Lopsided scores have always existed in the NRL but now their frequency has seemed to have reached a whole new level.
What is the problem down to?
Do we need a think tank?
Do we need a summit?
Do we need another committee?
Maybe we can do without all of the above by focusing on a part of the game that seems to rarely get talked about which is surprising because we see hundreds of them every week.
I am talking about the play the ball – and more specifically the differing speeds they are played at by different teams.
Take the current two best teams in the league – Penrith and Melbourne.
In contrast to most of their rivals, both teams have perfected the tempo of the play the ball in both attack and defence.
In defence, both teams have perfected the art of turning their opponents on their backs when making a tackle.
They hold their opponents before a player turns the top of the tackled player before delivering him to the ground on his back.
Tyrone May of the Panthers celebrates after scoring a try. (Photo by Matt Blyth/Getty Images)
This technique means they are consistently defending against relatively slower play the balls.
You could say both teams have mastered this to the extent that do this at least four tackles per set, often more.
However, while in possession, these same teams have perfected their players submitting in tackles so they land on their front resulting in quick play the balls.
Their mastering of these techniques is rewarded by the way the game is refereed.
Varying degrees of leeway are afforded to release a tackled player that all depend on whether the held player lands on his front or back.
Defenders who have tackled a player on their chest or knees are ordered to release immediately.
If they do release immediately, the attacking teams enjoys the head start of a quick play the ball against the retreating and less organised defence.
If they don’t release immediately, the defence is penalised with a ruck infringement which further concentrates possession and field territory with the attacking side.
When this cycle occurs over the course of 80 minutes it starts to take a toll.
American football is often criticised for the stop start nature of the game.
One good thing about the stop starts is that it ensures the way a player is tackled to the ground does not influence how quick the next play ensues.
Each new play commences at a standardised pace.
This is not a call to turn rugby league into American football.
However, we need to look at balancing or standardising the speed of play the balls so we don’t continue having games with teams playing consistently against each other at completely different speeds.
Teams shouldn’t be granted lightening fast play the balls just because they land on their knees or their chest instead of their back.
Defenders should be allowed to make a legs tackle on their own without the fear of being sent to the sin bin because they didn’t release within a tenth of a second.
Players who make low tackles or bring someone down on their front need to be given the same sort of leeway to release afforded to those who make high tackles, wrestle and put players on their backs.
It’s also about time we changed who kicks off after a team scores points.
The team that scored previously should kick off.
How many times have we seen games where one team can almost exclusively touch the ball for 10 -15 minutes.
You have seen the routine.
A team scores a try. They get the ball back from the kick off. They then receive a penalty or set restart and proceed to score another try or at the very least force a goal-line dropout. Then just repeat this sequence over and over.
Changing the kick off rule would enhance shared possession.
Giving defenders a helping hand with play the ball speeds would address the balance between attack and defence.
These measures would go some way to addressing score blow outs.
dodgydragons
Guest
No new rules needed. We just need the refs to enforce the rule of players playing the ball on the mark where they are tackled. Drives me insane that just about every set of 6 has players moving 3m forward or 4 steps to the left or right, taking markers out of play. As always the storm are masters of it
Short Memory
Guest
Yep. Crackdown on incorrect play the balls.
Short Memory
Guest
If only it were that simple. The issue is not that some teams are competent and some are not. We have seen blow outs between top 4 teams. The issue is that the poorly designed and inconsistently executed NEW rules are creating exponential advantage (i.e. the initial advantage leads to further advantage). Winding back the NEW rules a bit and correctly enforcing both the new and old rules will eliminate the blow outs while keeping the competitive spectacle we all love so much.
Joey
Guest
Let’s be honest, the rules of the game are being blamed for a number of teams out there who currently just don’t show to be NRL standard. Let’s focus less blame on the rules and put some onus back on the teams. The idea should not be to bring the better teams down 3 pegs so the weaker teams will look artificially competitive. Teams need to get their houses in order.
Joey
Guest
Slowing down teams much like adding extra weight to racehorses? Problem is if all horses in the race once carried 52kg and then you made them all carry 60kg, the best horses would still win, and probably by further.
Wait a minute !
Guest
Say what you like about slowing the play down. Melbourne are the inventors of the wrestling techniques brought in to slow the play the ball. Also started the chicken wing tackles. Still get away with lots of flop on tackles & holding down longer than most other clubs. Yet they were the best under the hold em down for ever tackle rules. Now are by far the best under the quick play the balls & 6 again rules. No matter who’s in their team. You can’t change who wins overall, by slowing down the play the ball. The best coached & managed team will still win. So all you’re suggesting is making the poorly coached teams look a bit better.
The Barry
Roar Guru
It really is that simple I don’t know whether I love or loathe these “let’s add a whole bunch of new rules to counteract the effects of the other new rules so we can get back to what rugby league was…”
Rellum
Roar Guru
I have been pondering the idea of rewarding tackles that get the runner of the ball on the ground. The whole point of tackling is to stop the attack, bring the player to the ground was the best way to do this, but with the wrestle we had defenders trying to keep runners upright and runners diving to the ground at times to speed up the play the ball. Winning the ruck was based on your wrestle and first contact engagement and wrestle technique. We should flip it and make the battle about if the the tackles can get you to the ground. In detail if you tackle the player to the ground you "win" the ruck and get that small extra time to climb up to marker. If you don't and the runner can keep their feet they "win" the ruck and get to have a quick play the ball. In theory it should reward the big guys who can make big hit ups and keep pumping. I haven't thought enough about this though so the secondary effects may not be desired and that is what my gut is telling me, but it is worth discussion at least.
Dragon footy head
Roar Rookie
Only one way to stop is this ridiculous 6 again get rid of it the rule is a lottery
Jon Re
Guest
I think that the referees should apply the rules. The tackled player shall: a. without delay regain his feet where he is tackled, b. lift the ball clear of the ground, c. face his opponent’s goal line, d. place the ball on the ground, and make a genuine attempt to play the ball with the foot while maintaining balance. Players are now placing the ball on the ground before getting to their feet and are allowed to get away with it. This is leading to faster play the balls and defending players being unfairly penalised or six-agained.
Paul
Roar Guru
How often do you hear a struggling Club holding a top to tail review of ALL aspects of the Club, including the Board? Never is the correct answer
Dwanye
Roar Rookie
Hi Paul. I’m with you, but it will get brushed under the carpet by the club they keep struggling along, got their jobs and idea’s, everyone else is wrong or treating them unfair.
Randy
Roar Rookie
The ptb doesn't need to be slowed down. Go back to a 5m rule and defenders won't have to slow down and lie all over the ruck so much....
Paul
Roar Guru
I have huge problems with looking at one rule, or one part of the game, in isolation. As others have already pointed out, I too have issues with trying to bring the very best teams back to the mediocre chasing pack by effectively reverting to what teams were doing prior to the rule changes. I'm not having a go at the author, but he and the rest of us should have a look at what Wayne Bennett had to say about blow outs, etc. IMO his words are 3 minutes of pure gold and put a completely different light on what he thinks is ailing the game right now. If rule changes need to be considered after fixing the issues he's identified with nearly all Clubs, fair enough, make them, but first fix the huge problems the Clubs are causing from front office backwards.
Paul
Roar Rookie
Jackaro I find your observations really interesting. I think one way of increasing the competition for the ball and without doing away with the 10m rule is to tweak the stripping rule. Allow competition for the ball until the referee calls "held" and perhaps require the tackler to only be completed once the tackler player is off their feet. There would be multiple players in the contest. It would slow down the play the ball a bit. Gives the defending team a chance at zero tackle if they can win possession. The attacking team won't always concede if they want a quick play the ball and could be rewarded with a "play on" kinda thing if they can get ball out quickly. If the referee calls held then everyone standup, play the ball and tackle count increases by one as per usual.
dogs
Guest
Even easier, most of the time you only need to make 5 tackles.
Clint
Roar Rookie
Hi Jackaroo. Looks like you're going to get lambasted on here but I actually agree with a lot of what you're saying. There has been an obsession with the play-the-ball ever since the 10 metre rule was introduced. Coaches figured out that fast play-the-balls and rolling rucks would tire out the middles which was then countered by gang-tackles, holding down and wrestling. Every proposed solution to date has been through the lens of how we speed up the play-the-ball, which has resulted in the play-the-ball being the key feature of the game rather than a way to safely restart play. While the incentive is there to play the ball quickly, coaches will always look for ways to slow it down in defense (3 men in the tackle is currently very popular) and to speed up their own (surrender tackles, milking etc.). Bernie Gurr, Sean Fagan, Paul Broughton and Greg McCallum have all in the past asked for the laws of the game to be reviewed within the context of "disempowering" the play-the-ball (reducing the 10 metres was one proposed solution), so you're certainly not Robinson Crusoe here, but I (controversially) agree with you that any further rule changes need to look at the game as more than a contest to play-the-ball quickly.
Walter Black
Guest
Simple Answer = NO! We should never ever dumb down the game to accommodate the under performer. We should never reward mediocrity. And if mediocre dumb clubs cannot adapt they should leave the NRL and we should bring in someone else who can.
Dwanye
Roar Rookie
Yeah I think we ‘band-aid’ it wish something quick. Forget bad management at clubs, uneven spread of talent or plan old giving time to players to ‘catch-up’ with the new rules. Let’s have a sport where the top get hamstrung so the weaker can keep up.
Onya!
Guest
In NFL, the teams with the ball can still rush through & get away quick plays, if they wish to ? Often to catch the opposition defence, still changing over defensive players. Giving themselves an assured penalty & a free play if they achieve this? Sounds a bit like six agains in another form? Don’t slow down the plays ! If a team hasn’t come up to speed as yet with the new rules? It’s all on them.