Rugby League may as well be dead20 March 2013
Rugby League may as well be dead, okay, sure, this may be a little alarming, a more appropriate title would read, ‘Colourful off field, Bland on it’, or perhaps ‘League got ya down’ or ‘What’s wrong with Rugby League?’ But, wait, yes me too, I am confused. Relevant online headline writing is generally just a tool today that hijacks attention to attract readership, something I would never deploy.
This technique would probably read something like, Rugby League is dumb.
Agreed, leave that to the serious writers. Lets get down to business... a more appropriate title would read;
Rugby League needs change, bad, swiftly...
Why would I say such a thing? Rugby League is great, I agree, and while, lets be honest here, i’m losing interest at a rate that requires a metric that is only used for spatial galaxies. This is mostly said, to say this, apart from something that I cannot stop thinking about for the past 5 years, okay 10, Rugby League commentators, commentators that matter and are listened too, are now discussing it on TV forums and other various mediums, about the very issue, ‘it’s boring’.
If I was to turn the volume off on the TV and change team strips across the league, and you only focused on each team’s style of play and noted length of assist to try, as a general fan, perhaps even as a league purist, could you really tell me what team is what?
Everything looks the same, and in a long long season when the league rolls out the same story lines each week, not only is it confusing, its, well, tasteless and not interesting.
Not only is the style of the play the same across the league, Rugby league as it currently displays, is no longer an open body type specific game, to be a professional League player in today’s environment, 5 foot 10ish’, 92-98 kgs need only apply. This is for many reasons, but most notably, whichever way you choose to look at it, the blandness or strict professionalism that the game requires to be most effective, this body type appears to be most suited.
Not only are open body types removed, positions are expired and of no genuine use. The original idea in sports regarding positions is so fans can make sense and relate to each player's role more easily, this no longer exists in Rugby League. The only positions that are most important and immediate to the teams success, is the halfback and fullback, and to a less degree, perhaps the service of a rake.
Bar the previous positions noted, any player on any professional rugby league team in the National Rugby League is now so skilled, he can play any position from wing to front-row and the common league fan would not note this as glaringly erroneous or out of place.
Could Glenn Lazarus play wing? Could Cliff Lyons play second row? Effectively and perform at genuine use?
We are in an era now, where players as a whole have never been quicker, fitter, skillful, cared and more appealing to our senses, yet …
Everything's the same, boring and it’s obvious.
Rugby League still has an abundance of specialised talent, Thurston, Inglis, Williams, Barba, etcetera, the list is long. (see 2013 rookies)
Make note to highlight, the King, Wally. Johnathan Thurston may very well be the most important Rugby League athlete in the past 30 years, or the Twenty First century, which is basically saying Thurston is the greatest league athlete ever.
Basically, Johnathan Thurston is awesome.
Yet it remains, Rugby League is dead, and it’s not the athletes fault.
But wait, its not all nothing, Rugby League still has enormous exciting displays, again, I agree, obviously, game darling, State Of Origin, that while being amazing, has its own problems which is another story. Other neon highlights, the finals series, seeing 8th place maneuver and perhaps on a less grand scale, seeing Melbourne play in Melbourne.
Now, there is no doubt Melbourne's creative salary cap techniques have obviously helped in their path to enlightened eliteness, you don't have to be a genius to work out, the more talent you have, the better you react.
And while Melbourne in Melbourne is great, it’s the equivalent of watching one the most celebrated and awarded films in culture in its original state versus seeing it in the new director DVD release 10 years later in ‘enhanced’ High Definition, at home, alone, think... Driving Miss Daisy. And while the ‘enhanced’ con release worked for awhile, the tricks up and no ones fooled.
Melbourne in Melbourne is basically Driving Miss Daisy on DVD in HD.
And that’s a highlight.
Rugby League is dead and it's not the clubs fault.
Rugby League started to employ serious change and invention in the early nineties when the game saw an explosion of experimentation as the league split and a pirate league emerged and Super League entered.
Here the game saw change like its never seen, and spread the planting seeds to its current problem, at the time while experimentation showed displays of, professional league players instructed to run backwards with their eye of the ball to set the line, think Rod Rocket Reddy’s Adelaide Rams, and we first saw distant markers and pivotal players for the first time evolving to only defend in the second line, the nevermind, immortal rise of Andrew Johns and a young Brett Kimmorley reinventing kicking bombs to a height that was unimaginable, that came down, snow blown, spinning like dance lights in the stars, romantically free and weightless, combusting fullbacks into ziggy stardust.
Some of these techniques were great, some not so great, what mattered most, stayed, Johns becomes an immortal, nevermind, the league inserts the importance and installation of defence structure and pattern, and Kimmorleys’ reinvention of the bomb is one the eras most important creations, don’t believe me, that’s okay, i'm not necessarily asking you to.
Andrew Johns achievements are hugely important to its era. And Brett Kimmorley, well Kimmorley is great, but no one wants to acknowledge or admit it.
The problem here with all this, it’s really the start of the professional era of Rugby League and the game has developed dramatically since. Not only has it developed in a crazy understandable manner, its had 20 years to get better from the above, across all levels, pee-wee, touch, flag, social, park, junior, mod, senior, veteran, amateur and pro.
The problem with current Rugby League is, their all too good and change is required, modern defense is so watertight, the progress the system has made has reached its limit of being attractive.
Defence is just too good, too tight, too structured, boring.
Modern defence systems and how they work
Unfortunately, this is not the time appropriate to discuss different styles of defence systems, as much is to get through.
However, If you were to type into the most used accessible visual research assistance available, Googles’ youtube, Modern Rugby League defence, you would probably think you enter some detailed analysis and publication of its process for experts, wrong, no the first result is a junior league coach showing preteen players modern defence structure. This is happening in the game at its most important development stage. The boring important stuff. This is like teaching prep school kids the periodic table of Chemical Elements to cook an egg. Or introducing preschoolers to basketball, by teaching them the complex triangle system.
This is why the games struggling, it’s too good at defending.
It is crazy to think, the answer to all this was just one mouse click away.
Fairly or unfairly, however you want to look at it, current New South Wales and Sydney City Roosters half Mitchell Pearce has been discussed in media and pulp web forums as, talented, prestigious, boring, overrated, ‘not even that good’, and while I think this comment on its surface is unfair, in my opinion he lays somewhere in between it all.
What's interesting here, Mitchell Pearce would be a modern coaches dream to coach, because he is a pure development and product from cradle to origin of modern Rugby League systems, Mitchell Pearce is the answer to how halfs are required to play in the modern game, and while its easy to say any player would be better in a better team, that's inherently true, I can not think of an exception that this rule applies more obvious than Mitchell Pearce.
Hire a mathematician throw them computer software or Rugby League XBOX and instruct him to create the greatest Rugby League team of current talent to the rules of the current system, without bias, exclusion of games history and ‘expert’ input, and the result, the halfback would be, more or less, Pearce.
Mitchell Pearces’ problem may very well be, not that he is not good enough, he’s too good.
So why can't he win origin? This is an honest question, keep in mind on the stage where the greatest showpiece happens, the current era Queensland team is the most successful in its history, it's there in black and white, seven times consecutively, a more interesting question or statement is, this era Queensland team is probably the greatest Rugby League team ever assembled... ever.
Pearce as great as he is, is the product of a system that requires and demands efficiency and works, built on margins and relies less on traditional desirables of the game and fan fave, notably, prime elite raw athletic ability.
This is in no way a smear on Pearce, this is not my intention, English naturalist and theorist Charles Darwin is long gone, but his work is kicked forth and back as one of the most important think tanks in human existence, Darwin argued that all life evolves and changes according to its surroundings. Mitchell Pearce and many, many, athletes like him are not to blame, nor are the clubs, as they can only perform to the rules and surroundings and more importantly restrictions on how to most be effective, be fittest and survive.
The Fix Is In
Before we go any further with changes to tradition, a much, much better job can be done in producing the game that starts with the NRL administration, start polling real stats, stats that matter, don't tell me its the 5th tackle all the time, and they need to kick it, we can all count to Five and aware of the games most basic rules, we are not dumb.
Stop treating us like we are, I want to know if you can tell me the last time Scott Prince broke the line outside the defences’ 40 yard line that led to an assist, creating a try, and tell me what play was used, the weather, his footwear, health-status, who against, home or away and what strip the team wore that night in what round, and, where on the field, left or right, and tell me how he did it, was it footwork, was it defence error, was it his playing ability and tell me the best 5 players who ever did it, and tell me who's the best at that stat this year, and tell me now, right now as its happening, and tell me as a side note just to add color, who is the best at it from the 30, the 50, the 60 yard-line, and tell me what this means and why this happens, and tell me is Prince even any good, or is past his used by date. And if he isn't, tell me how he can still contribute, and if the numbers don't stack, revert to ask an expert I guess.
Stop selling us fairy tales every week, it’s a long season for everyone, probably too long, i don’t know.
Stop making it so damn easy, not to watch.
Create better stories than rolling out the same thing each week like, the amazing player A plays against the amazing player B, every single week.
Rinse, Repeat.
I don't know... go deeper, get smarter, I guess...
Shane Perry was a halfback for the Brisbane Broncos who played a total 45 games for the club in the space of about two seasons, he also won a premiership ring with the side in 2006, after replacing Brett Seymour whose contract was terminated for disciplinary reasons, Seymour played a total 62 games, Scott Prince, first signed with the Broncos in 2001, and including this year's appearances, Prince has a total of 28 games played for the club, and he is still there.
Who is the better Bronco?
Yes, solid meaningful rational arguments can be made on both sides fore and against Princes’ career, this is undeniably true, but I do not believe hanging around is helping his legacy. Princes’ career regardless of opinion, is something of some significance, you don't make a decade in pro sports in any sport without being incredibly smart, yet, It’s a fair assumption Prince, still mostly greatly confuses me, I don't know, can you even say that, or answer it, but one thing's for sure, don't ask the NRL, cause they won't be able to tell you.
The only person who can answer that question right now is the same person who sold you the easter bunny and Lance Armstrong.
There is much more to the above, but another time, let’s move on.
Keeping on, fullbacks are impressive to watch and appear outstanding talent across the league, because they have the most opportunities at attacking a broken line of defence, Thurston is good at breaking the set line so much because, well, he's just that good.
The key problem to the core of all this is space. The key to the lock that solves all this, is perhaps to remove the lock all together.
By removing the lock, this makes the game 12 players, creates much needed space, and invites more exciting play, this idea is not new or unique, but can be extended by also dropping the marker to one only, and make it a requirement that the half back cannot defend in the main line of defense, this does a couple things, protects the league's most prized and expensive assets from its most dangerous activity, allows more space to allow freedom for attacking ball players, but most importantly frees the half back to mostly worry about attack, maximizing exciting execution.
If this is all too radical, simply just remove the lock and play on as usual, or remove the wingers, or make the defence line set 20 metres from the play the ball and add unlimited interchange.
Something, anything, but do something.
I asked, media-man and Rugby League Broadcasting statesmen Ian Maurice about all this, Maurice has seen the league change closely and more than most over the past 40-years had this to say;
" Rugby League MAY be dead .. at least the game those of us of a certain age knew it.
We no longer have competitive scrums.
We no longer have specialist positional players.
We no longer have ALL players expected to play for 80 minutes.
We no longer have leather footballs.
We no longer have referees with starched white collars.
We no longer have unlimited tackles.
We no longer have the game many of us learned to play in our youth.
But we do have a game that is exceptionally faster than the old one.
And we do have a game that can excite us, that can have us frozen to our TV screens and that can create heated, good natured debate with our work mates and friends.
True, we can no longer compare the current players to the greats of 50 or more years ago.
It IS a different game but then again the world is a different place. "
Other more crazy ideas were produced in the creation of this article but were left out for various reasons and audience suitability, my point here is, I have some ideas on how to fix it, but much smarter people than me will be able to provide that, and while its fun to create comparisons of athletes to modern popular cultural icons, the base of this article, is that, Rugby League is in trouble and it needs attention.
It’s important to the game, its brand, its appeal, league fans, me and you.
Lastly, while I promise to never compare anything to the movie Driving Miss Daisy again, perhaps a more suitable headline of topic to the NRL’s current problem is: Driving Me Crazy.
http://www.4bc.com.au/DeadLeague