He doesn't get selected for NZ because he answered his "spiritual" calling to play for samoa!!

OPINION not FACT

your view only and its a pretty jaundiced one at that I do begin to wonder why you even bother watching the game

Gives me four hours each week where I don't have to talk to the wife.

What more reason do you need?

Joking aside i think the standard has got tougher this season with the new interpritation of the ptb,the world cup( a lot of teams had players at the WC and must of effected their pre-season).
The close results point to a more competitive league imo and whilst we haven't witnessed as much free flowing RL as in the past there's still been some great games,plenty of shocks and the emergence of some quality youngsters so it's not all doom and gloom.

Thats really sad mate and take it from me it is one you might come to regret.

You never know whats round the corner.



But we drift OT

I welcome the slower PTB. It gives a better more even balance to the attack/defence elements.

Anyone any thoughts on also REDUCING the 10M rule as well.

I read it as a very light hearted quip.

IMO the rules need to remain constant for a few years we are always changing the rules and tinkering, the game needs to remain consistnet for a few years otherwise it will always be classed as a "gimmicky" sport by the masses.

That would be horrible. We would see very conservative attack into blitzing defenders, and teams simply trying to force mistakes with aggressive defence.

It's not like teams can open defences at will with the current 10m gap.

True,,,but whats light for some can be heavy for others.

He does seem to want give absolute statements of fact when actually they are just his opinions.

Before the PTB became slower, I was in favour of either slowing it down or reducing the 10m. I don't think both are necessary. Despite being in favour of a slower PTB, I'd hate to get to the stage that the RU prem's now at, i.e. where a defensive stalemate with hardly any tries becomes commonplace.

Anyone who wants to see what reducing the gap between the attacking and defensive lines results in should watch a bit of top level rugby union.

The cant ????

then again I refer you to the Leeds Semi-Final where both teams managed it very successfully.

There is an arguement that the 10m rule has perhaps stifled the variety of attacking options ie the close passing or short ball game.

Players like Topliss could open up a defence with a wide variety of skills.

Totaly different and not a true comparison... the RU defensive line merely has to be behind the ball at the ruck .....not 5m.

Try watching a few classic RL CC finals and tell me then if the slow PTB and the 5M rule stiffled the attacks.

I've watched a few in my time, although many particpants were a lot less fit than today's crop.

Maybe I should expand on this a bit: I started watching in the mid-seventies. The notion that Pitchford and Cookson (say) would defend a 5m gap as effectively as Peacock and Sinfield is laughable (no disrespect to the former players intended). You simply can't compare eras in this way and surmise that similar games will be a product.

Did they? How many times each over 80 minutes of action?
Surely a bigger gap and more time gives more options, rather than less?

He seemed to do it with regular ease against Leeds IIRC





Would you say that adage applied to the game last Saturday ???



The counter arguement is it simply invites the one man drive from the PTB to make the gain line for 5 tackles then a kick downtown to hunt the opposition mistake

But watch what the defences did. Stood back and waited, or at best jogged up slowly, and usually out of line with each other.

Pssst I was comparing the ATTACKS not the DEFENCES

I have watched a lot of "Top Level" union this year in the shape of Super 14.

I am sorry to say but it's (it being the whole competition and games on average) faster, more skillful and a hell of a lot more exciting than any game of SL I've watched for a a long time.

I've said before that I have started turning RL off to watch it. And I know from certain other posters that I'm not alone.

There, I've said it.

Then you need to think about the respective qualities of the defences they were/are up against. Do you honestly think that Topliss (good player as he was) would have found so many gaps in our defence today as he did all those years ago?

Who? How many?



Last Saturday? Attackers chose from multiple options, short passes, long passes, inside and outside, behind dummy runners and to short runners crashing into gaps, scooted from acting half and employed both short and long kicks both high and on the ground, and ran both ahead, outside and back to the inside.. What options do you feel they failed to use that would have been encouraged by a closer defensive line?

Genuine question as I've never watched it: how come it's so quick compared to the english prem? Different rules, better players or some other reason?

short answer YES

His skills / fitness would have increased with the extra full time and professional training / coaching.

You are the one comparing pre SL with SL. If the players of the likes of Topliss Holmes Dyl and Dick etc had the advantages of the modern players just imagine what they could do.

I only saw one side take those options remind me again what the other side did

and where the majority of the scoring options came from



How many clear breaks where there in the full 80 mins ???