Official 2024 NRL General Discussion

[HaroldBishop]

I guess the question in all of this is whether games back in the mid 90's (after the 10 metre rule but before the video ref) actually had less stoppages... or am I just pining for the game I the way I remembered it rather than the game that was actually played?

I often wonder this, too.

I'll tell you one thing though, from what I remember from the 80s the stoppages weren't as long. Players were actually keen to get to scrums.

 

[Sparkles]

I guess the question in all of this is whether games back in the mid 90's (after the 10 metre rule but before the video ref) actually had less stoppages... or am I just pining for the game I the way I remembered it rather than the game that was actually played?

The way I remember those games was there was more dawdling about to get to scrums and restarts and sideline kicks while the clock was on... more time in play but less play in the time!

 

[HaroldBishop]

The way I remember those games was there was more dawdling about to get to scrums and restarts and sideline kicks while the clock was on... more time in play but less play in the time!

Really? I remember the opposite in the 80s. I'll have to go and watch a game on kayo.

 

[Sparkles]

Really? I remember the opposite in the 80s. I'll have to go and watch a game on kayo.

Burgo mentioned the 90's.. I was actually probably thinking of the 70's

 

[BurgoShark]

I specifically chose this range because the 10-metre rule came in for 1993 and the video ref cam in for 1997.

My hypothesis is that years where RL both resembled the current game and had the least amount of stoppage time will have been the 1993-1996 seasons. Obviously many changes since then, but 1995 resembles 2020 a lot more than it resembles 1970.

 

[Sevshark]

Conversions are my biggest issue when it comes to actual game clock time wasting, especially when it's a gimme from in front of the sticks but they still have to go through their whole setup process to kick it. Just boot the ****ing thing dude and let's get on with it.

Stop the game clock and give the kicker an aggressive shot clock to take it or they forfeit their attempt. If you ain't good enough to slot it over under time pressure tough titties, get better at it. Goal kickers are getting too good kicking from out wide as it is anyway. Should be more reward for scoring up the guts or award an instant 6 points.

Otherwise all goal conversions and penalty kicks can be taken by both teams over the 15 min half time break from the relevant parts of the oppositions half. Fox/9 will have the no add break but gives something for fans to watch instead of some tragic half time "entertainment"

If your main guy has a stack of conversions to take but still needs a 5 min break over half time you can share the kicking duties with other players as per normal.

**** the half time coach talk, player can get the msg from a player or trainer later. Or you have a nominated 18th type man specialist kicker that doesn't need to be in the sheds at half time.

Do the same at full time, could lead to some fun contests between kickers to win the game after the 80 mins. If the game isn't close fans can just leave if they don't wanna watch the non-result effecting goal kicking.

Traditionalist would hate it but the game time wasting and general boredom of walking to the mark and lining up kicks calls for changes.

How much acid have you taken today Gards?

 

[bort]

I'll take front flip try around the corner post over guys packing a scrum 15 second quicker every day of the week.

Obviously doesn't mean things are immune to criticism or that elements like fast set restarts in the past wouldn't be good to have now. But it is certainly not like we have only made the game slow and worse.

The truth is those scrums were faster not because that was better watching but because the players and coaches hadn't figured out they would benefit from taking their time.

How much acid have you taken today Gards?

He took all three tabs at halftime to avoid time wasting

 

[Sparkles]

I specifically chose this range because the 10-metre rule came in for 1993 and the video ref cam in for 1997.

My hypothesis is that years where RL both resembled the current game and had the least amount of stoppage time will have been the 1993-1996 seasons. Obviously many changes since then, but 1995 resembles 2020 a lot more than it resembles 1970.

I'd agree with that. The 90's were pretty open and a lot like todays game in encouraging a bit of razzle dazzle

 

[Gards]

He took all three tabs at halftime to avoid time wasting

Almost finished all my kicks, should be able to get into the sheds and scoff down some oranges

 

[bort]

Almost finished all my kicks, should be able to get into the sheds and scoff down some oranges

Just make sure to listen closely to the couch talk

 

[BurgoShark]

I'll take front flip try around the corner post over guys packing a scrum 15 second quicker every day of the week.

Obviously doesn't mean things are immune to criticism or that elements like fast set restarts in the past wouldn't be good to have now. But it is certainly not like we have only made the game slow and worse.

The truth is those scrums were faster not because that was better watching but because the players and coaches hadn't figured out they would benefit from taking their time.

This is not true at all.

Players and coaches knew full well the value of the extra rest. They just also knew that if they ****ed around at scrums they would get penalised every time.

The NRL added timers, changing rules to have more BiP etc. also suggests that they think less wasted time = better.

Almost finished all my kicks, should be able to get into the sheds and scoff down some oranges

Good luck in the girls u17's GF Gards.

 

[Gards]

Just make sure to listen closely to the couch talk

Ya'll think I'm on acid but I tell you the couch is not talking to me

The Sofa on the other hand....

Good luck in the girls u17's GF Gards.

Open age

 

[bort]

Ya'll think I'm on acid but I tell you the couch is not talking to me

The Sofa on the other hand....

Seeyoursofa Tellaguy

 

[bort]

This is not true at all.

Players and coaches knew full well the value of the extra rest. They just also knew that if they ****ed around at scrums they would get penalised every time.

The NRL added timers, changing rules to have more BiP etc. also suggests that they think less wasted time = better.

Referring to HB saying "Players were actually keen to get to scrums." not sure what time period that was supposed to be but if they knew the value of time management and rest they were never keen to get to scrums, they just got there before they got in trouble, like they do now*

If they got to scrums before they got penalised I'd have thought plenty took as long as they thought they could get away with, not because they were keen.

*obvious exception being anytime it benefits you to pack quickly

 

[HaroldBishop]

I think Brisbane will win but the Bunnies might be worth a nibble at $3.10.

 

[Sir Chadley]

I think Brisbane will win but the Bunnies might be worth a nibble at $3.10.

 

[BurgoShark]

Referring to HB saying "Players were actually keen to get to scrums." not sure what time period that was supposed to be but if they knew the value of time management and rest they were never keen to get to scrums, they just got there before they got in trouble, like they do now*

If they got to scrums before they got penalised I'd have thought plenty took as long as they thought they could get away with, not because they were keen.

*obvious exception being anytime it benefits you to pack quickly

Yeah true. I guess what HB meant was that we didn't need a countdown timer because players knew from practice how long was acceptable, rather than having to stand around staring at a giant scoreboard. In any case whether they were keen or not, they were certainly compelled to get to scrums quicker back then they are now.

It's not really the extra 15 seconds at scrums that I'm worried about though. NRL countdown timer has been a measurable improvement. Even if it will never be as quick as it was in 1995 it will also never be as slow as it was in 2010.

 

[bort]

Yeah true. I guess what HB meant was that we didn't need a countdown timer because players knew from practice how long was acceptable, rather than having to stand around staring at a giant scoreboard. In any case whether they were keen or not, they were certainly compelled to get to scrums quicker back then they are now.

It's not really the extra 15 seconds at scrums that I'm worried about though. NRL countdown timer has been a measurable improvement. Even if it will never be as quick as it was in 1995 it will also never be as slow as it was in 2012.

Compelled is a good word for it haha

The timer takes the ambiguity away from it - this, and no more, is how long you can milk out of this. Drop outs same deal - although wonder if there could be any tendency for some teams to start trying rushed short ones for a bit

 

[Gards]

@Gards you have certainly thought this through mate. I just want to know what state you were in at the time!

NSW mate

 

[BurgoShark]

Compelled is a good word for it haha

The timer takes the ambiguity away from it - this, and no more, is how long you can milk out of this. Drop outs same deal - although wonder if there could be any tendency for some teams to start trying rushed short ones for a bit

I think the corner post change was also in part to speed things up. Couldn’t get good camera angles so reviews taking too long etc.

Current post-try review process is also an improvement for checking tries that we think are good. That is dead time anyway, so it’s a smart use of it. Can be a bit clunky when a guy has a conversion lined up and they give it a no-try, but in most cases it speeds things up.