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.

Yes you did....go back and re-read your own Post.
As for your "everyone come and look" post....how bizarre! Is a differing opinion now defined as an agenda as a matter of course?
I'd love you to explain to "everyone" exactly what you think my agenda is and try to do that without crying to a mod about "this creation" asnit smacks of you already having lost the debate.

I have no need to re-read it. I know exactly what I wrote. You either mis-read it or have decided to deliberately misconstrue it. Which leads in nicely to...

There are numerous suggestions on here from numerous posters about how to improve RL and its fortunes, yet you chose to pick one, irrelevant semantic part of one post to try and pick apart and take the p|ss out of. That's what you do. Pretend you're oh so knowledgeable whilst twisting facts and events to fit in with your bizarre habit of needlessly attacking people who are simply trying to discuss the sport they follow.
Sadly, for you, it didn't work this time as you were that eager to jump in you mis-read my post.

Oh and I've never complained to a mod about anyone so wind yer neck in yer massive great tart.

I'd pretty much agree with all that.
I didn't mean to say that scrums are the ONLY reason why they have more competitive games in Union, as you say there's a few (scrums lineouts, rucks & mauls, the time out of play), just that's one thing I reckon we could do that might work.

As you say the penalties help, though I think that's not something we could replicate as Union lends itself more to penalties in the opposition half. Personally I've never liked the penalty goal being 3 points in Union as I think it discourages teams going for a try. I'd rather they used the sin bin more often. The same goes for League.

I'd be interested in the 4 quarters thing. I'd like to see that trialled in some fashion and see what effect it has as that could be a goer.

Same goes for the 40-20. It could help a team turn a game around.

The general theme i've noticed over the last few years as Union has caught up professionally, is that they have many more areas of competition than League does. In League we've basically got attack vs defence and that's about it. Sometimes a kicking game makes a difference but that's often only between 2 closely matched teams.

In Union they've got attack v defence, the kicking game plus scrums, lineouts, rucks & mauls. So if your attack and even your defence isn't very good, but you're exceptional at scrums, lineouts and breakdowns, then you might well stay competitive even if you don't win, because you can at least control possession a bit.
In League a team who is just slightly off on both attack and defence can get hammered. And it's that I'd be looking to try and tweak somewhat.

Firstly......let's not forget what you said!


Now...the bits in Red are a clue.


Actually, I simply highlighted that you gave what is commonly known as a "Mark Anthony speech"....you started off with 'we can't learn from them and ended up with 'we can learn from them".....it's quite a well known circular sales technique!

By the way...still waiting to hear what my agenda is?


No, but you whine about "this creation" as if nobody knows who I am

For the record, I've posted many many ideas on how to grow the game in the UK and internationally, but the unfortunate truth i sthat whilst the clubs control the sport, the international game will remain a contrived thing outside the tri-nations, France and PNG!

Run a mile from anyone who writes in red or green ink, my Mum used to say...

I've often wondered if getting the try scoring team to kick off to the other team is worth a trial to see if we get closer games, as sometimes teams simply can't get the ball back when a side is on red hot form and making no errors. Most good sides would still end up getting the ball back from opposition errors anyway but it would level things up. In the CC final for example Leeds would have had to kick to Rovers several times, Dixon may have still knocked them all on and coughed up possession, but at least they'd have had a chance to get back in to the game. Instead the game was only entertaining for the Leeds fans and us HullFC fans laughing our heads off!

Th other thing I would say about Union is they talk up their game a lot better than us, every Union fan I've spoken to has been positive about the World Cup, whereas RL fans tend to moan about the venues, the kickoff time, the prices, the temperature of their half time pie...and also on TV the ex-players they have as pundits have been articulate (the public school background helps with that I suppose) and are finding positives about the minnow nations rather than dismissing the game of before it's even kicked off.

The other thing they have done better than us is get well known faces on TV and Radio, such as Matt Dawson on the Radio1 breakfast show, making a young audience of millions aware that the World Cup is on. Now for all I know RL may have asked to do the same and got told no...but the cynic in me wonders if we even try. We should be getting our players on the Tv and Radio even if it is only regional stations and Saturday morning chat shows, at least it'd make more people aware the game still exists.

BE careful he who laughs last laughs longest

Sam Burgess's good performance off the bench against Fiji and his selection to start against Wales has seen more mentions of Rugby League in the media this last couple of weeks than in the rest of the year. Let's hope his form continues.

Unfortunately, because there's such a lack of knowledge/presence of RL in even a basic form in a lot of the country that I don't think it'll make any difference. The only hope is that the RFL have a decent marketing effort for the Test Series planned for when RUWC ends.

All publicity is useful especially for a game that is otherwise anonymous in the national media. If that is positive publicity as in a player like Burgess becoming a super star in Union then his background will be debated and more people will become more knowledgeable regarding League.

Most if not all Union fans in this country are well aware of League and many are regular TV watchers and admirers. But apart from Sky and the Cup & International games on the BBC the sport is just not marketed at all. Why do we not have a major brand as a sponsor? Even Ladies cricket and football teams have major brand sponsors.

Rugby League may have been the first to become professional for players but we are still amateurs at running and managing the game and this is where we should be learning from the Union professionals.

It's been tried both ways in RL, hasn't it?

Don't know about Union.

and it starts again