 |
|
 |
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 80 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Apr 2007 | 18 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Sep 2010 | Jan 1970 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| The ultimate in modern full-time RL is the "roll" - a succession of fast play-the-balls with the pass fed to a fast, heavy and powerful forward on a well timed and well rehed run, each drive making 10 or more yards. A set of such drives can smash the defence apart or put the team close to the opposition line. Most fans love it, and most coaches and teams rely on it for the bulk of their progress in the match. It necessitates large fast forwards and it reduces the need for lighter players with good footwork and ball handling skills.
The referee calling "held" when a tackle nears a stalemate, and ensuring that the PTB is not allowed until the defenders clear the ruck (as it actually states in the laws) could change the emphasis of the game. A slower, more controlled PTB would reduce the effectiveness of the giant athletes and require teams to look for a greater use of ball-handling and footwork skills to break the defence (it would also cut out some of the joint damage caused by extended wrestling in the tackle).
Of course, the "roll" is what delights the crowd at the moment, and full-time clubs have an enormous vested interest in the status quo, in that they already have the big players on their books, and the systems within the clubs for making the best use of them. It takes many years to develop ball-handling and footwork skills: it is much quicker to bulk up a willing player and turn him into a battering ram. I can see no desire in the game for a slower PTB. I can see more and more high impact injuries, and an increase in the number of players who, one day, will regret some of the things they did to their one and only body.
| | |
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 1999 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Aug 2008 | 17 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jun 2011 | Jun 2011 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Huddersfield are already playing the 5m rule. Go on , fine me 4K. 
| | |
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 752 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Mar 2009 | 16 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jul 2012 | Jul 2012 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| saucer of milke for churchil
| | |
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Board Member | 5952 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Aug 2003 | 22 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Mar 2018 | May 2014 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote oxford-pie-eater="oxford-pie-eater"Take on board your arguement and I'm not one of these folk who think players are in any way hard done to. If you don't like it, go and work in a factory or office somewhere, like the rest of us. I'll trade places with Jon Wilkin any day of the week.
But its not the day of the week or the kick off time I'm talking about, it's the scheduling to suit TV, and even the TV companies make no bones over the fact this happens. Anyone who thinks clubs can decide exactly when and - crucially - how many matches they play is deluded - why do you think they're all bloody moaning about it?
In cases where a club can decide whether they play on a Friday, Saturday or Sunday and they choose to give their players a longer rest, it clearly gives em a shorter break before the following game. That works vice versa too and therefore has little bearing on this arguement.
I'm talking about too many games in a season (and not a long enough closed season) for sportsmen now testing their bodies well beyond the rigours of what Kel Skerrett and Kevin Ward put themselves through. Sure, the game's always been 'tough' - perhaps even more so in the old days than now - but the impact of collisions and the speed around the ruck are light years from where they were even 10 years ago. It's a different game with different physical attributes required. Mal Meninga was the Man Mountain, a fine physical specimen at his pomp, but he wasn't the athlete Israel Folou is (IMO), and yet he was probably the best of his generation.
Like everyone else, I'd watch a game every night of the week if I could, but if it's at the expense of players' medium to long term health and the quality of what I'm watching, that doesn't make any sense at all. My only suggestion was that we err more toward doing what's best for the game and its players, and not what's best for the pockets of the big telly bosses. Unfortunately, TV money rules the world so you either live with it, or find a compromise.
What I'm saying is that it's up to the main power-brokers in our sport to take a lead, do some research, put this on the agenda and find a compromise - but I wouldn't hold your breath as they seem to understand it about as much as you.

- This is a just summary of conclusions from just one study. It's a few years old and it's also a study of risks for 'subelite' rugby league players:
[urlhttp://ajs.sagepub.com/content/33/3/428.abstract[/url It's interesting all the same, and perhaps suggests we need a thorough study at the highest level.'" Some very valid points, however the fact is that the RFL and the clubs run the game, and if they wanted to, they could limit the number of games each player could play in a season, or even shorten the season overall.
The TV companies do not dicate how many games we play, it is the RFL/SL who do this and then sell this to the companies. A few years ago we used to play 30 games, and now we play 27. Sky's deal went up, and I'm sure they now just double up the odd game here and there.
If teams were that bothered, they could arrange games for Friday evening each week, then they would always get at least 6 days recovery time, but some clubs play on a Friday by their own choice, after playing away on the previous Sunday.
| | |
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Coach | 2794 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Feb 2005 | 20 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Apr 2016 | Jun 2015 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote Don Brennans Leg="Don Brennans Leg"
Yes we did have a 5M rule, but players still got injured. For example I've just finished reading Kevin Ashcrofts biography and he's had knee replacements, Phil Lowe has had hip replacements. Bill Ashursts knees wre jiggered when joined Wakefield in 1979, however recouperation and treatment techniques were'nt as good when those guys played as they are now.
I'm on the fence a bit with this one. A 5M rule did encourage more skilful players, but a 10M rule I believe gives us more open play. Pro's and con's for both IMO.'"
I'd fully support a return to the 5m rule purely on this basis - the 'flap about on the floor for a ridiculously quick PTB or penalty' technique is really grating.
| | |
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Board Member | 5952 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Aug 2003 | 22 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Mar 2018 | May 2014 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote Cragganmore Kid="Cragganmore Kid"I'd fully support a return to the 5m rule purely on this basis - the 'flap about on the floor for a ridiculously quick PTB or penalty' technique is really grating.'" But with 5m, wouldn't the importance of quick ptb's be increased? An average speed ptb can cause problems at the mo.
| | |
 | |
All views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the RLFANS.COM or its subsites.
Whilst every effort is made to ensure that news stories, articles and images are correct, we cannot be held responsible for errors. However, if you feel any material on this website is copyrighted or incorrect in any way please contact us using the link at the top of the page so we can remove it or negotiate copyright permission.
RLFANS.COM, the owners of this website, is not responsible for the content of its sub-sites or posts, please email the author of this sub-site or post if you feel you find an article offensive or of a choice nature that you disagree with.
Copyright 1999 - 2025 RLFANS.COM
You must be 18+ to gamble, for more information and for help with gambling issues see https://www.begambleaware.org/.
Please Support RLFANS.COM
|
|
|
POSTS | ONLINE | REGISTRATIONS | RECORD |
---|
19.67M | 1,551 | 80,283 | 14,103 |
|