I agree, one of the worst things about rugby league is its predictability, especially in the early parts of the game. There is so much more competition for the ball in RU.

I thought that the removal of the strike for the PTB as marker was one of the worst rules to be taken out of RL, or being able to PTB to yourself without a marker.

Thanks for proving you're not interested in the slightest in actual debate and discussion.

It's partly why I've changed my mind on scrums. I used to agree with the majority opinion in RL that they're unnecessary.
Now I think they can play a role in opening the game up.

The big (on-field) advantage Union, football and other sports have is that a team can be significantly "worse" than the opposition but still be competitive. In League it generally/often leads to high scorelines against the poorer team. So you can have Japan/Argentina etc being competitive and giving the top nations a game whereas in League they'd get blown away. And a big reason for this is the nature of the game. League allows pressure and dominance to be built up and it's incredibly difficult to turn that around.

So I've thought for a while now we could use a way of helping not so good teams compete with top teams. Imagine if France and Wales could give England a game in RL. We'd have a ready made annual Tri-Nations which would hugely help RL in this country.

I reckon if we re-introduced competitive scrums it COULD, and I stress the word could, help lesser nations be competitive. Teams could use scrums and kicking to touch to help them turn around the dominance and momentum that is built up by the better teams.

I understand the reasons against it, I just think we desperately need more competitive international teams and the nature of our sport currently doesn't help in that regard.

The Olympic stadium looked great last night for France-Romania, obviously still some doubts about the view from the cheap seats, but it looked a great venue. Hope we can come close to filling it for the England game, 50k there last night for what was effectively FranceB versus lowly Romania

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.