One thing thst occured to me is Lewis could defend at left centre between Averillo and Cotric.
In attack those 3 players could swap around a bit.
Move Allan to the right side and drop Hoppa.

The main thing we miss is the yards Hoppa makes.

Having 3 kickers in the starting line up gives us more options.
The opposition are targeting Flanagan, if they have 3 targets it is harder.

Start Topine at hooker with Wakeham on the bench we now have 4 kickers, Wakeham can do some kicks from dummy half.

Hopefully this should not create confusion, the dummy half should know from the field position which kicker is the better option.

Having guys playing in the centres who can kick the ball is also handy.

All valid suggestions with exception that Lewis wont run so wasted in the centres.

All we really need is Baz to instruct that the half be on one side of the ruck and the 5/8th be on the other.
The hooker then just needs to be savvy enough to know when NOT to pass to halfback for the 5th tackle and when to switch the pass to the 5/8th.

Football these days is about reacting to what the defence does and making the more efficient play that can yield the best result.

This is why Penrith and Souths are so good. They play what is in front of them. Even with traditional halfbacks like Cleary and Reynolds who have some predetermined ideas of what the play is, they can instantly re-adjust to an ad-hoc play.

To be successful in the modern game you need football smart players particularly in your #9 and at least 1 of your halves.
If you also have it in your fullback (in the case of Easts, Souths, Storm) you have even a greater advantage.

The only players with smarts in our team that i can see are Meaney and probably Dietz.

I reckon Heaps has a good idea you know.... just one.... he reckons he’s been saying it for years but I only heard it the other day.

Now this WON’T happen, but it’s what should have happened when they started with the whole keep teams 10m apart.

instead of making the defending team retreat 10m from the ruck, ENFORCE the rule as it was that the attacking team had to be 5m behind the ruck.

This would get rid of flat at the line forward pass from DH football. Reintroduce deep back lines because at the line football ain’t gonna work no more and also bring back field position instead of teams going backwards and forwards 80m each and the kick for in goal decides “field position”.

Touchies can be used to enforce it, both for the attackers and defenders, just raise a flag, and the teams would still be 10m apart, like they were always supposed to do.

You know it was Ando who invented flat at the line football.

Should probably throw in Averillo and Wakeham in that lot.
Although both are young and quite hesitant to make the ad-hoc play as it is not natural for Bulldogs to play that way.

It would be good if Baz gave these guys the freedom to play what is in front of them if the opportunity arises.
Im sure Baz did this last year with Penrith.

Deep backline plays are what makes rugby league (and union) a great spectacle.

The suggestion however is trying to get scores back down to 8-6 which is not going to sell the game.
It is not wonder guys like Heaps and Woz would like to see 80's football again. They know it is in our DNA and we would probably benefit the most out if it.

My personal preference is for 90's style rugby league before the wrestle came into it.

When you think about it, the only place you see deep running backline movements that doesn’t involve decoy runners every second man is in Rugby Union.... when they decide to give it to the backs. And they defend at the ruck, it forces the attack to stand deep, let the ball sing and run in to it.

we made a mistake, one they’ll never fix I know, but it was a mistake.

Those score lines were mostly in the 80’s and really mostly involved us.

I don’t think the speed of the modern game would bring those score lines back again even if they stood on top of each other.

Randwick had flat at the line football involving Lloyd Walker passing to Gary and Glen Ella.
That is the only time RU was ever worth watching, it was sublime footy some of the best I've ever seen.

Lloyd Walker seemed like a less fit lazier version of Cliff Lyons with more skill and smarts and brilliant execution of the pass. As you can gather the Ella brothers did the running 2 of them aiming a different holes and only Walker knew which one was getting the ball and when. The pass was flat but the runners came from deeper at speed, top speed when they got the ball, with last minute changes to the lines they were running.

The league flat footy is simply getting momentum over the advantage line means the defenders barely have time to get back the speed of the play makes the opportunity.

2 different styles but players running on to passes at speed makes for a great game.

Like Marki I think the wrestle was bad for the game.

Before they changed it, defences were too good for the 5 metre rule.

The game is typically  most boring when defence is well on top of the attack and it becomes a war of attrition.

With the current rules the attack is perhaps too far on top, but we have seen some brilliant long range tries and slick passing movements. I expect defences to improve and close the gap.

In league the one problem with standing deeper and running on to the ball is, it takes more effort and the pass has to be accurate if the attacker is moving fast.

To even up the game, they need to enforce moving off the mark and forward passes.
We can't have artificially fast play the balls with the attacker moving forward and taking defenders out of play.
To play the ball fast, you need to be standing still and standing.

With the line speed in the modern game teams might loose yards in posession, so many they end up back in their own in goal. Coming out of your own 20 might be very hard. 

Nothing wrong with having the defence back 10 and the attack back 5.

Another rule that is being totally exploited is in the PTB where an attacking player deliberatrly runs into a retreating defender and the defender is penalised for offside. In the past a defending player was allowed to stand offside as long as they did not involve themselves in the play. This garbage where the attacker can do this needs to change, whete if an attacker runs into a retrsting defender it places them  back onside and can tackle the attacking player this would stop an attacker using  the defenfer as a shepherd and drawing a soft penalty or 6 again. 

Fvcking useless smartphone keypads.

T Baz needs Dr Marki’s negotiating skills to move on 1 or 2 Top 30 players.... to Fwit Dessy’s Manly

Manly in the midst of a massive injury crisis with their backrow/forward department depleted m.... we should be on the phone right now offering:-
Roumanos
Stimpson
Britt
Napa

Can we offer Hoppa?
He is a Des-ciple. Des loves him.
He'll pay overs for him.

I’ll take just about anything to get rid of decoy runners, f***in’ hate decoy runners. I’d like to know how they become so prevalent in the game, they sort of just snuck up on us and become acceptable.

Someone should’ve started blowing the whistle and said you’re deliberately offside, wtf are you doing here. The skill in League should be behind the ball not in front of it. You want to run a “decoy” fine, as long as the pass goes in front of your body not behind it.

Ban the decoy, deliberately run in front of the ball, you’re f***in’ offside. make the coaches think of another way to trick the defence, like with the ball maybe.

I dont mind the decoy.
What I mind is when the decoy tricks the defence into tackling him (on suspicion I might add) yet it is deemed obstruction, even though the guy with the bloody ball is nowhere near the tackled decoy.

In an effort to make a rule black and white, the NRL felt it was easier to rule on the decoy making contact with the defence as opposed to actually obstructing anyone. 

Totally agree. You should  cease  to be a decoy when you can no longer legally receive  the ball. You are, as you say, in an offside position and the question shouldn't  be did the defence make a decision to tackle. You shouldn't  be  there

I agree there should be no penalty for tackling a decoy.

Any decoy that impeeds any defender is a automatic penalty.

The way to to rule it is the decoy should be at least 5 metres away from the guy carrying the ball when any tackle is attempted and must try to avoid  contact a with a defender.. A good play with decoys should be clean with decoys attempting to run into space and defenders making decisions.  If it looks like decoys are cluttering up play and impeeding defenders blow a penalty.

I mentioned earlier about being offside in the defensive line  and it is the same for an attacking side. If you are in front of the ball you are not deemed offside if you take no part in the play. Unfortunately as a decoy running into the defensive line  you are taking part in the play and should be rightfully penalised.

Great talk comrades...unsurprisingly I’ll add no value... 

Decoys enable more points, and more points equals a more entertaining game according to the ARLolC... and allow a greater spread of betting options... Decoys ain’t goin nowhere...

2 x 11 player power plays for 10 minutes the next ‘innovation’  to enable more points and a more entertaining  ‘product’...

Should be around the same time as the first climate lockdowns...

In my opinion the game was at its best in the 90’s. But it was when the idea that, a quick play the ball, would be the easiest way to score points. Laurie Daley wasn’t the first but he certainly was the best at it. This is when the game started on its downward slope. 

The reason I disagree with this, is that if a player puts up a bomb and the fullback takes it and runs back, there are likely to be half his teammates if not 90% of them in front of him.

Yet he can weave past them and make a break.

He cannot use them as an obstruction, but they are there. 

FMD that’s not the play I’m talking about. it’s the running block plays where the ball is DELIBERATELY passed behind the runner. It’s not hard to identify or police.

If you want run decoys, pass the ball across their body. Of course it won’t be as effective so we may see coaches have to devise some skill behind the ball instead of in front of it.

I know what you're talking about, Zef.
I was just highlighting other examples that occur during a game where it is absolutely fine for players to be in front of the guy running the ball that aren't considered an issue so why should decoys be?

Another example is when the hooker feigns to go 1 side with a couple of shuffled steps and then turns the ball back on inside. The guy playing the ball is in front of him. Is that bad?

Ok, let's eliminate that move too.

Where do you stop?

IMO a correctly executed decoy is exactly that.
If the defence is silly enough to move and tackle him, that's their bad read. If the decoy also executes badly and obstructs the defender from getting to a tackler then its clear penalty. 

The only part of this that has anything to do with what I’m talking about is the last paragraph.

OK so you don’t mind decoys, I reckon they’re boring and repetitive and illegal moves that somehow crept in the game over the last 20 years or so, not coincidentally I would say with the advent of flat at the line football.

Everything above your last paragraph has nothing to do with deliberate passing behind the man f***in’ boring block play decoy rubbish, so why bring it up?

That’s where you stop, because they’re easily identifiable, not confused with anything else, and simple to police.

I think the problem is the decoy is intentionally taking up an offside  position  to disadvantage  the defence. It's  intentional not passive

Of course it is. They don’t have to physically impede anyone, it’s about breaking sight lines and psychologically overwhelming with numbers like enemies at the gate.

And how boring is it seeing every second man in a passing chain running like a robot with no intention of being in the play.

Get rid of it, it’s lazy coaching.

And the thing is, the best most effective and pretty to the eye decoy plays you see - are legal. The ball gets passed across the runner.

Make them work on that.

I agree on effectiveness, but the most effective attacking plays require more skill.

We can see players skill levels are improving, wingers grounding the ball in the corner is one example. 

All that is needed is for decoys that run in front of the ball to at all times be far away from the player with the ball.
That will make that kind of lazy decoy ineffective, if they are a eligible receiver and the ball carrier dummies to them a defender may bite. The defender has to move towards the decoy at about the time they would have got the ball to be judged as initiating contact. For just about every other collision the attacker is at fault.

Bottom line, a lazy decoy needs to get well out of everyone's way, 99% of the time they will not affect play, to be effective a defender has to bite and attempt to tackle them.

I don't think lazy decoys are that effective, tightening up rule interpretations will make them less effective.

With the new rules we have seen the outside backs getting more room to move, we have seen centres burning their opposite number 1-on-1 (unfortunately Hoppa was often that opposite). We have seen early kicks catch out fullbacks defending in the line. Teams are learning fast play is better than slow play with decoys.

As teams adjust to the faster pace, decoys might die a natural death.

I think you guys are nostalgic for a game of yesteryear where scores of 10-8 were not uncommon.

I dont mind the odd grind of a game here and there, but the reality is, the game sells better when theres at least 5 or 6 tries scored.

Theres nothing wrong with a 32-28 scoreline, although with the rules nowdays geared towards achieving momentum, there are too many games decided by the 60th minute which I dont think the NRL wants.

IMO decoy plays just add another element of strategy in the attack and create more doubt in the defence. I reckon gaining a penalty for obstruction and marching 30m downfield with a kick to touch is sufficient risk-penalty for it.