I decided to write an article after, to my great shame, watching 100% Footy.
Current ARLC chairman Peter V’Landys was a special guest and a few of his comments really gave me pause. One theme that emerged was the need to create an entertainment product that would appeal to the casual NRL fan and the best way to create this product is to speed up the gameplay.
Rugby league is a dynamic sport. More often than not it is played at breakneck speed. V’Landys indicated that popular opinion demonstrates that the speed of the game directly affects the enjoyment fans can derive from the spectacle. But to what end?
The resumption of the NRL post-COVID-19 shutdown has seen a major push to increase the speed of the game, to bring in the magic word – fatigue.
Fatigue is seen as the direct cure for boring hit-up heavy football. The idea is that more players with tired legs mean that the little guys can come into their own and dominate the game – though it must be said that genuine little men are few and far between.
The new six-again rule has been implemented to increase the speed of the game as well as the speed of the ruck itself. This has occurred to some degree as ruck speeds are down to 3.4 seconds as opposed to 3.6 seconds pre-shutdown.
The evidence is, therefore, suggesting that the game is much more exciting because the game is faster and the ball is in play for longer periods of time over the length of a game (by about 2.5 minutes), but does a faster game create a better spectacle, or does it remove the ebbs and flows that are normally present in the game?
Not to take away from the idea of a faster game equalling nirvana completely, but does a free-flowing game provide the best possible sporting spectacle on its own? Or does it merely provide entertainment commodity for the casual fan to take off the shelf once or twice a year, perhaps at the expense of games being closer for longer?
Ignoring any conspiracies that refs manage games to keep it close I’m proposing a theorem that NRL is most exciting when it is close. The speed of the game is a distant second.
(AAP Image/Dan Himbrechts)
The current average winning margin since the shutdown is 16.7. For context, the lowest average winning margin in the NRL era was 11.75 in 2015 – which was a season that was capped off with a golden point thriller.
While the season under these new guidelines is only another four weeks in, I am not entirely prepared to declare the product as vastly improved. This is particularly true when injury treatment and the captain’s challenge are strategic tools to slow the game down despite the rule changes.
It’s not that I am a traditionalist by any means, but I feel that rule changes for the sake of it are not always going to be the watershed moment they were meant to be.
Adam
Roar Guru
As a fan of both (but union is my first love) they could probably speed up the lineouts. But it's pretty tough to speed up scrums without compromising safety
Adam
Roar Guru
Lineouts do take a little longer, as do scrums. But generally I think they have improved it. Maybe a shot clock for lineouts would be nice (even if it's an unoffocial one where the referee keeps it moving)
Micko
Roar Rookie
Has the ball in play decreased for union in the past 20-30 years? I remember enjoying watching the sport 20 years ago, but now I don't bother watching super rugby at all. Will watch the wallabies and internationals, but do struggle to stay motivated to watch the whole game sometimes.
Micko
Roar Rookie
Has this decreased in the past 20-30 years? I seemed to enjoy watching more 20+ years ago. I'm sure they stop and fart around a lot more now than they used to.
Tim Buck 3
Roar Rookie
The result of the contest is more important than the speed of the game and enjoyment fans get from the spectacle. This was not a problem until tries were changed to four points to discourage teams from converting penalties. Players slowing the PTB were encouraged to do so because they knew they could stop a try but they couldn't stop a kick for goal. When tries were three points teams would kick for goal and the players breaking the rules wouldn't get away with it the way they do now. For a team with a good defence six again is not a big worry at all.
concerned supporter
Roar Rookie
Adam, Ball in Play in Super Rugby is only 35 minutes V NRL now 57 minutes. Rugby need a massive shakeup in this area.
Adam
Roar Guru
The numbers do back you up. Ball in play is now 2.5 minutes more. Not heaps, but it makes for another couple of sets
Adam
Roar Guru
I think that this is the thrust of my concern. How fast do we need it to be? Let's just play touch if we want a super fast, high scoring game
Adam
Roar Guru
I think that she might have used NRL as a nice wedge to prove her point re: rule changes in the AFL
Nick Maguire
Roar Rookie
Nat agree. The ruck speed seems to have been the afterthought here as the 6 again rule was about re-setting your line after a cheap / cynical penalty. Ruck speed is 100% interpretation by the referees not a rule change, could have been done under the old rules (and was tried for a short and acrimonious time as we all remember!) and refs are definitely more inclined to give a 6 again than they would have a penalty before the rule change. I think you've nailed it.
Nick Maguire
Roar Rookie
Joe, 100% agree. Recruiting and player salaries were based on players potential contribution to the success of the team under a certain set of rules predicating a certain style of play. In your scenario under the new rules I see B Smith as a 13, which is effectively what he plays anyway and agree on Grant. Do you re-sign NAS on the big money if you know these rules are coming in? I don't, I actually think his usefulness has diminished a great deal and I might not even pick him, just when he had really developed and improved as a front rower from his early days. Welch another with no leg speed but enormous heart for the fight. Good comment.
bazza200
Guest
I think it's important to spend the time to get trys right it's very hard to know if someone has scored in reality alot of the times the players don't 100% know so how does the captian know. In regularly play they more likely know if the ball is stripped or they've been whacked in the head.
up in the north
Roar Rookie
I like that there is more ball being in play. When you deduct stoppages, an eighty minute game was substantially less, I've not actually researched it, but the vibe is strong.
jamesb
Roar Guru
Hi Adam People have emphasized so much on the speed of the game with the 6 again rule, but I reckon there is more football been played. Prior to the 6 again rule, the ref would blow a penalty. The team that gets the penalty, take heir time in kicking the ball out, and then play resumes. Whereas with the new rule, it's continuous play. Of course it is a small sample size after it was implemented four rounds ago. When this season is over, all 16 teams will have an opportunity to work around the new rule in the off season. And I reckon next year, most of the teams will have adjusted to the 6 again rule.
Gray-Hand
Roar Rookie
Well, by that logic that would mean that referees are currently manipulating the 6 again rule to generate blowouts. Doubtful. If that is not the case, it means either: 1. The 6 again rule doesn’t allow referees to keep games close as much as the old rules did; or 2. Referees just haven’t fine tuned their game management under the new rules yet. It may well be that by the end of the season the 6 again rule will be shown to be a rule that makes for easier referee game (score) management, for the reasons you have mentioned, but that isn’t the case so far.
theHunter
Guest
Instead of the six again rule, to make it real fast why not just have the players just place the ball down when they hear the ref call the first "held" call? Like Union but instead of creating a ruck/maul (whatever it is) they just place it facing there own goal line? You want fast, that would be extremely fast....scores will be 50+ every game, wingers will score 50+ tries every year
The Barry
Roar Guru
I’m not against the new rule, I’m just suggesting caution. The new rule has maybe fixed one area of the game - although I think the jury is still out - but we’ve already identified multiple areas where teams are making it up elsewhere. There’s also an issue there that instead of enforcing existing rules - as the refs tried to do in the short lived crackdown - we’ve introduced a new rule that’s pretty grey and applied inconsistently. Isn’t that what we had before?
Birdy
Roar Rookie
I was embarrassed that I couldn't always follow the 6 again penalty . Odviously I'm not the only one. They are sending this game around the world so imagine how newcomers would struggle . Please refs and commentators ,more info.
Joe
Roar Rookie
Not to mention the players continuously throwing their hands up and appealing to the ref every 2nd PTB.
Fraser
Roar Rookie
I agree with Joe. It's probably easier for the game to be manipulated now given there is zero scrutiny, measurement, or transparency on a '6 again' call. Giving a team a '6 again' in their first couple of sets while attacking the line is almost a definite try. The referee can appear to even it out later when the score is already blown out, but only give it to the fatigued team when they're struggling to get out of their own half.