I,ve been arguing over this on VT a couple of weeks ago about the lack of intensity in matches, last night was a prime example.
We are back to a 2 club league but of lower standard, i wonder if its possible for Leeds to play rubbish all season finish in 8th place and then go on to win the Grand Final.....the question is would the RFL change things or would they wait to see how bad we are in the World Cup.

I still enjoy my super league and watch all the games on sky, super league fulltime, boots n all and super league supermen but I also think the standard has dropped a hell of a lot over the years.

I wouldn't like to say why as its hard to put your finger on why but could it be:

The salary cap evening out super league but making the standard drop?

Could the the drop in the number on quota be effecting it?

Is there to many teams and not enough talent?

Thoughts?

Pretty much agree with all that.

Let's also not forget that SL moved away from the exciting spectacle it was becoming, with strictly-enforced 10m defensive lines and defending players having to get off the tackled player quickly. Yes, there were some cricket-score results (we still do...), but players were coming to terms with the changes. What it did do is make defences work hard and have to be top drawer, whilst skillful, entertaining players had space to work in. After SL abandoned this and allowed slowing of PTB's and shorter defence lines, defences had it too easy and it became more the 'big bloke' slugathon we have today.

Is Eddie Hemmings not claiming that 2012 is the best SL ever as he does year after year ?

A slower play the ball has certainly contributed to a lower standard, its given time for defences to get set, setting the majority of the game with forward drives and a kick at the end of the set.
We see more and more trys scored now from speculitive kicks at the expense of half back passing plays. Also the ascendency over the years of flat attacks means we lose passing space again with the half backs.
We get more games as slugathons with momentum provided by penalties courtesy of the inconsistent ref standard.
A top 8 play off has effect on standard, compare it to an examinatiom mark. Top 8 would give you a qualification mark of 40% a top 3 would be closer to 80%. Too much tinkering with the game from the RFL has brought us into the fashion of "correctness" where we don,t have failure in our game just different levels of success.

This is the first time since I've been watching that I've been utterly bored of Super League. I'm kind of wanting it to end already in the hope that next year could be better!

Surely, though, this forces the development of more creative halves over the longer term? Quick PTBs might lead to high scoring games, but it values the speed and awareness of a hooker over any other position. There's no need to use guile, clever plays etc to break a team down, just the ability to toss the ball quickly through your legs when you're half tackled.

As soon as a ref allows slower ptbs ( classically, at international level) or when teams slow it down by employing tactics intended just for that (see Wigan and Hudds of a season or two ago) a team is immediately rendered impotent.

IMO, it's a key reason why Aussie halves are infinitely better, there's no obsession there with having the tackled cleared within a nanosecond. Get the lines set, then let's see what you've got.m

I'd say it's actually a way to increase standards, though granted there will be a transitional period before the rewards come.

I,m not sure if we are going to develop half backs due to the manner we play in superleague with forward drives and a kick. Perhaps with more skilful forwards with good offloads to get half backs into potential gaps.
Can,t think of any English half backs that can unlock a tight defence, most of these in superleague are from the southern hemisphere. Thats proably why we have Widdop and Chase in our international side.
We will never catch up to NRL because our standard will be forever a transitional one. Its a pity we haven,t got 2 off Sam Tomkins operating at 6 and 7.

Something needs to be done and quickly to address this situation. I think 12 teams would be a good start, but still too many when you consider the lack of both number and quality of imports in the future, not to mention the amount of our own higer end players that are likely to be targetted by the big-money NRL. Personally I would move back to ten as soon as is legally possible.

The worst scenario is when our best players realise superleague is of such a low standard that they jump at the chance of going to OZ. We then have a situation where nearly all our international players are in the NRL. Our superleague then becomes a bi product for SKY and loses complete credability in the sporting world, whilst the RFL stick there head in the sand and every financial year announce we have made a profit.

Most of you may know that I'm not one for being critical of SL playing standards but I have to agree about quality when we talk about defences. Attacking wise the competition isn't a disaster but defensively we've gone backwards. Having never been a fan of increasing the number of teams in the competition to fourteen I'm loathe to suggest another issue that contributes more to the reduction in quality than this. There hasn't been enough talent in the UK to sustain so many clubs. Until this is tackled it makes it difficult to raise other issues because the size of the talent pool available is such a major contributor to the overall quality of the competition and as long as that is the case we're not giving ourselves the best opportunity to present the sport at the level that it deserves.

It will take coaches to realise that 5 drives and a kick doesn't win you trophies. The fact you can't think of any English halfbacks who can open up a defence is evidence, IMO, that we've neglected developing that skill because it hasn't been as important as quick ptb and scooting. When the quick ptb is removed from the game, other methods will need to be used and maybe we will see upcoming English halves concentrating on this element of their game rather than seeing yet more broken field support players with no organisational skills.

IMO, a Tomkins at 6 and 7 wouldn't work; he is the best broken field runner in the country but couldn't led a team around the field, orchestrate the line to open gaps etc.

The 'scootathon' rugby mentality was the reason we were getting smashed by the Aussies/Kiwis. All we were doing is producing scooting hookers. The hope is that now we start producing hookers and 3/4s that can actual control a game without relying on getting 10 cheap metres by running from dummy half every play.

The reason we get smashed by them is because they have larger talent pools to select from. It's not rocket surgery.

What exactly would that be then?