• We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.

Loaded dog

Well used Member
TC made an observation in another thread wherin he said that a reduction in interchange from 8 to 6 would result in"cricket scores".
Drag out your copy of '73 and take in the game.
Note how fast it was.
Note how quickly the scrums set. (I can think of lots of reasons why...)
Was that a cricket score?

Rugby league was great then.
IS THE " MODERN" GAME BETTER THAN IT WAS IN 1973?
(imho, the most useless player on the field was no. 10 for Manly)

DISCUSS.
 
It should be noted that in 1973 the defensive line was only set at 5m, which impacted on the attacking team, this was extended to 10m in about 1993.
 
Is the game better? I believe many of the rule changes in themselves have benefitted the game, what has ****ed the game is that those rules can now be "interpreted" by numbnut officials.

Referee's used to have at least the semblance of independence under the old Referee's Association but now they are simply the employees of the NRL do as they are instructed and are subject to cohersion.
 
Woodsie,

Which rule changes have benefitted the game?
That game was played at high speed. Far fewer stoppages.
It was exciting. 5 metres did not seem to create a problem.
I dont have a problem with 10 metres, btw.

A question for all: WHO was the useless number 10 for Manly?
Dont cheat... watch the game !
 
Last edited:
Woodsie,

Which rule changes have benefitted the game?
That game was played at high speed. Far fewer stoppages.
It was exciting. 5 metres did not seem to create a problem.
I dont have a problem with 10 metres, btw.

A question for all: WHO was number 10 for Manly?

Sh1t you ask hard questions, and no time to study .... I'll get back to you.
 
The game is more predictable today, bash bash bash then normally a kick on the last. Games back then were won by skill, the chip and chase, scrums were a contest. Now so may tries come from bombs and grubbers. I enjoy the athletisism of todays players and their courage is amazing but I remember the 70s with pride as it was a semi professional game and the fans went to games and family friendly times and the traditions we have were forged in that era.
 
Beneficial rule changes:
1. Forty-20
2. Seven-tackle restart
3. corner post still in play for tries

Poor rule changes (too many to list but) here's a few:
1. No punching, resulting in handbag melees
2. Video refs
3. Two refs
4. Allowing Channel Nein to determine schedule
5. Virtually no daytime matches
6. 5-day turnarounds, leading to uneven schedules
7. Not allowing successful Sydney-based clubs to play their first finals match at home
8. To demise of contested scrums
9 Too many interchanges allowed
10. Allowing trainers to remain on the field to coach under-six style......
 
Not even sure I agree with your good rule changes. 40/20 is only liked because it's a tiny way to break the monotony. Don't really think the 7 tackle re-start has done much either way - just seems to result in teams simply taking the tackle rather than risk a kick. Corner post - who cares?
1. The corner post rule change has resulted in numerous spectacular ties.
2. Seven-tackles lessens the standard kick on the last tackle
3. 40:20 because it does rely on some skill, and does break up the stereotypical play of most teams.
 
I haven't watched the 73 game for ages. Did Zorba have the great big hairy bogey under his nose (as Basil Fawlty would call it), or was he clean shaven?
 
A question for all: WHO was the useless number 10 for Manly?
Dont cheat... watch the game !

Panoutas Peterides

I haven't watched the 73 game for ages. Did Zorba have the great big hairy bogey under his nose (as Basil Fawlty would call it), or was he clean shaven?

Clean shaven. He also had Keith Page threaten to take him out the back of the SCG stands after the game and beat the crap out of him for allegedly calling Page a cheat during the game.
 
Z obviously had a penchant for pies back then too!

I was blown away by how fast the scrums packed. Probably because forwards packed in EVERY time. Now it seems, if you are excutIng attacking play number 583, the fullback packs into the right second row and the right centre goes to lock...
It must take these guys 30 seconds to work out where they need to be. And, the scrums of old resulted in something!
Also, the tackles seemed cleaner. I see the biffo as separate
 
Beneficial rule changes:
1. Forty-20
2. Seven-tackle restart
3. corner post still in play for tries

Poor rule changes (too many to list but) here's a few:
1. No punching, resulting in handbag melees
2. Video refs
3. Two refs
4. Allowing Channel Nein to determine schedule
5. Virtually no daytime matches
6. 5-day turnarounds, leading to uneven schedules
7. Not allowing successful Sydney-based clubs to play their first finals match at home
8. To demise of contested scrums
9 Too many interchanges allowed
10. Allowing trainers to remain on the field to coach under-six style......

Agree with all except the demise of the contested scrum.

In my opinion the scrum had become the single most ridiculous nonsense in the history of sporting stupidities. Standing around for 5 minutes watch the scrum reset and collapse 3 times only to end with a random "lucky pick" penalty which could have gone either way for at least 10 infringements from both teams .... not to mention the safety hazards to blokes necks.

Let the rah rah's have 'em.
 
Z obviously had a penchant for pies back then too!

I was blown away by how fast the scrums packed. Probably because forwards packed in EVERY time. Now it seems, if you are excutIng attacking play number 583, the fullback packs into the right second row and the right centre goes to lock...
It must take these guys 30 seconds to work out where they need to be. And, the scrums of old resulted in something!
Also, the tackles seemed cleaner. I see the biffo as separate

You know something? If I was the coach of a team that had a genuine speedster like a James Roberts or Marika Koroibete.....and I saw the fullback packing into a scrum at lock and neither of the opposition wingers had dropped back I would be tempted to get a long kicker (e.g. DCE) to get the ball from first receiver and just boot it downfield as far as possible and let the fast guys chase after it. At the very least you put the opposition on the back foot, forcing the forwards to have to turn and chase (running them out of gas quicker) and you can gain a very cheap 50 or so metres. And at best you end up re-gathering the ball and scoring a try.

As an old front rower I hate seeing backs packing into scrums with so much space between the players that you could drive a road train between them. And I also hate seeing scrum feeds that are basically at the locks feet. Bill Harrigan loved calling halfbacks for 2nd row feeds.....he would have a field day with how its done now.
 
There weren't too many scrum penalties in that game, and Cronulla won against the head several times!

If we can't bring back a real scrum, then something must be done to eliminate the time wasting excuse for a scrum that we have now.
 
There weren't too many scrum penalties in that game, and Cronulla won against the head several times!

If we can't bring back a real scrum, then something must be done to eliminate the time wasting excuse for a scrum that we have now.

Watch some more old time games, it was a plight .. a plight I tell you.

Originally I thought retaining the uncontested scrum was a good idea because it would compress the defence and allow for some scintillating back line plays... boy I was wrong ... pass one wide and take the tackle..... sh1te.
 
The 40/20 rule is a good addition. Breaks up the monotony of 5 hit ups then kick.

The 7 tackle restart should only be awarded for a negative long range kick designed to give the kicker's team a chance to set their defensive line. A grubber kick that trickles dead is hardly a negative tactic worthy of punishment.

The corner post rule ? Ehhhh, whatever. It's the same for everyone so I'm indifferent.

Competitive scrums ? Seriously ? You don't think the pinkies have enough areas where "judgement" penalties can be awarded ? I know they're a farce but a return to contested scrums would be a nightmare.

I'd go back to one referee tomorrow. Two referees has done nothing to improve the game. One look at the ESL proves this.
 
Watch some more old time games, it was a plight .. a plight I tell you.

Originally I thought retaining the uncontested scrum was a good idea because it would compress the defence and allow for some scintillating back line plays... boy I was wrong ... pass one wide and take the tackle..... sh1te.
The way I always saw it was that the ENTIRE point of the scrum was to separate the forwards and the backs (also why scrums were only 5m in from touch to maximise separation). This still applied whether contested or uncontested (and so it was just basic sanity to make them uncontested). So WHY oh WHY are backs packing into scrums.......mental!
 

Latest posts

Team P W L PD Pts
3 3 0 48 6
3 2 1 45 4
3 2 1 28 4
3 2 1 22 4
3 2 1 15 4
3 2 1 14 4
2 1 1 13 4
3 2 1 10 4
2 1 1 6 4
3 2 1 -3 4
3 1 2 0 2
3 1 2 -5 2
3 1 2 -15 2
3 1 2 -22 2
3 1 2 -36 2
2 0 2 -56 2
3 0 3 -64 0
Back
Top Bottom