Six Again Calls

[ningnangnong]

Only one team hasn't been able to adapt.

Doesn't matter IMO, it's the principle of it.

 

[Sproj]

Doesn't matter IMO, it's the principle of it.

Yeah that I do agree with totally.

 

[Dexter]

The repeat rule really destroys the notion of tactical sets. What's the point of offloading anywhere but near line if the majority of sets will end with a restart? And even worse, why bother throwing the ball in your own half?
We have made the most boring type of football, the best tactic. Now, teams that struggle to make yards normally are marched downfield. I predict our large forwards will soon become obsolete, without a rule change soon. It all comes down to being on your back at the play-the-ball. You can do that with much smaller forwards.
To me, the most exciting site to see is backline move deep in your own half that ends up a try. That's now insane to even try. If we must persist with this repeat rule we must at least bring back the 5 metres, so as to give the game some balance or reduce tackle counts.
Otherwise, we will have two teams of halves facing each other with a couple of big wingers each.

This kind of falls over on a couple of points.

The best attacking sides are definitely not just going from half, they are playing a very expansive style.

The 5 mtr change would be a disaster IMO. Teams are already rushing up and on top of the attack now, imagine what would happen under a 5 mtr rule.

 

[Thelmus]

This kind of falls over on a couple of points.

The best attacking sides are definitely not just going from half, they are playing a very expansive style.

The 5 mtr change would be a disaster IMO. Teams are already rushing up and on top of the attack now, imagine what would happen under a 5 mtr rule.

They manage it after dominating possession, and that's the key. There is no incentive to so to break the game open. Once a team gains a sustained time in possession, they simply wear down their opponents to the point every set becomes an opportunity to score with a constantly retreating defence, that even with the ball in hand fails to make sufficient yards to reverse the momentum.
In the past a team could reverse momentum by slowing play down and kicking for touch, taking a conservative approach, whilst sweating on an opponents mistake. This is nigh on impossible with 70/30 possession, teams camped and defending their try for sometimes as much as 5 sets of defence. I mean how skillful do you need to be after putting a defence through that?
Its simply a case of who can manage it first with halves now all capable of achieving it to an extent, made worse with exhausted defenders.
We want two teams to be competitive as long as possible. This currently is a long way from the case. Score lines are more extreme than ever and many teams have a realistic shot of victory gone before half time. This can't be good for the game.

 

[Harry Sack]

I think going back to the one ref has had as much of an impact personally. These guys just got too used to having a partner on the field who could watch X, Y and Z while they kept an eye on A, B and C. Ironically, I think this rule would be a whole lot better in the 2 ref system. That said, I don't like it purely because I think it takes away a lot of accountability when it comes to officiating. I'd like to see it tweaked, one restart then the next is just a penalty.

 

[Thelmus]

We need to do something. Forget the broncos and look at the other matches. It's the same everywhere.
One team that gets sustained possession just never gives away momentum.

 

[Allo]

We need to do something. Forget the broncos and look at the other matches. It's the same everywhere.
One team that gets sustained possession just never gives away momentum.

Or they other team get it in the second half and that’s why you see these comebacks happening. The game’s being played on a seesaw, just depends how long you’re running downhill for

 

[Thelmus]

Or they other team get it in the second half and that’s why you see these comebacks happening. The game’s being played on a seesaw, just depends how long you’re running downhill for

But is that good for the game? This has the potential to kill it as a growing spectator sport.
When the result is decided by shear weight of possession without an expectation of redress, the result rapidly becomes predictable. It used to be the exception. It is now the norm for games to be effectively decided with as much as 30 minutes to go but more often than not twenty.

 

[pagey]

Only one team hasn't been able to adapt.

Or one team has been targeted

 

[Organix]

They manage it after dominating possession, and that's the key. There is no incentive to so to break the game open. Once a team gains a sustained time in possession, they simply wear down their opponents to the point every set becomes an opportunity to score with a constantly retreating defence, that even with the ball in hand fails to make sufficient yards to reverse the momentum.
In the past a team could reverse momentum by slowing play down and kicking for touch, taking a conservative approach, whilst sweating on an opponents mistake. This is nigh on impossible with 70/30 possession, teams camped and defending their try for sometimes as much as 5 sets of defence. I mean how skillful do you need to be after putting a defence through that?
Its simply a case of who can manage it first with halves now all capable of achieving it to an extent, made worse with exhausted defenders.
We want two teams to be competitive as long as possible. This currently is a long way from the case. Score lines are more extreme than ever and many teams have a realistic shot of victory gone before half time. This can't be good for the game.

Yep. This is how it boils down. The team with fortunate and timely calls will dominate field position and possession and will win. If the calls are not fair, the result will always be skewed. Previously, the even up penalties at least produced a momentum shift and the potential for a resurgence.

 

[Dexter]

How many games have effectively been over by half time this year.
That's what this 6 again rule can do. Once you get on a roll it is very hard to counteract. Except when they realise it's the Broncos then suddenly a 9 nil penalty count gets produced

 

[Thelmus]

But that's the thing, the 6 again hasn't caused the problem, only exassibated it. For too long we have believed the answer to an ever more successful defence is to wear down players to the point that it is the primary factor in who wins and who loses.
When a casual observer watches the game what do they notice? Flying wingers leaping for bombs, big tackles, sweeping backline moves, big men crashing through defenders. Well none of that will decide a game. The flying wingers put possession under threat, sweeping backing moves make it harder to kick in goal, big men can crash into the line and be waltzed around, effectively turning it into a negative tactic. That is to say nothing of the long gone days of wingers skirting the touch line.
These things thankfully still happen but they are rarer and rarer, and incidental next to the real decider that is play-the-ball speed and possession. How many casual spectators truly gain pleasure watching a carefully orchestrated 3 man tackle that puts the runner on his back and holds him. Because that is now the most important skill to have, along with tying up the runner upright.
Slow play-the-balls and goal line dropouts, enough of them will beat a team with 4 or 5 Greg influx clones and 3 or 4 Artie Beetson's every game.
If we are to save this game we must look at what makes people watch sport. It's 2 things: drama and it's unpredictable nature.
For drama to work you need characters you can relate to. I'm not saying we let players be anti-social, but at least let them be themselves. Let them complain about the result and the referee, even each other. Draw a line sure but don't try and micro-manage player personalities. Every drama needs a villain, so let the gallens and lodges have their say, let the Ricky Stuart's whinge, the Bellamy's throw tantrums.
And let the game be decide by the skills that matter: the ones we want to see. But make sure the rules allow comebacks and allow some uncertainty to the result. Because a predictable game is like a sword fight in a musical: no matter how skillful and pretty, it is ultimately unfulfilling.

 

[coreyh88]

Our defense is too passive. So we don't dominate the tackles. The refs give you ages to lay upon the opposing player if you dominated the tackle. If you didn't they give you only a second and that's why we concede fast play the balls and penalties. The refs are more strict on this now that they can just say 6 again.

I will admit our passive defense was great in 2015. They might have marched up the field in one set but it didn't matter if they couldn't break our line or wear down our players.
However with the faster game and poor bench management we get worn down so quickly. Plus we also don't have the defensive calibre we did back then. The same tactic doesn't work anymore.

 

[Organix]

Our defense is too passive. So we don't dominate the tackles. The refs give you ages to lay upon the opposing player if you dominated the tackle. If you didn't they give you only a second and that's why we concede fast play the balls and penalties. The refs are more strict on this now that they can just say 6 again.

I will admit our passive defense was great in 2015. They might have marched up the field in one set but it didn't matter if they couldn't break our line or wear down our players.
However with the faster game and poor bench management we get worn down so quickly. Plus we also don't have the defensive calibre we did back then. The same tactic doesn't work anymore.

That's pretty subjective, isn't it? Allowing refs to determine dominance.

 

[Dexter]

So the refs are to be instructed to call 6 again when the markers are not square or leave early or place themselves in an offside position.
That there is whats wrong with the game. The refs have to be told to police the rules that are already in place FFS

 

[Organix]

This is "The Crackdown" all over again. But this time they're not stopping the game and having to justify their decisions. It will still be inconsistent, though. As if other coaches wouldn't spray the ref if they were getting hammered by the calls. We're just the whipping boys this year.

 

[holdzy]

So the refs are to be instructed to call 6 again when the markers are not square or leave early or place themselves in an offside position.
That there is whats wrong with the game. The refs have to be told to police the rules that are already in place FFS

With one bloke paying such close attention to the ruck, wouldn't it be nice to have another making sure the other team isn't offside all fucking night?
[automerge]1593509465[/automerge]

That's pretty subjective, isn't it? Allowing refs to determine dominance.

It's ended up with holding down being called 'driving'.

And 'milking' when being held down.

 

[Waynesaurus]

FMD...............why the fark are they continually wanting to muddy the waters and over complicate things by adding rule after rule...............its killing the game.