Official Blayke Brailey

[bort]

Gal has managed to play as a midget.

I don't think he's who people are thinking of when they say they want more small players in the game...

 

[HaroldBishop]

180cm and 104kg. Biggest ****ing midget I've ever seen.,

 

[BurgoShark]

Plenty of 'smaller' players doing well in the NRL currently - I don't see it as that much of an issue really, it's a professional contact sport, only the most athletic are going to make it. Across many sports this means getting bigger, stronger and faster.
If you reduce interchange maybe some of the awesome big fellas we have running around now that weren't always the fittest may have given up and gone to another sport years ago? Maybe Fifita wouldn't have got an opportunity as early and gone over to union?

I do agree however that there is no benefit to executing a good legs tackle anymore and that is disappointing and legitimately unfair on smaller players or those with (what used to be considered) good technique.
If you rip someone down by the legs one on one all they have to do is flop their upper body around a bit and it's a penalty for not letting go when a) you tackled them like half a second ago and b) throwing your upper body around with both arms wrapped around the ball is not actually a way that you can get up so it doesn't even deserve to be considered as an attempt to play the ball.

You either let go instantly and they quickly play the ball with your defense massively on the ropes or you hang on and get penalised, if not marched off. But if you grab someone around the upper body and push them around for a bit you chew up heaps of time and then chuck them on the ground and waste plenty more time. This slows the game down a lot but is much more effective in today's game than a good legs tackle, and a smaller guy can get even more easily dominated.

I'd rather see them have a crack at fixing this up before reducing interchange again.

This is exactly what I meant.

 

[Tatus]

I know this is the exception, but who can forget this textbook tackle. Little man on big man

 

[HaroldBishop]

I know this is the exception, but who can forget this textbook tackle. Little man on big man

View attachment 25230

Haha old mate Creagh. A bit liking having a Daihatsu Charade engine in a Ferrari chasis.

 

[Milkshark]

Plenty of 'smaller' players doing well in the NRL currently - I don't see it as that much of an issue really, it's a professional contact sport, only the most athletic are going to make it. Across many sports this means getting bigger, stronger and faster.
If you reduce interchange maybe some of the awesome big fellas we have running around now that weren't always the fittest may have given up and gone to another sport years ago? Maybe Fifita wouldn't have got an opportunity as early and gone over to union?

I do agree however that there is no benefit to executing a good legs tackle anymore and that is disappointing and legitimately unfair on smaller players or those with (what used to be considered) good technique.
If you rip someone down by the legs one on one all they have to do is flop their upper body around a bit and it's a penalty for not letting go when a) you tackled them like half a second ago and b) throwing your upper body around with both arms wrapped around the ball is not actually a way that you can get up so it doesn't even deserve to be considered as an attempt to play the ball.

You either let go instantly and they quickly play the ball with your defense massively on the ropes or you hang on and get penalised, if not marched off. But if you grab someone around the upper body and push them around for a bit you chew up heaps of time and then chuck them on the ground and waste plenty more time. This slows the game down a lot but is much more effective in today's game than a good legs tackle, and a smaller guy can get even more easily dominated.

I'd rather see them have a crack at fixing this up before reducing interchange again.

You don't see it as an issue?

The best half back in the comp is 35 years old, and he's the best by a country mile

It's a bloody massive issue.

Fifita would be an even better player if we reduced the interchange. SJ and Moylan would destroy teams, Chad would be a great player.

The current game has too many big bodied unskilled players that we don't need. We should honestly run an 8 team comp because that is about how many good players are currently playing, and that's being extremely generous.

It's not even just about losing the smaller players, its about bringing back attrition and opening the game up so its exciting to watch again.

 

[HaroldBishop]

You don't see it as an issue?

The best half back in the comp is 35 years old, and he's the best by a country mile

It's a bloody massive issue.

Fifita would be an even better player if we reduced the interchange. SJ and Moylan would destroy teams, Chad would be a great player.

The current game has too many big bodied unskilled players that we don't need. We should honestly run an 8 team comp because that is about how many good players are currently playing, and that's being extremely generous.

It's not even just about losing the smaller players, its about bringing back attrition and opening the game up so its exciting to watch again.

Yeah I kinda agree.

With the attrition thing, they really need to do something about the amount of stoppages. Watch a game from the 90's or 80's and see how long it takes to pack a scrum or take a dropout. So much faster.

 

[Mark^Bastard]

A big part of our formula for success is having forwards that are somewhat different to other teams. More mobile, more skilled, higher endurance. Nothing represents that more than Fifita. This is because the game has changed a lot in the last decade.

It's mind boggling that some dumb arses still persist with the plodding strategy. It's dead.

I'm not sure the reduction in interchange is needed. The game is pretty balanced right now and there's a lag between rule changes and fully realised outcomes.

 

[Gards]

some clubs can only afford or attract plodder type forwards

some coaches arn't using their full interchanges as it is or just giving some benchy 5-10 mins at the end. Injuries during the game do chew through the interchanges though.

I don't think it's terrible how it is but could probably be improved with a small reduction

 

[Mark^Bastard]

Nah I reckon there's a clear strategy at some clubs. Granted I think the ball has finally dropped, but it was obvious just a couple of years ago that the Bulldogs and Raiders thought it was a good idea despite all evidence to the contrary. Go back a little more and the Roosters were doing it too. In truth it hasn't been effective for a long time now.

 

[bort]

Not having a crack because I do think this is an issue that deserves a conversation

The best half back in the comp is 35 years old, and he's the best by a country mile

Not sure what the age relevance is? Is there a bunch of elite halfbacks running around that have only not made the NRL because they are too small? There probably are some but I doubt enough to warrant changing the whole game for them

Fifita would be an even better player if we reduced the interchange. SJ and Moylan would destroy teams, Chad would be a great player

Sure current Fifita would be more valuable but an emphasis away from big guys could have meant he changes sport to union (where they'd love him) well before he signed with us. SJ and Moylan would probably get a few more opportunities if other teams kept playing big tired guys but other teams would shift away from that and negate or match that with their own game breakers. Not sure how Chad suddenly becomes a great player (like Wayne Bennett) because other teams don't have as many slow props - if anything he is someone that may lose their job to a smaller faster half!

The current game has too many big bodied unskilled players that we don't need. We should honestly run an 8 team comp because that is about how many good players are currently playing, and that's being extremely generous.

Run an 8 team comp and face the same battles as Union and risk losing many skilled young players to other codes and countries for an opportunity. The trickle down impact of halving the opportunities could decimate rugby league.
If you reduce the value of the big guys teams will use them less and that negates the perceived benefit to smaller players potentially anyway?

It's not even just about losing the smaller players, its about bringing back attrition and opening the game up so its exciting to watch again.

If you eliminate the value of the slower tired guys they will get replaced by smaller fitter guys and Moylan and SJ won't have 'more' opportunity against tired opponents anyway.
Maybe lose the bottom 50% of props and replace them with 50% more second rowers that are a bit smaller and fitter but don't currently make the NRL? That sounds more boring to me

With the attrition thing, they really need to do something about the amount of stoppages. Watch a game from the 90's or 80's and see how long it takes to pack a scrum or take a dropout. So much faster.

I do agree with you and ILLmac a little more attrition would be good in the form of reduced stoppages, however I like keeping the interchange at 8 to protect players and if you want to use big guys with limited capacity then that's a risk you choose to take if you get an injury. It's a tactical decision I am happy for teams to have the option to make. I think rewarding legs tackles would also be good and probably a bit more control over how long you can drag on a tackle if you throw them down after ref has called held.

 

[stormshark]

You don't see it as an issue?

The best half back in the comp is 35 years old, and he's the best by a country mile

It's a bloody massive issue.

Fifita would be an even better player if we reduced the interchange. SJ and Moylan would destroy teams, Chad would be a great player.

The current game has too many big bodied unskilled players that we don't need. We should honestly run an 8 team comp because that is about how many good players are currently playing, and that's being extremely generous.

It's not even just about losing the smaller players, its about bringing back attrition and opening the game up so its exciting to watch again.

100% ILLmac, it plagues the Game, from Jnr Rep Level up. Many Small kids that are good courageous players, and who would be great senior players are beginning to toss it in from where I stand. I get the Athletic thing, and you don't have to be a monstrous sized 20 minute player to be effective. 4 runs from players, then a rest, is a joke.

 

[bort]

100% ILLmac, it plagues the Game, from Jnr Rep Level up. Many Small kids that are good courageous players, and who would be great senior players are beginning to toss it in from where I stand. I get the Athletic thing, and you don't have to be a monstrous sized 20 minute player to be effective. 4 runs from players, then a rest, is a joke.

If you're too small to stop someone who does 4 runs and has a rest you're to small to stop Fifita and half the other props in the game.

 

[Sparkles]

Tom Brady is 41 years old... just throwing it in there...

 

[HaroldBishop]

Tom Brady is 41 years old... just throwing it in there...

Makes as many tackles as me.

 

[bort]

Got some big units trying to kill him though

Cronk took a leaf out of TB12s game and just put himself in the right spot to not get hit in that GF

 

[Milkshark]

Thanks for the reply Bort, below is my response:

Not sure what the age relevance is? Is there a bunch of elite halfbacks running around that have only not made the NRL because they are too small? There probably are some but I doubt enough to warrant changing the whole game for them

I stated he was 35 because that is old for a rugby league player and there is no other 7 in the comp on his level or looking like ever getting to his level. We should have a number of 7's coming through but they are lost from the game due to not being big enough. It all comes back to the interchange. I do however agree with you that legs tackles should be rewarded, the game I feel last year has gotten quicker which is great, but we have a ways to go.

Sure current Fifita would be more valuable but an emphasis away from big guys could have meant he changes sport to union (where they'd love him) well before he signed with us. SJ and Moylan would probably get a few more opportunities if other teams kept playing big tired guys but other teams would shift away from that and negate or match that with their own game breakers. Not sure how Chad suddenly becomes a great player (like Wayne Bennett) because other teams don't have as many slow props - if anything he is someone that may lose their job to a smaller faster half!

I get what you are saying about Fifita however do disagree. The game will still have big guys, the game always did (Bella, Lazarous). Fifita would be the number 1 prop coming through the lower grades due to his ability to play large minutes. Please don't think it would turn into a games of marathon runners, it wouldn't. Reducing interchange gives us attrition, that is THE BIGGEST point about it. With attrition brings open play, with open play brings quick skilled players. The game in its current state has very little attrition due to players being subbed on and off so often. Due to this there is VERY little open play so there is no real need for the small quick players so we lose them. Only the absolute best halves make it through. You might say ''well thats good, we only want the best halves''. Not so, the best halves we have are pretty poor players when you think about what a 7 used to be. They used to present opportunities, have pace, have a step, have skill. Nowadays they are purely game managers, their job is to direct traffic and try to put a good kick in on the last. How often do you see a chip behind tired forwards now? Once a year?

Run an 8 team comp and face the same battles as Union and risk losing many skilled young players to other codes and countries for an opportunity. The trickle down impact of halving the opportunities could decimate rugby league.
If you reduce the value of the big guys teams will use them less and that negates the perceived benefit to smaller players potentially anyway?

Bad wording on my behalf, i'm not so much saying we should do that, my point was really that we only have about that many real rugby league players (less even). There are so many players making a living out of this sport that shouldn't be.
Again, please stop thinking we lose the big guys, we don't. We are just reintroducing skill into the game that take advantage of these big guys. The game right now is 90% big guys.


If you eliminate the value of the slower tired guys they will get replaced by smaller fitter guys and Moylan and SJ won't have 'more' opportunity against tired opponents anyway.
Maybe lose the bottom 50% of props and replace them with 50% more second rowers that are a bit smaller and fitter but don't currently make the NRL? That sounds more boring to me

I'm unsure why you think we eliminate the value of the big guys, it's quite the opposite really. Big guys will be running over the top of the small skilled guys we bring back, but when they get tired the small skilled guys will run around the big tired guys. It goes both ways. Hence why league used to be a game of shapes and sizes. The big guys still have a spot in the game, in the forward pack. But out wide and in the halves we want speed and skill, we do not want 100kg wingers and centres. Of course there will be some that have speed, size and skill but they are very few and far between.

People like Renouf, O'davis, blake and mat rogers would have no place in the current game. And if they did make it, they would have very little to no impact on it. They would get destroyed due to their lack of size.


I do agree with you and ILLmac a little more attrition would be good in the form of reduced stoppages, however I like keeping the interchange at 8 to protect players and if you want to use big guys with limited capacity then that's a risk you choose to take if you get an injury. It's a tactical decision I am happy for teams to have the option to make. I think rewarding legs tackles would also be good and probably a bit more control over how long you can drag on a tackle if you throw them down after ref has called held

Curious, what are we protecting players from? I'm going to assume injury. It is a well talked about issue in the game, so many injuries. It's because players are all so big now, they spend so much time in the gym to get size. Everyone is so big and running full speed all the time and causing injury upon themselves and other players.

 

[HaroldBishop]

I do agree with you and ILLmac a little more attrition would be good in the form of reduced stoppages, however I like keeping the interchange at 8 to protect players and if you want to use big guys with limited capacity then that's a risk you choose to take if you get an injury. It's a tactical decision I am happy for teams to have the option to make. I think rewarding legs tackles would also be good and probably a bit more control over how long you can drag on a tackle if you throw them down after ref has called held

Curious, what are we protecting players from? I'm going to assume injury. It is a well talked about issue in the game, so many injuries. It's because players are all so big now, they spend so much time in the gym to get size. Everyone is so big and running full speed all the time and causing injury upon themselves and other players.

There have been studies that say more attrition will likely reduce injuries due to less impact in tackles as players tire.

It's worth exploring although I do think there needs to be a bit of notice if they do reduce to 6. At least 12 months, if not more.

As I've said before though, it's not the only solution. Stoppages needs to be reduced dramatically. Not much can be done with video referrals but scrums and dropouts need to be much faster.

 

[Milkshark]

There have been studies that say more attrition will likely reduce injuries due to less impact in tackles as players tire.

It's worth exploring although I do think there needs to be a bit of notice if they do reduce to 6. At least 12 months, if not more.

As I've said before though, it's not the only solution. Stoppages needs to be reduced dramatically. Not much can be done with video referrals but scrums and dropouts need to be much faster.

Exactly.

6 is a start if we can reduce stoppages DRAMATICALLY. If teams want to continue wrestling and slowing it down, then we go to 4.

Scrums, drop outs need a 10 second timer, maybe 15.

And bring back being able to play on when there is no marker, doing this means defenders need to get up off the ground quickly which brings back quick the play the balls.

 

[stormshark]

If you're too small to stop someone who does 4 runs and has a rest you're to small to stop Fifita and half the other props in the game.

Of course, but my real point is, reduce the interchange and get rid of the big slobs who can only play 20 damaging minutes. Will be interesting to see how Boyd and Paulo go this year, these type players I mean. No disrespect to them, great players but ya gotta be able to play more than 20 destructive minutes, changing things up will mean they either gotta get fitter to play more minutes or will be shown up with less interchange and become dispensable, and will result in re introduction of trickier, more skillfull ball players (inc in the forwards). A Better spectacle will result. I'm hoping that Sharkies 20s team who won it 2018, are the forerunners, all bar one of the pack looked athletic ballplaying forwards, offloads Galore, particularly near the line.