We all know, including saints fans, that was the worst decision in the history of RL.

I think all saints tries were scored with the play starting within the 5 meter line

Obviously this is why they are called 'the entertainers'. Length of the field tries are like watching paint dry in 2010

Waaaaaa, those dirty referees are speeding the play the ball up because crowds find it entertaining - and therefore I'm scared that we won't continue dominating with wrestling tactics, waaaaa!

Come off it. It was a brilliant match, the atmosphere was immense and the game flowed. Anyone being introduced to the game would rather watch that than the World Club Challenge WWE-fest, for example. We are a game in development, the way it was going we were on the verge of driving people away. I'm all for a controlled ruck, but attacking teams getting no reward for winning the collision is completely wrong, and completely boring at that.

I agree that someone who hadn't seen RL before would like it more than a low scoring close game but I just don't think the tries were of high enough quality like others have said. They were made from qucik PTB, we don't want this to be the only way we can score, this is why we lose to aus, we don't get quick PTB's.

It's not the only reason ofc, but it's an important one.

Dummy half scoots are one of the most boring parts of our game atm, along with cross field kicks to the winger.

Nothing wrong with a few scoots when the forwards are tired, but one man rugby is boring to watch. There are too many players who get called good players and all they can do is take advantage of a QPTB. Higham, Roby and Pryce to name a few. Anyone can run a good 15m when the defence isn't even set.

Cross field kicks I don't have a problem with, they are an effective scoring method as other options are less effective in that situation, it can also be risky and turn defence to attack. Some of Richards tries from kicks are superb to watch, and its the same with QPTB but we don't want this to be the only way teams can score so maybe your right but personally I enjoy the tension when the ball goes up.

But a quick PTB also leads to more attacks if the defensive line isn't set. If we slow down the PTB, would we then go back to 5 drives and a kick?

Stu, as I posted originally four of Saints tries last night came from either the hooker diving over the line, or one pass from dummy half and a forward powering over the line.
If the referee had made the player playing the ball do so correctly i.e. with the foot do you think all of those tries would have been scored?

We're not on about stopping the quick play the ball, merely wanting the rules enforced so that the attacking team is not getting too much of an advantage.

Matty Ashurst's try was absolutely superb skill and didn't come from a quick PTB. Flannery's break in the 2nd half was also superb skill involving quick hands on the fringes.

I think there's a fine line with the PTB speed. I prefer faster PTB's because it results in a fast, open game. But, I can also understand the rationale for controlled PTB's. Last year it was far too slow, this year it's an improvement.



Understandable, but at the same time you shouldn't take away the advantage of winning a collision and then having a quick PTB. It works both ways. A controlled attacking and defensive set is earned.

Blob, but do you not agree that we need to enforce the foot on the ball at the play the ball to stop the attacking team gaining too much of an advantage?

Nobody, as far as I can see is arguing about a fast legitimate play the ball, but players are completely disregarding the rule.

Absolutely.

By all means reward a fast PTB if this is down to the skill of the attacking player.


But don't reward (in fact penalise) an attacker who cheats his way to a fast PTB.

Would that be because you don't have a hooker adept enough in that side of the game to make consistent yardage scooting from a quick play the ball, but do have a tall winger who's good in the air and scores lots of tries from cross field kicks?

Isn't it as long as an attempt is made then it's ok?

There are things that need looking at more than this, and it wouldn't be an issue if McCarthy Scarsbrook had listened to the ref against us at least once when he was being warned about it the other week.

Its just lazy, if you watch the NRL almost every play the ball the player touches the ball with his studs. It's getting the fluidity of the movement that gets your a fast ptb. Missing out the ball completely means if the ball is rolled backwards aimlessly (which we see often) then the Hooker spends longer picking it up.

Bring back the contact, and along with it - the 80 minute, skillful hooker i.e. Cameron Smith or Robbie Farrah.

If we ever want to compete against the aussies we need to develop our game to make sure team's have to develop a wide range of skills to break down a well organised defence.

IMO, we have been far too reliant on quick scoots and penalties gained from percieved holding down at the ptb. As soon as we come up against a good team with excellent defence and fitness (eg australia) then we struggle to gain advantage because we have become too over reliant on quick ptb's to gain an advantage, and - as has been clearly demonstrated over the past world cups, we are completely clueless at reading creative attacking play, and our defence is exposed as we have no experience of consistenly defending against such a varied and skilled attack.

There is a place for a hooker spotting an opportunity to exploit a gap around the ptb, but with our obsession with a lightening fast ptb we have become far too reliant on this.

From a wigan perspective I have enjoyed watching the skill and variety in wigans attack this season far more than many recent seasons and that is due to moving the ball at speed to both sides of the pitch and having players fit and committed enough to provide dummy runners and multiple options. Huddersfield have also played some brilliantly creative attacking football - neither of which has required scooting to get the defence on the back foot. I know which style of rugby i'd rather watch.