Originally Posted by
Webbo Again
The RL authorities got it right in enforcing the rule where defenders had to get off the tackled player quickly. Then got it wrong when reversing that and allowing defenders to slow the PTB. They probably didn't realise how coaches like Brown and Maguire would take that and exploit it to such a degree by building entire gameplans to buy their defences even more time to set. Other teams had little choice but to copy.
Fast-forward a few years and we have the stunted, conservative game we see now. Yes, there's the odd game where two lower-table teams less obsessed with defence (like HKR) are decently matched, and Wire do sometimes play more expansively. But overall, attrition is the key. We played one of the most attacking teams last week and nilled them. What is the point of focusing on attack when the rules mean that defences always have the upper hand, the cheat-code, all the aces?
I know some purists love this, but we need to remember we're in the entertainment industry. For years after taking over the TV rights, Sky enjoyed strong viewing figures for RL, picking up a lot of casual viewers, but these figures have dwindled over the past decade or so. Coincidence? I think not.
Last Grand Final was tense and, as we were emotionally invested in the result, we were captivated - and that ending was pure Hollywood. But, looking at it objectively, it was a boring game. A number of posters on here commented that casual viewers they knew who they'd implored to watch it, we're bored and some turned off at half time.
Is it any wonder Sky aren't offering us a good TV deal? Is it any wonder we can't attract blue chip sponsors? Is it any wonder more and more actual fans feel they still go to games more out of a sense of duty than enjoyment?
It's no good criticising lack of marketing and poor media recognition without having a product on the pitch that is exciting and gets hearts racing with multiple breaks, great passing, loads of tries, disrupted defences, speedy players hurtling through gaps, etc.
The focus of the game's administrators needs to be on finding rule tweaks that lead to disrupted defences, which allows players to play expansive rugby.
I don't think for a moment they will. But it'd be f*cling typical if they did at a time when we've gone full-on build our game around the defence. You'd have to feel gutted for Roby who, as he showed in 2006 & 2007 was probably the best exploiter of a quick PTB and disorganised defence ever - with Cunningham not far behind. A part of me dies feel that, after we swept all before us in 2006 and the emergence of Roby, reigning us back was part of the thinking by the RFL in allowing the slowing of the PTB.