I think in some ways they already do. Players set up in a different way than the normal defensive line and can open the game up to training ground set peices. Danny McGuire in an international game which escapes me a few years back is a good example. Im sure there are millions of others.



Leagues very physical based nature tends to allow fitter, stronger teams to get on top. lopsided internationals and challenge cup games show this a lot I have said this to friends/family etc.

Football allows you to put ten men behind the ball if you are a "worse team" and this is incredibly hard to break down.

The huge variation in tactics and rule interpretation in a RU game allow a "worse team" the opportunity like we saw for Japan, people who watch more RU than me could easily come up with more examples. I play RU a bit, but I wouldnt go as far as to say I understand it!!



For sure, an example would be the 40/20. IMO one of Leagues best rule innovations for a long time and nothing to do with fitness/physicality.

It would be great if England could play France and Wales regularly and they could compete but maybe that would require more than rule tweaks. Wales and France need more players in the top leagues, need to keep developing their own players and for sure need to play eachother and the big three more often.

Didn't see this actual incident, but, amazingly, a player doesn't have to be in the field of play to score a try in RU!

You can have both feet outside the touch-line or touch-and-goal line (I'm not absolutely certain if the same applies to the dead ball line; I assume it does), but as long as the ball is in the field of play when you touch it down, that's considered OK. So it sounds like the officials were right in this instance.

Yeah,I know it sounds Mickey Mouse, but it's true!

After seeing videos of competitive scrums in league I gotta say keep them away. Absolute mess and and looked a shambles.

I understand your point however not sure about contested scrums because of the dangers from collapsed scrums and inexperienced scrummagers. What I would do to open the game up is to insist that only the forwards can pack down and stay down until the ball has reached the first receiver. This will allow the backs some extra space to score tries. I really do not like to see the likes of Watkins packing down in the 2nd row while a prop is at stand off.

Also a reduced subs bench should see some tired big forwards in the last quarter which again will create extra space for the backs.

well! Which is it? You can't say that we shouldn't be looking over their shoulders and then in the same post say we can learn from them. As for the subject matter, I have plenty to say on the subject, but none of it is anything new.
France v Romania got over 50,000 to the Olympic stadium and we should be getting the same for the NZ test, but if we don't, it'll be the fault of the BBC and the RFL and not the fans who didn't bother paying to go to the game. We'll have a few of these types of threads in the next few weeks due to the other lot and their world cup which incidentally is averaging 54k a game and got 8 million TV viewers for the England game despite the BBC doing a pretty god hatchet job on union over the last week.
Namibia just scored a try and the Olympic Stadium (full again) went nuts.......the try was scored by a namibian, not an ANZAC interloper and the result is not in doubt, but the public appreciate the effort of these smaller nations. Japan shipped 91 points v Australia 8 years ago but turned over SA this time........that's international sport, not the contrived RLWC we offer. I think RLWC 2013 was fantastic, but don't think it offers anything in the way of development for the sport. 2 samoan born players in the 4 nations shows how far we have to go.......how any scottish born players will represent next year?
England RL sticking 70+ on Russia or Australia hammering them by over 100 in the RLWC 2000 didn't crucify Russian RL........Lacck of support and development assistance has done that!

International RL will always suffer because the clubs generate all the revenue and therefore the club come first......

Everyone, compare and contrast this lump of bizarre drivel with the reasoned responses and debate from normal human beings on this thread. Further proof, if it were needed, of this particular creation's agenda.


I didn't. But you've always attempted to twist the facts to suit your bizarre agenda haven't you.

But they wouldn't be the same as they were back then. And looking a shambles doesn't stop Union.

Yeah, but the scrums, and the delays they cause, are the worst thing about union! Even most thinking RU fans accept that.

I have no prob with RL scrums exactly as they are. But OTOH I don't think it would be a disaster if they were abolished,

How do you change it though. We haven't got someone like the IRB behind us supporting the smaller nations.

Scotland cannot produce their own players when they have no money to support Scottish rugby league.

This all should have been done 20+ years ago. Until we have an international board who has real money behind them nothing will change.

Although still not perfect, most if not all Union fans think they have got better the last 12 months due to new laws. And most if not all Union fans would rather have contested than uncontested scrums.

There is a few more obvious points that get ignored when looking at this. Firstly, all the set pieces mean that the ball is simply in play less. It is less about the dominance and momentum and more the fact they are simply making fewer tackles, fewer hit ups, running less, and there is less opportunity to score because the ball is in play less.

Also the kicking penalties keep a score close. Japan were outscored 4 tries to 3 by SA, but kicked 5 penalties. 19 of their 34 points came from kicks.

I've said before and ill say it again, if we want to keep games closer and improve the spectacle. 4 x 20minute quarters. Too often in our game we see a game ended in a 15-20mins spell. We would see far more shocks.

Id also be interested in the reasoning behind the 40-20 being a 40-20 and not say a 30-30. It would probably encourage a few more efforts at it from teams struggling to get out and if it did become more prevalent it might see the wingers/fullback having to drop back a bit earlier creating more space.