Opinion The NRL is a failed competition

[SPEARTAKVIDREFS]

You make a good point with this. Is it that teams are getting better at using their challenges, or is it that psychologically refs are now making their calls with less care because they are coming to rely on captains making a challenge? Could be a bit of both. The second possibility was always on the cards, it is basic human psychology to become less careful when we perceive that we have some sort of safety net, but doubt the NRL did anything smart like talk to some experts before coming up with the current system.

What other sport offers a team to challenge a refs decision, are there any?
Its just fuckin weird I tells yu.
like what the actual fuck??????????????
'Lets show the fans on the big screen just how incompetent we actually are' lol

 

[Sandra's Bollocks]

I don't think Souths can match the Storm or Penrith.

Maybe not bro, but they do have Lurch at the helm so they will at least contest for it.

 

[Alan79]

So a player who has family, friends and a support network in Sydney will be forced to go to, say, Cairns or Auckland where he knows no one, has no family and no one to support him. Move out of a house, unit whatever that he is paying off and intends to raise his family in just to move into rented accommodation in. To a city that he knows nothing about and possibly has never even been to. All for what could be $1 because they offered that much more than the next highest offer. Even if it $1000’s the player could easily be be much worse off financially let alone emotionally.

Think about it if it was you, you brother, your son or your grand son being forced to move away. It’s not like he had to go to get a job, he has one locally, that he would like to continue and some third party is forcing him out of it.

If the club doesn’t want or can’t afford to incur the penalty then ultimately it’s the player that suffers, no matter what penalty is potentially applied to the club.

The RLPA would never agree to it and I don’t blame them.

Go Dogs

I've been suggesting a similar idea for a couple of years with regards to the highest bid setting what the lowest bid can be. Under this system any club that is able to hide payments outside of the cap can get away with publicly saying that a player has accepted far less than what other clubs have offered. The Roosters for instance would like people to believe that Keary accepted $200k a season under what his market value was and Tedesco supposedly took $300k under what others offered. That $500k a season might not seem like a gigantic amount to throw at another player. But you'll pick up a fairly exciting player for that kind of money. It would just mean that the top teams can't hoard talent by cheating with outside the cap payments. Teams that have set aside big money for a certain position could actually have a chance of taking a player away from a club that we suspect is cheating the cap. If someone offered a million for a player and the Roosters couldn't offer 950 thousand they're not able to make an offer.

In the short term it wouldn't have much impact, but over 4-5 years it would mean that clubs would have to start actually offering market value to players and they couldn't cheat the cap to the tune of $300k on a single player by hiding payments. At best they'd be able to get away with paying 5% less and possibly offering payments under the table. In the long term they would eventually have to buy players on a budget elsewhere.

As a means of making it fairer for players, the player could for instance set the stipulation that they only want to play for a year in a location they didn't really want. You might force the clubs to offer adequate accommodation for that year. In short you could find ways to make it acceptable to players.

If we continue on with this sytem of perennially seeing a small handful of NRL pets playing with rosters heavily stacked with talent the game will see a slow decline of fans.

This bullshit of Vlandys saying that the bottom teams need to catch up to the top teams is absurd when there is no means to spread the talent. The concept of paying massive unders really just means that competent cap cheats will continue to make life hard for those working honorably.

 

[Alan79]

What other sport offers a team to challenge a refs decision, are there any?
Its just fuckin weird I tells yu.
like what the actual fuck??????????????
'Lets show the fans on the big screen just how incompetent we actually are' lol

I'd guess that the captains challenge only came about because a lot of clubs pushed hard for it.

 

[dogluva]

Roosters won't do it this year, but that is purely down to injuries. It is between Strom and Panfers, and the only two teams that could get a look in if they play their best on the day are Eels and Souffs.

The rest of the teams are just making up the numbers. What a sad state of affairs.

Hit the nail on the head. It is Storm and Panthers the grand finalists from last year who are light years ahead of all the rest. I reckon the only way we won't see a repeat of the 2020 grand final is if they end up on the same side of the draw.

 

[Dogzof95]

If he wants the lower teams to pull their finger out, then scrap the cap!

 

[dogluva]

Good points... that being said I did like watching Souths get pumped. Injuries are another problem, I think something needs to be done in terms of cap and top 30.Dont think the new rules are needed just ref the game like origin and all would have been good. Also don't know why they got rid of the 2 refs? I thought it worked OK. Standard of refereeing is also an issue more and more clubs are making successful multiple challengers it's getting up to 4 or 5 a game..

Looking at what the referees are offering this year there might not be enough talent to have two men in the middle, or competent men that is.

In addition it is problematic enough with the bunker becoming more involved in final say on tries and either making ridiculous decisions or showing up the ineptitude of the referee by overturning the decision after it has been made "final" by the referee. Two referees mean two differing interpretations of the same event which caused a lot of controversy and adverse opinion from the fans. Captains challenge also has its problems with the phrasing of the challenge being all important and to think that there can be a "hung jury" on that makes it even more baffling to the fans...

 

[dogluva]

I agree 100%. Bulldogs and Manly have forfeited 3 Home Games to Magic Round. Manly have been really hard done by as their opponents in Magic Round have always been the Broncos who play an away game at their home ground.

How hard is it to do a draw where the same teams play each other the next year with the home teams reversed.

Just remember that the Good Friday and Anzac Day games have always had the same teams for a number of years and the home teams alternate year by year.

So the computer that does the draw can be programmed to do the Magic Round in a fair manner.

Fair manner and the NRL don't go hand in hand though. While ever certain teams seem to get the rub of the green constantly and or favourable draws fans will rightly speculate as to the ethics of those in power as the custodians of the game.

All good points.

The only one that truly works that way though is the Good Friday game where both of those sides actually call the same ground their home and are designated home each other year.

The ANZAC day game between the Roosters and Dragons is always at Allianz/ Sydney Cricket Ground( after demolition of Allianz) although teams designated home are rotated each year.

No side truly has a 'home ground advantage' unless they do play out of their home ground, even if they are called the home side. Broncos DO play out of Suncorp each year in magic round, their true home ground. Unless the location of the magic round is changed each year that will always be the case.

 

[Nasheed]

I like
The game sped up, but maybe if it
Was me I’d change Rick infringements to be stir& up penalties like d old skool
6 again for ten metres thang b poppin

 

[Shanked]

here's the table

don't think ive seen a points difference like this ever, panthers could have + 400 by the end of the season

nrl ladder - Google Search

and if the rabbits didn't get smashed by 50 on thursday, they would have a +100 pts difference as well

 

[Motorhead]

All good points.

The only one that truly works that way though is the Good Friday game where both of those sides actually call the same ground their home and are designated home each other year.

The ANZAC day game between the Roosters and Dragons is always at Allianz/ Sydney Cricket Ground( after demolition of Allianz) although teams designated home are rotated each year.

No side truly has a 'home ground advantage' unless they do play out of their home ground, even if they are called the home side. Broncos DO play out of Suncorp each year in magic round, their true home ground. Unless the location of the magic round is changed each year that will always be the case.

Yes the Broncos are always playing at their home ground during Magic Round but the least the NRL could do would be to ensure that it is classed as one of their 12 home games of the year. ATM they get 13 home games and only 11 away.

 

[Motorhead]

I agree 100%. Bulldogs and Manly have forfeited 3 Home Games to Magic Round. Manly have been really hard done by as their opponents in Magic Round have always been the Broncos who play an away game at their home ground.

How hard is it to do a draw where the same teams play each other the next year with the home teams reversed.

Just remember that the Good Friday and Anzac Day games have always had the same teams for a number of years and the home teams alternate year by year.

So the computer that does the draw can be programmed to do the Magic Round in a fair manner.

Fair manner and the NRL don't go hand in hand though. While ever certain teams seem to get the rub of the green constantly and or favourable draws fans will rightly speculate as to the ethics of those in power as the custodians of the game.

The Storm/Warriors game on ANZAC Day has always been a home game for Melbourne at AAMI park, supposedly for the sole reason that their shitheap can do a great light show with video projections onto the roof. Doesn't seem fair to me or a legitimate reason for the Warriors to always cop the shit end of the pineapple.

 

[dogluva]

Yes the Broncos are always playing at their home ground during Magic Round but the least the NRL could do would be to ensure that it is classed as one of their 12 home games of the year. ATM they get 13 home games and only 11 away.

Yeah weird that one but tell the fans who have season tickets. A Clayton home game that they have to pay to watch......

 

[Motorhead]

Yeah weird that one but tell the fans who have season tickets. A Clayton home game that they have to pay to watch......

Why is it a Clayton home game? The Broncos play out of Suncorp so it's no different to any other home game for them. Season ticket holders wouldn't be affected at all.

 

[Kelpie03]

I've been suggesting a similar idea for a couple of years with regards to the highest bid setting what the lowest bid can be. Under this system any club that is able to hide payments outside of the cap can get away with publicly saying that a player has accepted far less than what other clubs have offered. The Roosters for instance would like people to believe that Keary accepted $200k a season under what his market value was and Tedesco supposedly took $300k under what others offered. That $500k a season might not seem like a gigantic amount to throw at another player. But you'll pick up a fairly exciting player for that kind of money. It would just mean that the top teams can't hoard talent by cheating with outside the cap payments. Teams that have set aside big money for a certain position could actually have a chance of taking a player away from a club that we suspect is cheating the cap. If someone offered a million for a player and the Roosters couldn't offer 950 thousand they're not able to make an offer.

In the short term it wouldn't have much impact, but over 4-5 years it would mean that clubs would have to start actually offering market value to players and they couldn't cheat the cap to the tune of $300k on a single player by hiding payments. At best they'd be able to get away with paying 5% less and possibly offering payments under the table. In the long term they would eventually have to buy players on a budget elsewhere.

As a means of making it fairer for players, the player could for instance set the stipulation that they only want to play for a year in a location they didn't really want. You might force the clubs to offer adequate accommodation for that year. In short you could find ways to make it acceptable to players.

If we continue on with this sytem of perennially seeing a small handful of NRL pets playing with rosters heavily stacked with talent the game will see a slow decline of fans.

This bullshit of Vlandys saying that the bottom teams need to catch up to the top teams is absurd when there is no means to spread the talent. The concept of paying massive unders really just means that competent cap cheats will continue to make life hard for those working honorably.

Thanks a million Alan for backing me up.

 

[bradyk]

I've been suggesting a similar idea for a couple of years with regards to the highest bid setting what the lowest bid can be. Under this system any club that is able to hide payments outside of the cap can get away with publicly saying that a player has accepted far less than what other clubs have offered. The Roosters for instance would like people to believe that Keary accepted $200k a season under what his market value was and Tedesco supposedly took $300k under what others offered. That $500k a season might not seem like a gigantic amount to throw at another player. But you'll pick up a fairly exciting player for that kind of money. It would just mean that the top teams can't hoard talent by cheating with outside the cap payments. Teams that have set aside big money for a certain position could actually have a chance of taking a player away from a club that we suspect is cheating the cap. If someone offered a million for a player and the Roosters couldn't offer 950 thousand they're not able to make an offer.

In the short term it wouldn't have much impact, but over 4-5 years it would mean that clubs would have to start actually offering market value to players and they couldn't cheat the cap to the tune of $300k on a single player by hiding payments. At best they'd be able to get away with paying 5% less and possibly offering payments under the table. In the long term they would eventually have to buy players on a budget elsewhere.

As a means of making it fairer for players, the player could for instance set the stipulation that they only want to play for a year in a location they didn't really want. You might force the clubs to offer adequate accommodation for that year. In short you could find ways to make it acceptable to players.

If we continue on with this sytem of perennially seeing a small handful of NRL pets playing with rosters heavily stacked with talent the game will see a slow decline of fans.

This bullshit of Vlandys saying that the bottom teams need to catch up to the top teams is absurd when there is no means to spread the talent. The concept of paying massive unders really just means that competent cap cheats will continue to make life hard for those working honorably.

Tedesco reportedly on 1.1m and Keary 1m, what's so hard to believe about that? That's what they're worth and a top team can sign and re-sign players for what they're worth (flip that for shit teams). There is no conspiracy or under the table payments there lol.

 

[dogluva]

Why is it a Clayton home game? The Broncos play out of Suncorp so it's no different to any other home game for them. Season ticket holders wouldn't be affected at all.

Tongue in cheek mate.

 

[chisdog]

I've been suggesting a similar idea for a couple of years with regards to the highest bid setting what the lowest bid can be. Under this system any club that is able to hide payments outside of the cap can get away with publicly saying that a player has accepted far less than what other clubs have offered. The Roosters for instance would like people to believe that Keary accepted $200k a season under what his market value was and Tedesco supposedly took $300k under what others offered. That $500k a season might not seem like a gigantic amount to throw at another player. But you'll pick up a fairly exciting player for that kind of money. It would just mean that the top teams can't hoard talent by cheating with outside the cap payments. Teams that have set aside big money for a certain position could actually have a chance of taking a player away from a club that we suspect is cheating the cap. If someone offered a million for a player and the Roosters couldn't offer 950 thousand they're not able to make an offer.

In the short term it wouldn't have much impact, but over 4-5 years it would mean that clubs would have to start actually offering market value to players and they couldn't cheat the cap to the tune of $300k on a single player by hiding payments. At best they'd be able to get away with paying 5% less and possibly offering payments under the table. In the long term they would eventually have to buy players on a budget elsewhere.

As a means of making it fairer for players, the player could for instance set the stipulation that they only want to play for a year in a location they didn't really want. You might force the clubs to offer adequate accommodation for that year. In short you could find ways to make it acceptable to players.

If we continue on with this sytem of perennially seeing a small handful of NRL pets playing with rosters heavily stacked with talent the game will see a slow decline of fans.

This bullshit of Vlandys saying that the bottom teams need to catch up to the top teams is absurd when there is no means to spread the talent. The concept of paying massive unders really just means that competent cap cheats will continue to make life hard for those working honorably.

a points salary cap would be good too.

 

[steeliz]

What other sport offers a team to challenge a refs decision, are there any?
Its just fuckin weird I tells yu.
like what the actual fuck??????????????
'Lets show the fans on the big screen just how incompetent we actually are' lol

Unfortunately not that weird.

NBA,NFL and Tennis all have this, I am sure there are others but I can't remember off the top of my head.

NFL is where the NRL got the original idea from.

 

[chisdog]

Unfortunately not that weird.

NBA,NFL and Tennis all have this, I am sure there are others but I can't remember off the top of my head.

NFL is where the NRL got the original idea from.

cricket