NRL to trial 11-a-side rugby league

[watatank]

I suppose it means that positions will probably disappear but the way league focusses on role players it was bound to happen.

There's many ways to get rid of two positions but it would really depend on the player personnel. What I think might happen is the positions will become like union. So you will have the hooker being like a scrum half, the halfback like the fly half and I really think the five eighth will be like an inside centre, getting rid of one centre and the lock position all in one hit. Rest would stay the same.

 

[God-King Dean]

I use to like this idea. But the thought of taking away centres doesn't sit well with me. Be interesting though.

 

[Mr Angry]

I use to like this idea. But the thought of taking away centres doesn't sit well with me. Be interesting though.

Not centres, 5/8 and lock.

Let's face it, locks are backrowers, and 5/8s do not really exist anymore.

It would be be 7's at all.

A lot less gang tackles and more one on one action. (keep your mind out of the gutter)

 

[DeeJ]

There would probably be even more grappling and holding down in the ruck since it's even more important to slow down the speed of the game.

 

[Loudstrat]

i said i would rather.

I don't want players being taken away. I'd rather they look at different options to "open up" the game then take players off the field.

So you either play on wider fields or have less players. How else do you open up the game apart from increasing the size of the area each player has to defend?

I don`t like this at all. Would take all the skill out of the game. Have you guys ever seen rugby Sevens? Absolute crap. Just running, running, running, no thinking required at all. Pathetic game. If they bring this in, then you surely must reduce playing times cos even the fittest players would be spewing their guts after 40 minutes.

Disagree. It would take the dummy half running, and the tries from kicks (therefore boring legalistic video refs) out of the game.

There would probably be even more grappling and holding down in the ruck since it's even more important to slow down the speed of the game.

Disagree. Gang tackling would decrease, as this tends to draw players close to the ruck. In 11 a side - this would produce much space out wide.

I think it would encourage sliding defence, maybe rebirth the old cover defencive role.

 

[Tommy Smith]

What a stupid idea. Touch football sucks. So do 50-46 scorelines. The problem with the game atm is that its too much like touch footy, so lets just make it worse!

 

[griff]

Surely it isn't April Fools Day yet?

So many obvious things to fix like scrums, the ruck, markers and they go for a stupid idea like this.

 

[Chook Norris]

What a stupid idea. Touch football sucks. So do 50-46 scorelines. The problem with the game atm is that its too much like touch footy, so lets just make it worse!

touch footy rocks

 

[DINGb@T]

Think of the wider consequences.
With only 11 players you've got 2 less players to pay in first grade, 2 less in Toyota cup, etc etc along with all the training, transport and other costs that build up. The extra cash can go straight to salary cap improvements to keep the best players in the game. Not to mention make our code a lot more efficient- to field a team we'd be paying something like 7 fewer people than AFL. Not a bad advantage to have on your opposition.

If the same applies to grass roots footy it'll become a bit easier to organise teams as you have 2 less players you need to find which means less forfeits, more teams, etc.

I really like the idea. Lets hope it gets a decent trial, hopefully more than one game to really measure the effects.

 

[Glenn]

Would have thought there would be more pressing issues to try and rectify. :|

 

[Chook Norris]

Think of the wider consequences.
With only 11 players you've got 2 less players to pay in first grade, 2 less in Toyota cup, etc etc along with all the training, transport and other costs that build up. The extra cash can go straight to salary cap improvements to keep the best players in the game. Not to mention make our code a lot more efficient- to field a team we'd be paying something like 7 fewer people than AFL. Not a bad advantage to have on your opposition.

If the same applies to grass roots footy it'll become a bit easier to organise teams as you have 2 less players you need to find which means less forfeits, more teams, etc.

I really like the idea. Lets hope it gets a decent trial, hopefully more than one game to really measure the effects.

hear hear,
i think in a time when our game is having heaps more trys from kicks and is being described as boring and predictable.. this is just what we need

defence has improved a lot and with more room on the field it will probably work

and just like somebody mentioned before... it could provide the players for a whole new team

 

[Jono078]

I don't like the idea at all.

To me this is something theyre doing because of a shortage of great players.

So taking 2 average ones out will get rid of 2 less average players per team which makes the whole comp better talent wise.

Well that's the feeling I get.

I would rather they come up with other things.

 

[Loudstrat]

Im bemused by the touch footy concerns, when the game is dominated by dummy half running, and tries from kicks. Clearly we are a code that makes field position easy to gain, but passing movements and one on one skills to beat defence is hard to achieve.

We can cure that by bringing back the 5m rule, and opening up the lure of attacking the flanks. Make running rugby the means to gain field position again.

 

[Calixte]

Take off the f**king shackles...

Give me a break.

In one country, France, our code is built on the bedrock of the principle of 13 players. Let's throw it all out because of the odd boring Sydney team in the NRL.

FFS. :roll:

 

[krudmonk]

In one country, France, our code is built on the bedrock of the principle of 13 players. Let's throw it all out because of the odd boring Sydney team in the NRL.

You're mad because the French aren't original to name the sport anything other than "Rugby with 13 guys?"

 

[Calixte]

I'm saying 11 a-side is a reactionary response which would clearly appeal to simpletons.

 

[Parra]

Souths have already started the trial today.

Their wingers took the field, but took no part in defence.

 

[Tommy Smith]

Abolishing the interchange system and replacing it with the old style system of having 4 subs (once youre off you cant come back on) would have the same effect as what i imagine they want to see with 11-a-side touch footy.

It would open the game up.

I highly doubt this bullsh*t idea will go ahead but if it does then the sport that once was rugby league can go and get stuffed. I'll lose interest because the forward play will disappear and be replaced by a glutiny of giant athletes who cant pass or think but can run and run well.

 

[aussies1st]

Just wouldn't be rugby league if we do this. Teams will just find a way to make it boring again. So do we reduce it to 1 a side then? The Storm and Raiders play some real entertaining footy.

 

[Edwahu]

What if the Poms disagree with the change? Do we go back to 13 for tests?