Gridiron Rugby

[roopy]

Stumbled across this when looking at the Spike TV site.
Someone trying to promote 11 a side Rugby League for highschool teams to be played on narrower gridiron fields with gridiron markings.

I went to one of the 11 a side games played in the Toyota cup last year, and the game has a lot of potential IMO.

I think it would be a perfect fit for highschools in the US, because they all have gridiron fields with gridiron markings that could be used for 11 a side League in the off season.

http://gridironrugby.com/index.html

 

[roopy]

Joined the facebook group.

 

[coach]

I had forgotten about the 11 a side Toyota Cup from last year. With them not going with it again this season suggests they didn't much of it.

 

[RL1908]

I've heard that ARL Development are also introducing an 11-a-side RL (with a 5m rule) to offer a semi-contact social form of RL - primarily a form of RL club comps that don't have to be trained for to any great extent. I'm not sure when/where that is starting though.

 

[roopy]

The main advantage for American highschools is that it won't cost anything.

The gridiron fields and markings in yards are already there, the goalposts are already there, basically you just need a set of jerseys, some soccer boots, 3 or 4 league balls, and a rule book - that's it.

 

[RL1908]

I had forgotten about the 11 a side Toyota Cup from last year. With them not going with it again this season suggests they didn't much of it.

I always thought the NYC trial of 11 a-side was a waste of time unless it was played with a 5m rule. The idea of reducing teams from 13 to 11 is to create space to encourage ball passing movements - but with a 10m rule, there isn't much difference between playing 13 or 11, not at the pro level anyway.

The 10m rule was introduced to create space and thus give more attacking football - but the "space" the 10m rule created was simply the distance between attackers/defenders, rather than creating more space between defenders, and thus encourage the ball to be passed (instead of hit-ups and dummy-half scoots).

 

[roopy]

I always thought the NYC trial of 11 a-side was a waste of time unless it was played with a 5m rule. The idea of reducing teams from 13 to 11 is to create space to encourage ball passing movements - but with a 10m rule, there isn't much difference between playing 13 or 11, not at the pro level anyway.

The 10m rule was introduced to create space and thus give more attacking football - but the "space" the 10m rule created was simply the distance between attackers/defenders, rather than creating more space between defenders, and thus encourage the ball to be passed (instead of hit-ups and dummy-half scoots).

I disagree.
The game i was at live (Knights v Sharks) was between two sides that were well out of contention for the finals and not very skillfull in the scheme of things, but they turned on some of the most exciting footy and some of the best tries i saw all season. One of the tries went through 11 pair of hands and 70 metres from memory.

 

[RL1908]

I disagree.
The game i was at live (Knights v Sharks) was between two sides that were well out of contention for the finals and not very skillfull in the scheme of things, but they turned on some of the most exciting footy and some of the best tries i saw all season. One of the tries went through 11 pair of hands and 70 metres from memory.

That's great - but it is possible that the same exciting ball passing footy would have been produced with 11-a-side under a 5m rule - they didn't trial it, so we don't know.

What I'm suggesting is that if the same result (exciting ball passing footy) is achieved at 5m as at 10m, then there's no need to impose the 10m rule upon the game (and all the penalties, wrestling etc. that comes with the 10m rule at the NRL level).

 

[roopy]

That's great - but it is possible that the same exciting ball passing footy would have been produced with 11-a-side under a 5m rule - they didn't trial it, so we don't know.

What I'm suggesting is that if the same result (exciting ball passing footy) is achieved at 5m as at 10m, then there's no need to impose the 10m rule upon the game (and all the penalties, wrestling etc. that comes with the 10m rule at the NRL level).

People thought about that after the two trials they had - which was actually the positive outcome of the trials - seeing what happened and thinking about how it could be improved.

Saying the trials had no point because all ramifications couldn't be foreseen is silly.

 

[Goddo]

Interesting... How will scrums work with 2 less (assuming centre / second row are possitions dropped?)

Great way to break into the american school/college market

 

[Skeletor]

Interesting... How will scrums work with 2 less (assuming centre / second row are possitions dropped?)

Great way to break into the american school/college market

Could use the Mod Leage rule of dropping the fullback and Lock and using 5-man scrums.

 

[Ryan_N]

Really, really, exceptionally brilliant idea. If it gets off the ground would definitely, almost definitely improve the profile of Rugby League in the USA.

 

[roopy]

The facebook group could be a good way to spread this idea - especially if Americans join.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=139000461783&ref=nf

 

[RL1908]

People thought about that after the two trials they had - which was actually the positive outcome of the trials - seeing what happened and thinking about how it could be improved.

Saying the trials had no point because all ramifications couldn't be foreseen is silly.

That's my point - any success of an 11-a-side trial was inevetiably going to raise the obvious question i.e. "How would it go with a 5m rule?"

The problem with 11-a-side under a 10m rule at the NRL level was/is easily forseeable - it wouldn't make any difference given the proven no-risk method for gaining ground, penalties and tiring out opponents is repeat hit-ups/scoots, rather than searching for gaps in the defence.

A 5m rule under 11-a-side would deny the 10m game advantages, forcing teams to look for gaps in defences now reduced to 11.

Given how rarely opportunities are provided at the pro level of the game for matches trialing rule changes, I just reckon that more use should have been made of it.

A trial under 11-a-side and a 5m rule might have provided the stunning success advocates of 11-a-side were hoping for. That could have provided them the momentum needed to hold a NRL trial etc.

As it was, the NYC trails of 11-a-side were played, were seemingly encouraging, but then nothing....

 

[roopy]

That's my point - any success of an 11-a-side trial was inevetiably going to raise the obvious question i.e. "How would it go with a 5m rule?"

The problem with 11-a-side under a 10m rule at the NRL level was/is easily forseeable - it wouldn't make any difference given the proven no-risk method for gaining ground, penalties and tiring out opponents is repeat hit-ups/scoots, rather than searching for gaps in the defence.

A 5m rule under 11-a-side would deny the 10m game advantages, forcing teams to look for gaps in defences now reduced to 11.

Given how rarely opportunities are provided at the pro level of the game for matches trialing rule changes, I just reckon that more use should have been made of it.

A trial under 11-a-side and a 5m rule might have provided the stunning success advocates of 11-a-side were hoping for. That could have provided them the momentum needed to hold a NRL trial etc.

As it was, the NYC trails of 11-a-side were played, were seemingly encouraging, but then nothing....

It's a good discussion to have.

I started a thread about it on the facebook page.

 

[RL1908]

It's a good discussion to have.

I started a thread about it on the facebook page.

Talking RL can never be a bad thing!

The Gridiron Rugby under 11-a-side presents a different situation as the field is not as wide. I see on their website that they are starting under a 10m rule, but it may change once they've seen how it goes for a while.

 

[babyg]

How much thinner is a gridiron field. Do they really need to drop players. Risk is we could end up with another major split in the rugby codes

 

[macavity]

there is a good 10-12 metres difference - definately need to drop players.

this is a fantastic initiative and (w a 5 metre rule) should be the standard for US amateur RL - it is the only way it is going to work in schools, which is where we need to get it.

 

[macavity]

thought a bit about this - IMO the name to promote it is American RL - tap into the patriotism there.

also, the 2 players to go = lock and 5/8. 5 man scrum.

explain EVERYTHING in NFL terms: halfback = quarterback, tackles = downs, try = touchdown, knock-on = fumble, etc etc.

If you could get this into schools it would be massive - and the way to do it is surely to build on what they know and love.

thoughts?

 

[roopy]

As long as they stick to the same rules, i don't care what terms they use.

I'm sure the French, Serbs, Russians, etc all have their own words to describe trys, tackles, knock ons etc.