After making through the summer doldrums with no rugby league to watch, the NRL is finally back. [Painting by James Brennan]
Having followed the game since I was a kid on the Paddo Hill at the Sydney Cricket Ground in 1961, I have seen the evolution of rugby league.
I must admit, I don’t like what I am seeing these days. I have come to the conclusion that today’s rugby league is a dumbed-down version of what the game used to be.
Let’s go back a couple of decades to the eighties. The Tina Turner era if you like.
What have we lost since then? Some may say, “not much”, but look carefully at some video of the matches featuring players like Benny Elias, Steve Roach, Terry Lamb, Mal Meninga and Wally Lewis. A comparison to the modern game raises several questions.
How do we have scrums like they are today? Why has the skill of raking the ball at the ruck been obliterated? Where is the sweeping backline play of the great Parramatta teams of their premiership era?
What has become of the specialist hooker? Why do so many players play the ball as if they were playing touch football? Where are the practised moves that broke defensive lines? None of these things are evident today.
So what do we have instead? Scrums that are nothing more than twelve blokes bending over – and sometimes they are unable to even do that! Witness how long it takes to form a scrum today. You can hear the referee telling first grade players how to pack!
The ball used to be fed into the tunnel between the front rowers. The skill of the hooker, in combination with his half-back, has been eroded. Now, anybody can be a hooker. You can’t strike for the ball when it’s fed in behind the second row. How did league fans allow this to happen?
While I blame league authorities and referees, mostly I blame the media for this travesty. In the days when scrum penalties were issued for breaches of the scrummaging rules, the media would focus on the amount of penalties given in a match.
Wrongly they would blame the referees for “not allowing the game to flow.” But the referees were not to blame – the players were the ones responsible for these penalties. I do not recall too many media outlets blasting certain hookers or scrum-halves of those days for persistently trying to flout the rules.
If the refs ‘pinged’ them, surely the players (and coaches?) should have got the message. The call to let the game flow has now come to the point that rugby league is little more than touch football, but with full-on body contact.
Oh, and a thing called a scrum – but we don’t really know what’s for any more, do we?
Let me move now to the part of rugby league that is causing more problems than it should: the ten metre rule. This was designed to open up the game. While it has done that to a degree, it has also taken the creativity out of the game.
It has also caused a huge number of problems for referees and players at the ruck area. Players used to make an effective tackle (sometimes even one-on-one) and jump up to act as dummy-half without a problem. Why? Because his team mates did not have to retire so far behind the play the ball area.
I used to see the three yard rule in action. I loved the game back then. It worked. Then it became the five yard rule and that too was ok as it did not alter the game much. When it became ten metres, many things changed.
Coaches understandably got their players to wrestle or hold the opposition to the ground to deliberately slow things down, enabling the defensive line to set. You can’t blame them for this. You can blame the administrative ‘genius’ who thought the ten metre rule would be a good idea.
That decision now sees players lying all over a tackled player, making no effort to get off until the referee tells the players to move.
Since the rule change, we’ve had complaints about grapple tackling, chicken wings, chin strap tackles, dominant tackles (a stupid concept, that is) and clubs have employed wrestling coaches to train players to get the opposition onto their backs in the tackle.
None of this would be necessary if the offside rule was brought back to five metres. Maybe we could even have backlines that stood deep in attack to give them time to perform, wait for it, a backline move! Remember those?
I am not giving up on rugby league. Yet. It has always been a great game to watch but I am sick and tired of watching of incorrect play-the-balls go unpunished, of watching bastardised versions of ‘scrums’ pack down, of watching players running backwards in ‘defence’, of watching players lying all over the tackled player to slow things down and of watching players who do not have a clue what to do when a ball is dropped.
I also remember St George Illawarra, in last year’s finals, standing around and watching the ball bounce after a high kick. This is happening all too often in the modern game. It was unthinkable to do that in days gone by.
Today’s rugby league is in bad shape as a game of skill.
Yes, the players are bigger, yes, they might be fitter, yes, the hits are enormous, but the player of yesteryear had more skill.
And as for making games more amenable to television advertising? Well, don’t even get me started on that one!
Jaredsbro
Roar Guru
One final thing: I've just read Oikee's post below and it intrigues me. Unfortunately Rugby League can't afford to just let fans go watch Rugby Union...ie we won't miss them if they go kind of argument. Firstly because like it or now Rugby League is a game very similar to Rugby Union. That means these days particularly you're going to get fans of both. Now this is great and most do appreciate both for their differences, like we treat our only slightly distant rallies. But it's really skirting around the issue, which is that like it or lump it, Rugby League is in a battle for legitimacy with Rugby Union particularly and that means for mine that getting rid of a forward-contest as separate from the backline-contest is not a good idea...and it will never happen entirely, because without a forward-contest Rugby League's going to inevitably go in one of either two directions. One further towards touch-football, because players are already getting paid more and more for flashy backline moves vs getting paid not so much less and less, but going up far less quickly for those non-big name forwards (who are effectively just forwards, ie they don't/can't play like the backs can). Increasingly there will be less motivation for forwards to do anything other than what they're told to do...unless they have extraordinary talent. So far no-one defending Rugby League's trajectory towards a back-centric game have admitted this, but it seems pretty self-evident...unless you count the rather feeble attempts by the same roarers to justify merely encouraging big guys to use their bodies not their brains. Second, the game may turn towards something more like American Football, where the play the ball becomes more of a contest like a scrimmage. This is due to teams realising the idiocy in letting those few teams/players who can play like Benji Marshall/Wests to dominate the game, when they can find other means to win which can maximise their strengths and minimise Wests-type footy's effectiveness. I doubt the second option will happen, without more incentive to legally defend at the play-the-ball, not just twiddling your thumbs (waiting) until its your turn to get the ball, which sounds a bit like welfarism to me. And yet I love this part of Rugby League, but it will be ruined if that's all play-the-balls become: waiting games, or wrestling games for the teams who hardly need them anyway considering their array of back-line talent (Melbourne I'm looking at you!).
Jaredsbro
Roar Guru
I doubt anyone will read this, but for those of you code warrior trawlers here goes. For me it basically comes down to legitimacy. I don't doubt the issues that come from a joke-of-a-ritual-paying-lip-service-to-a-self-parody that the scrum has become are frustrating. And provide ammunition for Rugby League haters to look the other way, even though they know the game sells! But until Rugby League gets over the legitimacy crisis (for lack of a better word) when it comes to forward-play, which gives the very meaning to the notion that Rugby League is synonymous with, that is back-line play, you're not going to see any change. I personally believe it's the main thing separating the converted from the unconverted (particularly in Rugby Union and Australian Football playing circles). Without addressing the issue of whether the forward (ie the big boy battering-ram) physique is still an integral part of the game or whether they're now an anachronism. It may well be that in order to continue to give meaningfulness to back-line moves, those players formerly called forwards will have to become even bigger....becoming like the lineman in American Football. But I'd like to think they could evolve into half-forwards, who actually get to co-ordinate the attack a bit more than they traditionally did, but also co-ordinate the defense. But without doing a thing you're basically admitting that the game doesn't need to which is foolish. Especially considering there are 13 players on the field and only seven of them (give or take a few big name forwards) who contribute to actual scoring of tries. But it's also a real dumb move, because it ultimately reveals Rugby League's weakness as a game, a game which cannot reward many (and often all) of the six of its hardest working professionals...which doesn't give off the signs of providing a better future at all. It's this insufficient incentive-for-effort which is what I've been talking about when it comes to a lack of legitimacy in Rugby League, not as code as a whole, but as a code which is in the interests of the traditional forward who (let's never forget) never particularly hogged the ball like what you get in Rugby Union. But why should forwards play to their best if they're not going to be rewarded for it?
James
Guest
it was one of the things Super League had right for that one season in Australia. Once you tackled, you had to let the player get up and play the ball right away. No wrestling, holding them down or 'pig rooting'. Some complained that it made the game 'too fast' and that games were 'too high scoring'. it is still the same way in English Super League, and one of the reasons the NRL champions still loose every year when they go over to play them, as it is under English rules. I actually agree with going back to a 5m rule. It would force diagonal back line play and to spread the ball wider and faster, instead of just standing flat and playing 3-4 tackles of "first receiver, hitup"... but it would be useless unless referees forced tackling players to roll away as soon as the tackle is made. I disagree with the 'old players had more skill line'. Watch any of the old GF's they replay on Fox Sports from the 80's. Most players can barely pass the ball more than 5m and even then there is no spin on the ball at all. They just kind of 'flop' it, end over end, to the next player in line. Toyota Cup under 20's players have far more skill moving the ball through the hands than 'ye olde greats of yesteryear.
Queensland's game is rugby league
Guest
Weren't Umaga and Lomu rugby league juniors?
Queensland's game is rugby league
Guest
"What planet are you on? This sort of comment makes me think you know very little about either game, possibly one of the dumbest comments I have ever read on this site." Then why don't you explain why you think it's one of the dumbest comments you've ever read? If it's so stupid and unrealistic then you shouldn't have too much difficulty. I can safely say that most of the flyhalves I've seen are just kick touch-finders and ball distributors. Very few of them will create space for their outside backs by running the ball at the line. I cannot recall seeing too many of them using a deft short kicking game for their fullback and outside backs to run onto: the only one I've seen do this are Cooper from the Reds and Larkham from the Brumbies. The onesfrom Australia and New Zealand have some potential to make the switch to league, but the ones from non-rugby league playing countries (IE. South Africa, Argentina) are very robotic and uncreative. I used to play rugby union.
Todd Johnson
Guest
The thing with the scrum now is that it doesn't create backs on backs. At the moment you have second rowers and locks at first and second receiver and fullbacks and hookers packing at lock. There aren't ever any set plays (apart from the odd blind side move from the tigers). I don't think this article is saying that today's game doesnt have skill but it has become a game where there is too many dummy half scoots, wrestling on the ground and ref decisions make such a big impact because sets of 6 take you 50m regularly. A wrong penalty takes you into try scoring territory. I'd like to see Warren Ryan's idea of a 5m rule, 11 man aside game. I would also then go back to contested play the balls (this would see blokes play the ball properly and not try and play up for a penaly) and allow any stripping of the ball. I'm not convinced the scrum needed to die the death that it has. Watching the games on Fox from the early 90's and late 80s shows competitive scrums without many penalties being blown. You also had the bloke wearing 9 at hooker, 13 at lock and so on
Queensland's game is rugby league
Guest
Don't worry about him Razza. He has a habit of being sarcastic and morbid. It's one of his hobbies. If you say something then he'll find a way to twist it around so that he can mock it. I don't know why the mods allow it. It's just another form of trolling.
Queensland's game is rugby league
Guest
How can anyone say there was more skill in the game back in the 1980's? The halfbacks from those days couldn't even throw a spiral pass! The reason Wally Lewis was so successful is because he was one of the few who could throw a long ball with accuracy. He was an abberation. not the general rule. The centres didn't step too well, either. At least not to the same standard as Hodges,Folau, Tonga, Gasnier, Etc. The wingers were fast little guys who had useless hands. Now the wingers are supermen who contort ttheir bodies in all sorts of ways to avoid getting thrown in touch before they ground the ball over the trty line.
Razza
Guest
Ian Whitchurch What do you think the players of the early days did, don't you think they "got broken". ??? Do you think their 20 bucks a game if you won was enough to fix it and live, they had a fulltime job, rugby league was their sport', what part of that dont you get. Yup, too much money today.
Razza
Guest
turbodewd. Mate, i stand by what i said about being loyal, if you pull your weight for the club, you will be looked after, if you are there for the beer, then bye bye, that is why they go looking for another club, they are not wanted. Gee whizzo, i might ask you what part of Australia you are from also, because when Rugby League first started it was not professional, they played for the sport, not the dollar like today, so goodluck mate.
Razza
Guest
James i was not complaining, i was making a statement and it was not directed at any club in particular, it was general, but to carry on, i was not a happy chappy when the Eagles bought the Poms out and i still say as an Eagles supporter from way back, they bought their first, first grade grade final in 1972 by doing so and our juniors were forced to go to other clubs, because not too many players get picked to play for their State or Country from back then, reserve grade and i stand by what i said about loyalty. And about buying Ref's, thats a bit childish isn't it. Thanks for your interest in my opinion.
Razza
Guest
Thats ok fuzhou, keep having your over 60 momemts, ha ha haaa, i was giving you a bit of support, we have got the advantage on MG Burbank of being able to go back to those great days of League, so i guess we cannot be too hard on him as he has only been here 5 minutes. And as i stated that i could go on forever naming players of the past who put their name on the game and alot escaped my memory, but you named a few that were out of my thought, but we both need to give ourselves an uppercut as both of us forgot to name one of the greatest locks( 8) of that time, among many, Ron Coote, he was always dangerous with the ball and could run and while on Souths, (i know Coote also played for Easts), there was Bobby McCarthy, Paul Sate, George Piggins, Big John O' Neil, all hard and tough. Cheers mate.
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
After watching the Broncs v Cows match last night,an absolute ball tearer of a game,why would anyone want to "fix "it. Individual brilliance(abounded in the game:Bowen eg ),deft passing,fullbllooded defence, fast backline passing movements,great goal kicks,beautiful reading of the game by some,fluctuating scoreline.. Maybe the scrums were unsightly,but did anyone in their right mind really concentrate on that aspect or even notice it,in the whole scheme of things. If anyone complains about a game like that,they would not only boo Santa Clauss but insist he had his beard trimmed, because it's unsightly and impractical..
NashRambler
Guest
I seem to remember Sean Fagan suggesting on this site that rugby league should at least explore experimenting with alternative scrum formations. I believe he suggested a five man formation with 2 in the front row and 3 in the back row. In rugby union sevens the 3 vs 3 scrums seem to work well, in the sevens games I've watched the scrums are usually quick and clean with only a few instances of penalties and resets. It seems that a 2 vs 2 front row contest for the ball with a 2-3 formation could be as effective as the 3 vs 3 RU sevens scrums.
clipper
Guest
Crosscoder, the point I was making, and one you have agreed with is that league is more popular in some suburbs than others - I didn't intend to get into a political treatise (even if I don't disagree with you). The reality is that league is more popular in certain areas, unlike Aussie Rules or even Soccer which are have the same amount of support in all demographics (in AFL states). If anything, I would say that league was more popular in the east 30 years ago, and naturally in the north before the demise of the bears.
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
I know Pete75,but to quell the Barbarians at the gate, who want change,I threw it in to stem the flow so to speak. I know it "aint " busted,but based on some comments you would feel it is going downhill fast. I am more than happy the way the game is headed.
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
No Rough Conduct,I am trying to get through(,like trying to negotiate a minefield), to a couple of people that the perception held around 30 years ago is not the same today,in my experience. I am merely stating the population at large is better educated now than it was then.That is hardly a scoop,and the effect has spilled over into rugby league both players and spectators. Having come from a working class background ,all I am uncomfortable with are snobs.I was fortunate enough to get a decent education,well let's say an education that has given me much to be thankful.I have been quite explicit in noting the game's working class heritage,that is something to be proud of. Obsessed with rugby union (for clarification purposes)! NO I was involved with the game for 6 years,and still watch AB tests,and even the occasional Reds match.If I was obsessed either negatively or positively I would spend time on ru threads,.I don't end of story.I recounted an experience(only one) I had in NZ.I would like to mention an experience I had with a shopkeeper in Omaru(spelling) who was quite happy to discuss rugby league, seeing my cap. You are a ru man,it is no secret,and had your dig at rl.One could suggest you spend a fair amount of time on a rl thread for a ru man.Nothing wrong with that,but last I heard it's open debate and ru rules were suggested by some.A precedent thus had been set. Just be clear and precise in your post and you would have got the response directed as such.Your meaning did not come across so.. Class warfare !!! please champ give it a break,I mix with people from all stations in life. . Even Clipper similarly noted in responding to you "nothing wrong with targetting the bottom end of the market,it continues to grow each years,and lets face it ,you'd have a hard time targetting the top end in League,as it will be associated with the workingmen's game,apart from a few billionaires wanting to grab a slice etc". Your whole argument is blown out of the water with the pay Tv ratings ,they are not the casual fans.There is, as ratings have constantly shown a very large core rl viewing base,which has grown further based on last weekend's figures. FTA Tv is a different animal,there will be the casual viewers to watch many sports,on that I concur,but it is not confined just to rl.Tv channel switchers are a funny breed. I give my 30 years involvement a little validity,into how the game has changed demographically.And I don't have to be an expert like a Bernard Salt to form that view. I also note ,it is sometimes the casual viewer on FTA Tv who watching a game of any code for the first time,takes a liking to it and becomes a regular. Why the fear of the code attracting a wider demographic?
Matt S
Guest
Ironic the Reds union guy about to break the world goal kicking record,Harris, was a NZ League junior. Bet that won't be mentioned too much in union circles.
The Cattery
Roar Guru
They have to execute the skills at a faster pace, having to run half marathons and under more physical pressure and against defensive structures that could barely have been imagined 20 years ago - you have to hit targets, every time, or you're dead.
Rough Conduct
Guest
"a flyhalf in rugby union doesn’t need to have the vision, creativity and footwork of a halfback/five-eighth in rugby league." What planet are you on? This sort of comment makes me think you know very little about either game, possibly one of the dumbest comments I have ever read on this site.