9's vs 13's

[TheRev]

Is there anything you saw over the weekend that youd like taken into the official NRL competition?

o 9 vs 13: Did anyone find 9 a side football more entertaining than 13?

I think the intensity was down because it wasnt the real competition and half the stars were left back home.... But what about 11 a side? I have to say that I think 13 a side is atleast 1 too many in the modern era with the well trained brick wall defences, I think it would be more entertaining and show off player skill to open up more space, let more players make decisions, score more points, I thought 9 was fun, but 10-12 would be close to perfect...

o Removal of Goalkicking: They want to reward scoring closer to the goalposts.. thats fine, do it with the bonus point zone under the sticks, I loathe goalkicking, its a waste of time, favours whichever side has the radar kicker, takes away from the joy of the game which is scoring tries.. imo Rugby Union is a terrible game because of the kicking, and we could drastically improve our game by reducing it or removing it completely/

o Faster Game: A lot of the rule changes like captains not talking back and faster restarts all seem like big positives.. but most of them roll into the 13 a side this year anyway, so something to watch with interest.

o 9 minute halves: I found this too short, id like to see longer games, but when its being run as a weekend tournament there just isnt time or the endurance to play anymore.

 

[Slippery Morris]

I enjoyed watching the nines. I would reward tries scored from longer distances rather than between the sticks. If you score from a play that starts in your own half you should get the bonus point.

I would also extend to 12 or 15 minute halves.

 

[TruSaint]

Its an interesting topic.
For mine couple of things...

13 v 13 is OK. Doesn't lead to 56 - 46 results (often).

All I want is 80 minutes of footy, not 60 or 65 ( i.e scrums, kicks over sideline etc ). Time off when there is no play.

Tries of kicks 3 points. How many times have we seen an omelette of bounced balls from a kick leading to a try.

No players in the refs face. Call the plays as they are. I remember listening to Bill Harrigan talking about how at half time they review the penalties. Whats the count ? 6 -2 ? Ok.

Why? Off side is offside ? A rake is a rake. A head-high tackle.. same. Why do we have to balance the equation?

Do it for the full 80.

Extra time to played to its limit. Not a field goal fiesta.
Tries scored from inside your 20... the shot at goal is in front.

Encourages enterprise, deters ref pressure and leads to 80 minutes of footy.

Radical ? Maybe.

 

[BennyV]

Trusaint, gotta disagree with the 3 points for tries off kicks. Look at BMoz try against Panthers - took more skill to take that ball and ground it than half the tries in the NRL. No way should he be punished for that.

 

[TheRev]

Hmmm agreed that BMoz is a master of the high take, but in general agree, id rather see players skillful enough to go "through" the line, than a kick lottery...

To me the masterplan for League is to showcase the freakish talents, the Barba's, JT's, Slaters, Dugans and so on..

I dont think we will ever move away from 13v13 though since its a historical thing.. but something like Rugby Super 12's not that I follow it.. but got so successful it almost challenges the real game, and I cant help but wonder if we have room for a longer 9's or 10's comp in League too.

 

[TruSaint]

Trusaint, gotta disagree with the 3 points for tries off kicks. Look at BMoz try against Panthers - took more skill to take that ball and ground it than half the tries in the NRL. No way should he be punished for that.

Fair call Benny.

Indeed there are skill elements in a kick try.
What worries me is the "amount" of tries scored by nothing but absolute kaos.
Kick through, bounces here and there, touched by "some One". etc.

I agree that there are terrific tries scored from kicks. Bit amongst those is a load of cr.. tries scored by nothing more than srambles eggs. Ten metres out, bounces off three players, ends up in the arms of a player...

Dont know that I have the answer.
Probably not.

Having said that, nothing appeals to me more that seeing a stream backline movemnt, or a tough prop crossing the stripe to score.

 

[TruSaint]

Hmmm agreed that BMoz is a master of the high take, but in general agree, id rather see players skillful enough to go "through" the line, than a kick lottery...

To me the masterplan for League is to showcase the freakish talents, the Barba's, JT's, Slaters, Dugans and so on..

I dont think we will ever move away from 13v13 though since its a historical thing.. but something like Rugby Super 12's not that I follow it.. but got so successful it almost challenges the real game, and I cant help but wonder if we have room for a longer 9's or 10's comp in League too.

Rev, there is definitely space for such a comp.
By all reviews the 9's was a great success.

 

[Stagger Lee]

Is there anything you saw over the weekend that youd like taken into the official NRL competition?

But what about 11 a side? I have to say that I think 13 a side is atleast 1 too many in the modern era with the well trained brick wall defences, I think it would be more entertaining and show off player skill to open up more space, let more players make decisions, score more points, I thought 9 was fun, but 10-12 would be close to perfect...

Was thinking along the same lines REV of making it 12 a side, but I think the best option would be to reduce the interchange. Getting the big players tired and watching the defensive structures fall apart at the end of each half would have the same effect and be less radical a step.

 

[Slippery Morris]

It was interesting watching a game of footy with no scrums this weekend. Makes you really wonder whether they are needed or not. It's good that when they have scrums the forwards are taken out of the equation and you can attack whilst the scrum is still set.

Personally if they police them properly and make the half put the ball in the middle rather than feed the 2nd rower then they should be still in the game but we all know that doesn't happen anymore so why keep them?

 

[TheRev]

Was thinking along the same lines REV of making it 12 a side, but I think the best option would be to reduce the interchange. Getting the big players tired and watching the defensive structures fall apart at the end of each half would have the same effect and be less radical a step.

Yep this is a valid idea.. it will push endurance and showcase the little men late in the game.?

Though the question is whats the best outcome?

o Option 1: Less Interchange, and more players capable of endurance
o Option 2: Unlimited Interchange, promoting more explosive players

Dunno tbh, I see pros and cons for both.

 

[Highland Saint]

Good post Rev. I definitely enjoyed the nines format and the change in gameplay as a showcase of the players abilities. I'm keen to see the effects of the 2014 rule changes on the pace of play. Overall im a fan of the 13 a side format as the line breaks and tries are rare and r more hard earned. If the main event was like the nines the game would become more about the scorelines and less about the actual tries like basketball

 

[GT0007]

Drop the interchange by 2 and make it golden try with 10 players a side in extra time to get a result but in general 13 a side is great and there are plenty of points scored that are earned as well as the tries are more spectacular then ever. Keep scrums but maybe make a try off the scrum 5pts to encourage teams/coaches to utilize the extra space and develop plays like Tim Sheens used to. That would make a scrum a feature and exciting