The most positive thing about Pearson’s comments is that is shows that the club owners and administrators know that something is wrong. They see falling attendances at the same time as football is drawing normal crowds. There is specific talk in the podcast about our attendances when, if success is viewed in terms of trophies, we are riding the crest of a wave.
He also had something sensible to say about the lack of press and media coverage, which has been progressively getting worse and worse for years. However, I wish the owners and administrators would read this board and listen to fans and perhaps to casual TV viewers who have lost interest in the sport. Gray’s letter, which I accept may not have been fully representative of all views, was virtually ignored by the RFL and, as far as I am aware, by our own club. My own fear is that they will bring in changes that do not address the main issue, which relates to the way the game is played. And the way the game is played is dictated by coaches and by officials who, at the moment, are not offering an entertaining product.
I’m as guilty as anyone about wanting to win but there is more to the game than the final hooter and whistle and another win in the bag. Sitting through a dreary 80 plus minutes of slow PTBs, defences given a metre or so extra by failure to police the defensive line, tries scored by barge overs or from kicks and video ref decisions that take far too long won’t make the win enough to attract the new viewer or potential fan. Neither will the convenient injuries to defensive players when the next play should result in a try.
I’m not sure about private equity investment. What I constantly read about asset stripping by private equity partnerships doesn’t sit well with me at all but Pearson mentions a huge private equity investment into Rugby Union (£600 million I think) and into other sports, such as women’s football. Maybe we are being left behind and maybe risks will have to be taken. He also suggests that some private equity concerns have specialised knowledge that could help develop the sport but do they have the know how to get the on field product exciting again?
Yes, this is the essential point. This is not a 'the NRL is amazing and flawless' thing, but the halves down there are able to be much more creative. Here it has become all about size and physicality (as you've said before) as this is what the authorities would allow us to get 'closer'. Games are incredibly monotonous at times now in Super League. A lot of us were banging on on Twitter about Sky getting the Leeds-Hudds game on after the Wire postponement. The lads at the game were saying it was just as well they didn't bother.
And people citing the Lions tour as RU having problems - the Lions tour has been hammered by everyone pretty much in rugby union (including people associated with World Rugby) for the standard of play and the spectacle, and has even called the Lions concept into question. Anyone who watches union either regularly or semi-regularly knows that the reforms to the game have made it a totally different spectacle (certainly at club level) to a decade ago. The Premiership playoffs this year, particularly the Quins games, were unbelievable entertainment with free-flowing rugby and tries aplenty. 'Kick and clap' was once a very accurate depiction of union, and in that respect the Lions was a throwback (which everyone in union is ••••ed off about). It isn't representative in the slightest and is a strawman argument. They've moved on.
We've moved backwards. Which is a disgrace because we had a far superior game to union in terms of spectacle. I keep hammering this point but the point of a ruck in rugby league is fundamentally to ensure a speedy resumption of the game (in principle, for all the tweaks). We have gotten to a situation where - at times - union rucks are faster than league play-the-balls. Where cynical play to slow down the flow is penalised with an often meaningless six again (at least in the northern hemisphere) because a) teams use it to get their defence set and don't mind extra tackles early in the count from distance b) our halves and pivots do not know how to create and exploit space c) because you can give away a set restart deliberately at key points of the game knowing it can't result in a shot at goal, which actively incentivises slowing the play at points when it should be its fastest (approaching full time in a close game for instance).
Not to be a misery-arse, genuinely, but as one poster pointed out earlier in the thread, it's great that we have been winning again (believe me I've loved it), but Woolf's approach is not dissimilar to the malaise that has afflicted this comp. Very one-dimensional attack, rely on getting in charge early for the most part. It's no coincidence that despite winning the cup, this year we had a game in Super League where we failed to score a try at home (and duly lost to Wire, having kicked an early penalty close to the line) and lost at home to Cas for the first time in decades. We aren't great to watch much of the time, and that's why Hull KR are getting the plaudits they are, because they are genuinely trying to play rugby in a style that is closer to what we as Saints fans are familiar with (with inferior players). So it can be done.
Speaking purely for Saints, I'm hoping the new signings coming in will fit better into a Woolf system and allow greater attacking options, but we'll see.
Reducing the subs has got to be a priority for me. It does have a huge influence on what the game looks like.
I do think that the way the game is refereed is the main cause of it's lack of entertainment. If the game tackled/PTB was faster then you would by default get more fatigue and more gaps. The refs shouting held then move is something that is unnecessary, we did without it for donkey' s years, why are they coaching the players saying well done, well listened ? They are there to apply the rules, not coach. If a player came in and touched a man already on the ground, it was an automatic penalty even only a few years ago, it's now in every tackle. The stepping over the ball is another joke, it guarantees a perfect ball for the hooker to pass, another skill gone. All these things are in the rules or were in the rules. Coaches will naturally look to find an advantage or a loophole, officials should apply the rules consistently. Take the teams back a proper 10 every time, if they don't get back, penalise them but treat both teams the same every time.
Pearson sounds like they are open to considering a major change to our games construction, it's not required, just get the officiating sorted out, maybe reduce interchanges, bench size etc but that's all. As I said earlier, we had an exciting game, just go back to it.
I'm not sure I go with some of the other posters feelings that the referees are the biggest problem. It's a problem for sure, but not the biggest, in my opinion. The lack of talent in the British game along with negative tactics are our major downfall.
Whilst I've gone to town on the coaches about those negative tactics, in Australia, quality players can find answers to them. If there's quality in the halves, gaps can still be created. If there's pace, players can go through those gaps, and if there's offloading, then there is the platform for the other two to take place. We don't seem to have any of those three here, and creating a gap for somebody to run through at Saints has become as rare as rocking horse droppings.
If we forget about the spoiling and the constant drives and a hoof for a minute, there seems to be a missing link between coaches and players and I suspect that coaching NRL style defence into players with limited talent is fine and will work. However, we have hit a point where we have got the defence right, but haven't got the quality players to counteract it.
In the NRL, they seem to realise that offloading the ball in tackles opens up play. It's hardly ground-breaking news, but it's something that their coaches once stopped them doing and we followed suit. Their game plummeted to depths of tedium not that long ago, but they have livened it up by encouraging and coaching their players to offload again. With the huge amount of quality they have in the backs, this has allowed for open play and the scoring of the kind of breathtaking long-range tries that we can only think of here as "old school", for a 101 great tries video of recent times from here would comprise almost entirely of acrobatic dives near to the corner flag.
What concerns me is that, with what is clearly the least skilled set of players this country has ever seen since television was invented, that we have lost our way here. Our players are that far behind that maybe coaches here, or who come here, can't see our teams winning any other way than by adopting the grind. They look at the players and ascertain that they simply aren't good enough to offload, create and break. Certainly, the cringeworthy amount of handling errors our players make whilst supposedly playing risk free rugby wouldn't fill anybody with confidence that they could do anything other than make a complete porridge of it if they actually tried to keep the ball moving.
I just feel now that the coaches in this country have spent so long teaching players to be multi-faceted, whilst emphasising the need for bulk, fitness and energy over skill, that we now have a generation of young players coming through that are way short of the quality mark required.
I'm not sure what they do in Australia in terms of coaching that is different, but there is no doubt that the gulf in quality is as big, if not bigger, than it has ever been. Defensively, we are better than perhaps we have ever been, but attack and rugby-ability-wise, there is hardly a player in this country bar Jack Welsby that I see coming over the horizon. For all the talk of Lewis Dodd, I suspect the reality is that we have only been excited because for the first time in a while we have a No.7 who has a basic grasp of scrum half skills, but that's all we've seen. We haven't seen anything that looks like a Goulding or a Long in the making, we've just seen a couple of instances of a lad who knows what a half back is supposed to do and got all ahead of ourselves.
The game has so much wrong with it at the moment that somebody could write a book about it, and whilst I do accept that speeding up the play-the-ball and referees getting a grip on the inordinate amount of gamesmanship would help, I don't think that even that could disguise the simply dreadful quality of skill-sets that the modern British players possess.
Last edited by DD; 20th August 2021 at 16:49.
THIS YEAR LENDING SUPPORT TO:- St. Helens RLFC, Manchester City, Celtic, Alemannia Aachen, Steps 1 to 6 Non-League Football
Do you think though, that one begets the other ? You get more chance of an offload if there aren't 3 or 4 players in every tackle, if the PTB is faster you get more chance of a gap that a centre can exploit to put a winger away. A consistent 10 gives space to get a move going, as does penalising the centres straying offside to stop the ball going wide. Surely if this space is there then coaches will use it to gain advantage ?
Aussie refs get criticised but they are far more consistent in the above areas than ours. Our skill areas were poor when Holbrook took over yet he had us passing & supporting in a short space of time so the skills are there, they just need rewarding and encouraging as Tony Smith is doing at Hull KR.
Whoever thought that we would be holding HKR up as a leading light of attacking rugby ?
It just needs the will to enforce the rules and the incentive to use the space. Coaches in Australia were quick to jump on the faster, more open game, why wouldn't they be the same here ?
I think is very fair comment, but the current skill level of a lot of top players is woeful. I have no idea why but it must surely have something to do with coaching. Top players should be able to pass equally well to the left and right for instance but a lot can't! It must be a coachable skill. The reduction in skill level is plain to see. I agree that we haven't yet seen Dodd set a game alight, but Grace didn't either for quite a while. Welsby looks like an exception and seems very skilful
Yes, as usual, I was unclear. I don't think Grace routinely lit up every game he played in during his first few months. It was obvious he was good though and he has got better, I'm hopeful Dodd will be the same.
Dodd has done well in my view but he hasn't scored a forty yard try, set up a rout or floated deadly bombs into the oppositions in goal area. I really hopeful all that is to come. He has played well and looks like he will be a great asset, in time.
Was Grace an unmitigated continuous success from his first game or did he need time to settle in? I think he needed time to settle in as all players do, even Long, but maybe I'm wrong.
Couple of points - I agree with a previous post that flops are common now and go unpunished. Slows the PTB. Also that refs allow the edges of the defensive line to go offside, as though it doesn't matter cos it's the edge. But of course that channels play down the middle therefore less chance of getting the ball wide = less excitement. And while I'm having a moan, get rid of the 'water carriers' coaching defences on-field. The Cas man the other week was indistinguishable from the defenders - could have influenced attack decisions.
Regarding better attacking play, I agree more offloads would help - needs better support play. A major factor in producing uncertainty in defences is having sufficient options in attack, which is what we have been critical of. Whatever happened to dummy-runners? Rarely seen these days, but they hold up the defensive slide and create space on the edge. The 40-20 kick is one of the few rule changes that everyone approves, but is way underused.
Private equity would of course = cash, and who wouldn't want that, but the 'then give them a free hand' view sends shivers down my spine. The example of The Hundred in cricket is not a road I'd like to go down, but I suspect that would be the private equity big idea. But what aspect of RL fits that model? The equivalent of hitting sixes every other ball would have to be scoring tries all the time, which could only be achieved by creating more space on the field - fewer players? The PE danger is that the game would change fundamentally and would turn off the current supporters whilst failing to attract the new younger audience that PE would no doubt aim for.