Rugby league finally ''mans up''

No I'm not into fighting sports. But Rugby League really isn't all about the biff, the biff is a part of the game but not central to it. The point of Rugby is to run as hard as you can at someone and knock them out of the way and score a try or use speed and skill to dodge through the line and score a try. Contact sports are fantastic because they are a mix of size, speed, power and skill which frankly other sports struggle to match. Fighting sports would probably come the closest to match it. The fighting comes in 100% of the time because a player feels he has been contacted in an unlawful way and either punches or shoves a block who then reacts. It get the feeling people think players in League just start fights without provocation for the heck of it, and really anyone who thinks that clearly doesn't watch the game. You said it yourself, football used to have sneaky elbows etc, I say rather than crack down on the fighting, crack down on the reasons the fights start, tighten up the rules and enforce them better and as a result the fights would stop.

Best reply to an article I've read in some time Supereel. The real issue in the recent rule changes, is the notion that Rugby League must pander to these casual audiences. This in turn is a symptom of the code battle that is raging over Australia, which realistically is between the AFL and NRL. The NRL feels it must present the most universally likable game to win the battle. However, as so often happens when trying to make something universally acceptable, this is just watering down what made the game appealing in the first place. If the NRL wants to make the game more popular, they should look at what made the game appealing to its original audience: i.e. toughness and passion. It allowed men to express their anger and frustration by seeing players expressing such heart and guts, that they could not help but connect. This is what the NRL should be using to attract new viewers, as I truly believe that League is (or used to be) the most honest expression of these very human emotions. I love all the footballs. I love soccer for its skills, I love AFL for its endurance and Union for it rugged unpredictability. But league has its history and its heart, and by changing rules to pander to the casual viewers it is weakening its appeal.

The issue I have with the ban on punching is it waters down the sport. Sometimes passions just boil over for a multitude of reasons and while I don't condone punching I do enjoy seeing the odd biff. The crowd certainly loves it, after every fight there is tangible energy within the crowd. The players also feed off that energy. As a fan I can think of nothing worse than seeing a guy get tackled high, go to punch a guy because he really disagrees with the way he was tackled and then think better of it because he knows he will have to spend 10 minutes in the bin, all the while the other guy gets off without punishment. Contact sports need to embrace violence because ultimately that is how the sport is played. I don't mean they should let them go out there and punch each other but part of rugby league is bashing into someone as hard as you can, violence is part of the sport.

Rugby league players play for penalties too.

Now I'm not a Rugby League fan first and foremost either, but to suggest that it's not a technical game or doesn't have some of the world's best athletes is quite condescending. As is suggesting that the NRL isn't already one of the premier shorting competitions on the globe. To me, a manly sport is one where you take your knocks, be they legal or not and play on without whinging to the ref. This is probably why Rugby League fans have a go at soccer players, because the premier players have skill but are also happy to dive in order to win penalties from the referee and win shots at goal in an underhanded fashion.

I don't know that the comparison stands up though. It's not so much much that Rugby League is more manly, it's that soccer is less manly. I do understand that faking penalties is now a part of the game of soccer and that falling at the right moment and having the appropriate look on your face to create the illusion of pain is a skill like good ball control is a skill, I just think that soccer needed the change more than league does. Soccer had regular broken legs and disgusting acts of stomping, to the extent that bans were absolutely necessary, but Rugby League is diferent, even after the fight Nate Myles played on and can still walk. It may seem like I'm exaggerating a bit, but as a soccer fan, you'd understand the act of overplaying what happened to get a result.

Rugby League is a tough sport founded by tough men. They removed the shoulder charge. A completely legitimate tackle if executed correctly for over 100 years. Why? Because of a bunch of ill-placed public opinion. The game is becoming soft, it's far from getting tougher, it's getting softer. I grew up in the 90's so I wasn't brought up in the real tough era of rugby league. I wasn't around to see John Sattler have his draw broken in a Grand Final, I wasn't alive to see the likes of Raudonikis call "CATTLEDOG!!!" or Beetson go man-to-man with teammate Michael Cronin in the first ever State of Origin match. You grew up with soccer, I don't hold that against you. But to understand why the outcry has occurred you have to understand where the "biff" has come from. I hate when there are cheap shots. Cheeky elbows, knee twists, eye gouges, knees in the back. I think it's a dog act and is worse than a punch as the player affected can't defend himself. One man standing toe-to-toe with another bloke sorting their on-field issues on the field is the nature of rugby league. The game is the toughest sport in the world and has the heaviest collisions. I played soccer and I have also played rugby league. They odd stray tackle can do damage but running straight into a bloke at full speed who is heavier than you hurts your entire body. In a game with plenty of aggression, at some point it's going to boil over. You type of people who have the casual interest in league is who the administrators are pandering to. Not the die-hard leaguies like myself. You may think us below you for enjoying seeing bust-ups but we value what the game was founded on. The NRL is going the way of touch-football. It is getting ridiculous. We don't want to see these "athletes" we want to see tough footballers. But that's the way the game is going. The last of the real "footballers" are in the twilight of their careers. Guys like Civoniceva, Lockyer, Hindmarsh, Webcke, Price. When you look at blokes like Jason Smith, Jarrod McCracken, Dean Pay and Jim Dymock, they were talented players but tough as nails. Jason Smith is currently playing country rugby league and still smokes. He could deliver the most sweetly timed pass but he'd let you know if you pissed him off. A lot of younger players these days like to niggle either with their mouth or cheap shots. They talk the talk but won't walk the walk. I might be their age but my thinking is of a different era. Playing soccer a few seasons back I collected the ball (I was a keeper), the striker followed through after me and when running past me elbowed me in the ribs. I played on but the next time he was near me I put my shoulder in which sent him to the ground. When he got up and had a go at me I grabbed his jersey and said if he wanted to have a go he could have a go but whatever he threw was coming back at him. He didn't come near me for the rest of the game. You look at a guy like Michael Ennis. He's been called a germ and a grub because he niggles. And his jaw's felt the wrath of many a player. I've always believe that if you niggle and get away with sneaky little punches etc. that you deserve to get decked. You might like the softer game as it's closer to soccer but I sure as hell don't and I believe the NRL has to stop pandering to ill-directed public opinion as everything they do at the moment is a knee jerk reaction.