Punishment for poor nines squads

[nick87]

i always love the argument about how player could get injured in a trial game or training, so why is the 9's any different

You could get hit by a car any day of the week. Doesnt mean you go walk across busy roads without looking does it?

Trials and training a necessary evil to ensure your team is match fit for NRL games, y'know the games that matter.
9's is an unnecessary evil and those teams wishing to protect their star players from suffering serious injuries for a unnecessary evil should have the right to do so. Coaches livelihoods are on the line, at the end of a season when a team has under performed and the coach faces the music, it helps him little to point to a vital player who missed 3 months of the year because of an injury sustained in the 9's.

These guys have a job to do, it's to win an NRL premiership. If they feel their best chance to do that is phone this mickey mouse comp in, so be it.

 

[Parra]

Trials are generally non competitive tame affairs. Risk is there, but it is a lot lower than a full blown match.

Why do people think trials are the same as competition games?

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Rugby league fannies being insular and shortsighted. Now I've seen everything.

 

[Someone]

the trials should be canned.

let clubs organise 'friendlies' against other teams if they desire and keep the nines.

Its not as if teams don't practice and practice set plays and structures at training, then call in the u20s or reserve grade squad to implement these structures in a game type scenario. I don't see the use of having trials at all.

 

[Noise]

Trials are friendlies. The clubs organise the trials between each other, not the nrl.

 

[Someone]

learn something new everyday, I stand corrected. I thought they were organized by the NRL.

does that mean a team can choose to not have trials?

 

[Parra]

yes

 

[East Coast Tiger]

NRL has two official trial weekends so in theory they are meant to play in those. But due to the wcc there is often one club that doesn't have a team to play like the ugliest girl at the dance.

You can tell the clubs organise them though because most of them are in Sydney and Brisbane. Because that makes a lot of sense..

 

[magpie4ever]

Trials are generally non competitive tame affairs. Risk is there, but it is a lot lower than a full blown match.

Why do people think trials are the same as competition games?

Don't agree they are tame affairs, the minute a player goes easy is the minute he will get injured.

They are not the same as a comp game for sure, unlimited replacements (run one team on, and another off) etc etc; but no coach would advise to go easy.

 

[magpie4ever]

If 9s is ever going to find a place in the calendar than go for it as the last action before the comp starts (one or two weekends before the comp commences) after all the 13 man trials.

 

[Parra]

About the level of a full contact training session. Players will get injured, it is fair dinkum in individual moments, but that is all. Nowhere near like a match.

 

[Perth Red]

Most definately, but a trial at least has some value to the club unlike the 9's or the All Stars. If the concept is so good, let the teams send whatever team they choose and the concept will sustain it. If not then it probably wasn't a good enough idea to start with.

And the value to the game? Suggesting a tournament is at fault if it fails due to clubs sending a squad of no names kids is about the dumbest thing I have heard on here for a long time! :crazy:

 

[Perth Red]

i always love the argument about how player could get injured in a trial game or training, so why is the 9's any different

You could get hit by a car any day of the week. Doesnt mean you go walk across busy roads without looking does it?

Trials and training a necessary evil to ensure your team is match fit for NRL games, y'know the games that matter.
9's is an unnecessary evil and those teams wishing to protect their star players from suffering serious injuries for a unnecessary evil should have the right to do so. Coaches livelihoods are on the line, at the end of a season when a team has under performed and the coach faces the music, it helps him little to point to a vital player who missed 3 months of the year because of an injury sustained in the 9's.

These guys have a job to do, it's to win an NRL premiership. If they feel their best chance to do that is phone this mickey mouse comp in, so be it.

That's only if you consider it a wothless pre season trial. If you think of it as A meaningful competition important for the development of the ga,e and worth winning in its own right the the risk becomes acceptable. What do clubs gain from nsw or Qland winning origin? Nothing, arguably that competition is far more detrimental to a clubs season. Are you suggesting clubs should withhold their players from origin?

 

[nick87]

Origin in the highest level of play in our sport. That aside, finacially it's not even in the same realm. Also clubs dont have the power to withhold players from representing at higher levels, they do have the power to withold them from representing in social competition

When the 9's are offering up 30k per game for the players and is the highest rating event on television, along with the pinnicle of our sport, let me know. Until then your analogy is f**king geniused.

 

[AJB1102]

Origin in the highest level of play in our sport. That aside, finacially it's not even in the same realm. Also clubs dont have the power to withhold players from representing at higher levels, they do have the power to withold them from representing in social competition

When the 9's are offering up 30k per game for the players and is the highest rating event on television, along with the pinnicle of our sport, let me know. Until then your analogy is f**king geniused.

To be fair it did take 30 odd years of Origin to get to a point where players get paid $30K to take part.

Every side gets some amount of money to play in the 9's, and the money goes up the more successful they are over the weekend. To my knowledge Clubs receive no financial reward for having players in Origin so from a Club's financial perspective its a better risk/reward situation to have a star feature in the 9's and risk injury. Not even taking into account the difference in intensity and fatigue of the 2 concepts.

I'm not really arguing for either but its interesting to see this 9's concept evolve. I love Origin, so if 9's could get up on that level we'd be f**king laughing. The more blockbuster top shelf RL the better I say.

Just be thankful our code is drumming up things like this and not shit like NRC lol.

 

[unforgiven]

And the value to the game? Suggesting a tournament is at fault if it fails due to clubs sending a squad of no names kids is about the dumbest thing I have heard on here for a long time! :crazy:

Really you must not read your own posts. Seriously I don't see the BBL having trouble remaining relevant when it doesn't have the Australian cricketers and it also started with all new teams.

As I stated if this concept is to survive it needs to be able to do it without the majority of the big name players just like every other sports truncated version.

 

[AJB1102]

Really you must not read your own posts. Seriously I don't see the BBL having trouble remaining relevant when it doesn't have the Australian cricketers and it also started with all new teams.

As I stated if this concept is to survive it needs to be able to do it without the majority of the big name players just like every other sports truncated version.

I'd reckon thats the long-term plan, for it to be credible enough to stand on its own. To which you could probably argue that if it got to that point, the stars would want to be a part of it anyway.

If its gonna last past its initial 5yrs then it has to get to a point where you don't need contractual obligations to get star power behind it. But having that to begin with gives it a bit of a fighting chance against selfish Clubs.

From memory the BBL relied pretty heavily on star power to begin win and still does now. Not sure how well it would of taken off without the likes of Warney, Brett Lee, Chris Gayle, that Sri Lankan chucker. Teams still climb over each other to sign a bit name to promote their franchise.

 

[unforgiven]

I'd reckon thats the long-term plan, for it to be credible enough to stand on its own. To which you could probably argue that if it got to that point, the stars would want to be a part of it anyway.

If its gonna last past its initial 5yrs then it has to get to a point where you don't need contractual obligations to get star power behind it. But having that to begin with gives it a bit of a fighting chance against selfish Clubs.

From memory the BBL relied pretty heavily on star power to begin win and still does now. Not sure how well it would of taken off without the likes of Warney, Brett Lee, Chris Gayle, that Sri Lankan chucker. Teams still climb over each other to sign a bit name to promote their franchise.

Yeah thats where we should be doing the exact same thing the BBL does and bring in former players, All those players had already retired from international cricket. We should use our recently retired stars in the same way for this concept and leave our current stars to play real football,

 

[AJB1102]

Yeah thats where we should be doing the exact same thing the BBL does and bring in former players, All those players had already retired from international cricket. We should use our recently retired stars in the same way for this concept and leave our current stars to play real football,

Cricket and RL are too different to begin to think Cricket's strategy will fit.

For starters more RL players are known for what they do in the domestic comp rather than on the international stage, which is the opposite for Cricket. Once our guys are past playing at the top levels they can still enjoy highly paid and watched careers at the domestic level, which until the BBL ex-Aussie cricketers couldn't really do. So when our guys retire its usually the end of them. Not to mention the amount who shift into TV roles after hanging up the boots.

Until its a decent payday I don't see many strapping back up for a weekend of getting blitzed by teenagers for anything other than fun. And by the time they can earn a quid those teenagers will be the stars going for the representative coin like they do Origin and internationals.

 

[unforgiven]

Cricket and RL are too different to begin to think Cricket's strategy will fit.

For starters more RL players are known for what they do in the domestic comp rather than on the international stage, which is the opposite for Cricket. Once our guys are past playing at the top levels they can still enjoy highly paid and watched careers at the domestic level, which until the BBL ex-Aussie cricketers couldn't really do. So when our guys retire its usually the end of them. Not to mention the amount who shift into TV roles after hanging up the boots.

Until its a decent payday I don't see many strapping back up for a weekend of getting blitzed by teenagers for anything other than fun. And by the time they can earn a quid those teenagers will be the stars going for the representative coin like they do Origin and internationals.

That is actually a good point, you may be a welcome addition around here.