you think they are inaccurate

we are talking about which sport has the most fans

on afl how many mcg and scg members go to games for free and are counted as “fans”

I’ve posted comments from foxsports before where they have been critical of the giants and suns

nz2 brisbane 3 are expansion teams afl can’t hope to match

ignoring the rubbbish that is Telstra contra the nrl tv deal will match or beat afl next time and going forward should beat it fairly easily

 

[Dark Corner]

IDK what competition you guys are watching, but it isn't the NRL.

ATM NRL referees actively ignore most of the rulebook most of the time, only to pull the whistle out almost at random, or when it'll seemly have the largest impact on the game.

They ignore the vast majority of forward passes, offside (it's to the point that "good line speed" has become a synonym for offside most of the time), not square at marker, wrestling, etc, etc, that go on in a game. They take way, way, waaay to long to call tackled on average, which is seeing things like f**king mauling return to the game out of necessity and a rise in dangerous tackling technics that had been more or less eradicated from the game about a decade ago.

There're other rules that exist for very good reason that they blatantly ignore, like e.g. voluntary tackle, loss of forward momentum constituting held, attacking players lifting the elbow/forearm, etc, etc, and others that they only pull out in certain areas of the pitch, obstruction being the best example, which is almost totally ignored unless it's in a try scoring opportunity in the redzone.

Then every now and again they'll pull out a rule that's been ignored for years or even decades, and when they do it's almost always during the most crucial period of the game and f**ks a team over, which, whether true or not, gives the impression that that is the intention of pulling said rules out of their arse.

The most insidious thing about it is that it seems to affect certain teams more than others. Any genuine person who watches a lot of NRL (especially if they attend games) will tell you that there're things that certain teams can get away with that others simply can't, and that there's a definite corelation between the "good" and "bad" teams based on how much leniency they're given by the referees on average in the ruck, line speed, etc, etc.

The truth is that the standard of refereeing over the last 5 or so years, give or take, is easily the worst of the professional era, and the NRL's refusal to genuinely attempt to do anything about it structurally (except arguably introducing the 6 again rule, which made the problems much worse) is impacting the game, and will have worse impacts the longer it goes on.

Try watching England v Argentina mate....I rather make love to you then put myself into this Union shite again.

 

[Dark Corner]

IDK what competition you guys are watching, but it isn't the NRL.

ATM NRL referees actively ignore most of the rulebook most of the time, only to pull the whistle out almost at random, or when it'll seemly have the largest impact on the game.

They ignore the vast majority of forward passes, offside (it's to the point that "good line speed" has become a synonym for offside most of the time), not square at marker, wrestling, etc, etc, that go on in a game. They take way, way, waaay to long to call tackled on average, which is seeing things like f**king mauling return to the game out of necessity and a rise in dangerous tackling technics that had been more or less eradicated from the game about a decade ago.

There're other rules that exist for very good reason that they blatantly ignore, like e.g. voluntary tackle, loss of forward momentum constituting held, attacking players lifting the elbow/forearm, etc, etc, and others that they only pull out in certain areas of the pitch, obstruction being the best example, which is almost totally ignored unless it's in a try scoring opportunity in the redzone.

Then every now and again they'll pull out a rule that's been ignored for years or even decades, and when they do it's almost always during the most crucial period of the game and f**ks a team over, which, whether true or not, gives the impression that that is the intention of pulling said rules out of their arse.

The most insidious thing about it is that it seems to affect certain teams more than others. Any genuine person who watches a lot of NRL (especially if they attend games) will tell you that there're things that certain teams can get away with that others simply can't, and that there's a definite corelation between the "good" and "bad" teams based on how much leniency they're given by the referees on average in the ruck, line speed, etc, etc.

The truth is that the standard of refereeing over the last 5 or so years, give or take, is easily the worst of the professional era, and the NRL's refusal to genuinely attempt to do anything about it structurally (except arguably introducing the 6 again rule, which made the problems much worse) is impacting the game, and will have worse impacts the longer it goes on.

Not impacting crowds and again I'm loving the NRL this year compered to Union and Super League...you are gifted with a great comp.

 

[mongoose]

IDK what competition you guys are watching, but it isn't the NRL.

ATM NRL referees actively ignore most of the rulebook most of the time, only to pull the whistle out almost at random, or when it'll seemly have the largest impact on the game.

They ignore the vast majority of forward passes, offside (it's to the point that "good line speed" has become a synonym for offside most of the time), not square at marker, wrestling, etc, etc, that go on in a game. They take way, way, waaay to long to call tackled on average, which is seeing things like f**king mauling return to the game out of necessity and a rise in dangerous tackling technics that had been more or less eradicated from the game about a decade ago.

There're other rules that exist for very good reason that they blatantly ignore, like e.g. voluntary tackle, loss of forward momentum constituting held, attacking players lifting the elbow/forearm, etc, etc, and others that they only pull out in certain areas of the pitch, obstruction being the best example, which is almost totally ignored unless it's in a try scoring opportunity in the redzone.

Then every now and again they'll pull out a rule that's been ignored for years or even decades, and when they do it's almost always during the most crucial period of the game and f**ks a team over, which, whether true or not, gives the impression that that is the intention of pulling said rules out of their arse.

The most insidious thing about it is that it seems to affect certain teams more than others. Any genuine person who watches a lot of NRL (especially if they attend games) will tell you that there're things that certain teams can get away with that others simply can't, and that there's a definite corelation between the "good" and "bad" teams based on how much leniency they're given by the referees on average in the ruck, line speed, etc, etc.

The truth is that the standard of refereeing over the last 5 or so years, give or take, is easily the worst of the professional era, and the NRL's refusal to genuinely attempt to do anything about it structurally (except arguably introducing the 6 again rule, which made the problems much worse) is impacting the game, and will have worse impacts the longer it goes on.

I have always wanted to trial going back to a 5m rule and reducing the field to 12 vs 12 with a 5 man bench. I think this would reduce wrestling, marker infringements and also open the game up a bit. The problem is whenever you bring in drastic changes and new rules, teams and coaches eventually adapt and start bending the rules in other ways...

 

[Dark Corner]

I have always wanted to trial going back to a 5m rule and reducing the field to 12 vs 12 with a 5 man bench. I think this would reduce wrestling, marker infringements and also open the game up a bit. The problem is whenever you bring in drastic changes and new rules, teams and coaches eventually adapt and start bending the rules in other ways...

At least scrums.line outs and Rucks are not a problem

 

[MugaB]

I have always wanted to trial going back to a 5m rule and reducing the field to 12 vs 12 with a 5 man bench. I think this would reduce wrestling, marker infringements and also open the game up a bit. The problem is whenever you bring in drastic changes and new rules, teams and coaches eventually adapt and start bending the rules in other ways...

Why a 5 man bench? Unnessesary if want space and fatigue, plus it would only suit a few attacking teams in the comp, like sharks, cows and souths, and then you'll end up with massive blowouts, where the match ups would be one sided, at the moment the 13 a side works, and a sinbin (depending on who the player is) works to give us a taste of 10 mins of what you are talking about, but it cant go for 80s like that, that would be insane

 

[mongoose]

Why a 5 man bench? Unnessesary if want space and fatigue, plus it would only suit a few attacking teams in the comp, like sharks, cows and souths, and then you'll end up with massive blowouts, where the match ups would be one sided, at the moment the 13 a side works, and a sinbin (depending on who the player is) works to give us a taste of 10 mins of what you are talking about, but it cant go for 80s like that, that would be insane

but sin binnings reduce it to 12 vs 13, why would anyone want to see that? 12 vs 12 is evolving the game to allow for increased fitness and speed of the players. Teams would all have to adjust to the new structure... I guess the bench could remain 4, i'm not committed to 5 player bench.

 

[MugaB]

but sin binnings reduce it to 12 vs 13, why would anyone want to see that? 12 vs 12 is evolving the game to allow for increased fitness and speed of the players. Teams would all have to adjust to the new structure... I guess the bench could remain 4, i'm not committed to 5 player bench.

Yes but 13v12 isnt about attacking, its about defending, not sure it matters if you are attacking with 13 players on at the same time (normal) or 12, or 5 really...
Defending with 12 is the point, its a hard slog for a whole 80mins, fmd tigers and dogs cant even do with 13 men, htf will that improve the comp,

...if anything there should be those "alsorans" teams being allowed 14 players on field, just to even up game hawhawhaw

 

[Ride the Lion to Zion]

IDK what competition you guys are watching, but it isn't the NRL.

ATM NRL referees actively ignore most of the rulebook most of the time, only to pull the whistle out almost at random, or when it'll seemly have the largest impact on the game.

They ignore the vast majority of forward passes, offside (it's to the point that "good line speed" has become a synonym for offside most of the time), not square at marker, wrestling, etc, etc, that go on in a game. They take way, way, waaay to long to call tackled on average, which is seeing things like f**king mauling return to the game out of necessity and a rise in dangerous tackling technics that had been more or less eradicated from the game about a decade ago.

There're other rules that exist for very good reason that they blatantly ignore, like e.g. voluntary tackle, loss of forward momentum constituting held, attacking players lifting the elbow/forearm, etc, etc, and others that they only pull out in certain areas of the pitch, obstruction being the best example, which is almost totally ignored unless it's in a try scoring opportunity in the redzone.

Then every now and again they'll pull out a rule that's been ignored for years or even decades, and when they do it's almost always during the most crucial period of the game and f**ks a team over, which, whether true or not, gives the impression that that is the intention of pulling said rules out of their arse.

The most insidious thing about it is that it seems to affect certain teams more than others. Any genuine person who watches a lot of NRL (especially if they attend games) will tell you that there're things that certain teams can get away with that others simply can't, and that there's a definite corelation between the "good" and "bad" teams based on how much leniency they're given by the referees on average in the ruck, line speed, etc, etc.

The truth is that the standard of refereeing over the last 5 or so years, give or take, is easily the worst of the professional era, and the NRL's refusal to genuinely attempt to do anything about it structurally (except arguably introducing the 6 again rule, which made the problems much worse) is impacting the game, and will have worse impacts the longer it goes on.

This post is confirmation that your understanding of Rugby League is akin to your grasp of the grammatical difference between "who" and "whom".

 

[Wb1234]

Why a 5 man bench? Unnessesary if want space and fatigue, plus it would only suit a few attacking teams in the comp, like sharks, cows and souths, and then you'll end up with massive blowouts, where the match ups would be one sided, at the moment the 13 a side works, and a sinbin (depending on who the player is) works to give us a taste of 10 mins of what you are talking about, but it cant go for 80s like that, that would be insane

Exactly

you want less interchanges not more

unlimited interchanges was awful

 

[Wb1234]

Yes but 13v12 isnt about attacking, its about defending, not sure it matters if you are attacking with 13 players on at the same time (normal) or 12, or 5 really...
Defending with 12 is the point, its a hard slog for a whole 80mins, fmd tigers and dogs cant even do with 13 men, htf will that improve the comp,

...if anything there should be those "alsorans" teams being allowed 14 players on field, just to even up game hawhawhaw

How about teams in the bottom four get 14 players on the field, top four 12 and the rest 13

 

[MugaB]

How about teams in the bottom four get 14 players on the field, top four 12 and the rest 13

I was joking, but if you want make each game a contest?
its not a fair system, nor would i care for it, RL has always been about eveness, and no handouts, and having that underdog mentality, something sticky is channelling right as we speak in the Hunter today

 

[Wb1234]

I was joking, but if you want make each game a contest?
its not a fair system, nor would i care for it, RL has always been about eveness, and no handouts, and having that underdog mentality, something sticky is channelling right as we speak in the Hunter today

I was joking

nrl is a dud competition with two good teams

the rest should be handing back the money the arlc for being useless