DISCUSSION: Attack or defence?

[DJDL]

It's all to do with the overload of "stat-driven" analysis of each team.
I mean seriously do we really need to focus on who has the most Line Break Assists and the like?

These days it's all "if you complete x% of your sets, and only miss y tackles you'll win z% of your games". How's about concentrating on actually playing a bit of footy and trying to outscore the opposition?

It drives me mad.

As for proposed rule changes I really don't like the "dominant" and "surrender" tackle rules. They're both wide open to differences in ref interpretation. Maybe have it so they can only be called on dummy half runs or hit-ups one pass off the ruck. Reward teams for spreading the ball.

 

[Fin077]

Did you consider amount of teams and games for each year?

Wouldn't you have to to calculate an average figure. Divide the total points by the number of teams. Good point about the number of games though.

I think it still tells a bit of a story though.

 

[Frenzy.]

Wouldn't you have to to calculate an average figure. Divide the total points by the number of teams. Good point about the number of games though.

I think it still tells a bit of a story though.

It does. I'm interested in the amount of games and teams though to see if it strengthens or weakens the point you made.

 

[Frenzy.]

It's all to do with the overload of "stat-driven" analysis of each team.
I mean seriously do we really need to focus on who has the most Line Break Assists and the like?

These days it's all "if you complete x% of your sets, and only miss y tackles you'll win z% of your games". How's about concentrating on actually playing a bit of footy and trying to outscore the opposition?

It drives me mad.

As for proposed rule changes I really don't like the "dominant" and "surrender" tackle rules. They're both wide open to differences in ref interpretation. Maybe have it so they can only be called on dummy half runs or hit-ups one pass off the ruck. Reward teams for spreading the ball.

I agree with what you say but am loathe to have to endure too many more rule changes. The amount we have yearly x the last 20 years has steered this game into the sort of pseudo gridiron style we have now. The more rules we change the more we stifle the game and the more it become like human chess.

I simply don't want anymore rule changes that give advantages to the defensive team.

IMO the game needs opening up.

If I had to suggest any rule changes I come out of left field and bring in something like a forward breaking from a scrum will be deemed offside if he makes the first tackle after the ball clears the scrum. Fugg this sh*t off where we have 110 kilo giants breaking from scrums well in advance to tackle the 110 kilo 5/8 everyone uses now to combat that.

Would give the ball a chance to fly and let the 3/4s come into their own defensively and offensively.

The rule is copyright all you media outlets and commentators. :lol:

 

[ghoti]

I think Weaponhead's got it right...and it's something I've been considering for a few years now. Attacking dominance today is based on individual flair...the top teams are those who are made up of dangerous players that puts the rushing defence pattern on the back foot.

The way I see it, it's going to be about establishing broken on-field conditions so more metres are made from hit ups and more chances are created out wide. LIke Weaponhead mentioned, the early spread does this. It stretches out the defensive line and starts to pop holes across the line. Once this is achieved we can run angles that are going to be more successful and continue to generate second phase and broken play for the dummy half and support players to take advantage of.

Tries are rarely scored against a set defensive line anymore. Broken play needs to be created by stretching the defensive line to the edges and back in again...they need to be moving laterally for the entire set and thinking constantly the entire set. Once that flow's driving forward the ball needs to be used.

The problem with us, and a lot of teams these days, is the reliance on ruck plays, short balls and inside balls in order to suck the defensive line to the centre and then whack it out wide, or in our case, not using the ball at all. The innovation will lie in doing the opposite. In stretching the defensive line to the edges and then coming back to attack the centre.

 

[Frenzy.]

I think Weaponhead's got it right...and it's something I've been considering for a few years now. Attacking dominance today is based on individual flair...the top teams are those who are made up of dangerous players that puts the rushing defence pattern on the back foot.

The way I see it, it's going to be about establishing broken on-field conditions so more metres are made from hit ups and more chances are created out wide. LIke Weaponhead mentioned, the early spread does this. It stretches out the defensive line and starts to pop holes across the line. Once this is achieved we can run angles that are going to be more successful and continue to generate second phase and broken play for the dummy half and support players to take advantage of.

Tries are rarely scored against a set defensive line anymore. Broken play needs to be created by stretching the defensive line to the edges and back in again...they need to be moving laterally for the entire set and thinking constantly the entire set. Once that flow's driving forward the ball needs to be used.

The problem with us, and a lot of teams these days, is the reliance on ruck plays, short balls and inside balls in order to suck the defensive line to the centre and then whack it out wide, or in our case, not using the ball at all. The innovation will lie in doing the opposite. In stretching the defensive line to the edges and then coming back to attack the centre.

We've lost a few games through this exact thing. Especially since Cement left.