The V'Landy's era .. Pass or fail poll

[Kevinward777]

"The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy".
Martin Luther King Jr.

People whinged about the wrestle
People whinged about concussion
People whinge.. so it will, so it always will be

The NRL needs a strong leader to act decisively and make the hard calls.

Approval ratings have never been a reflection of a leader's success. It's only in retrospect that the great ones get recognised

Did you watch the weekends footy? If so, we're the games any good?

 

[Kevinward777]

Yes, the NRL needs a strong leader to act decisively but they also need to make the right calls.

PVL is crash or crash through and it worked during COVID. It worked on cutting the fat out of head office. But taking the same approach on basically everything, and most importantly rule changes, just highlights his limitations.

You think he is doing a good job and people should get behind him. That's fine. I respect that perspective. But to me his biggest weakness is glaring, being that he seems to think his opinion is the only one that matters. For example, stating that "the game is more exciting now" as fact just reeks of arrogance, particularly when the grassroots are telling him it simply is not.

But it's raining tries! According to PVL - a 40 nil flogging is great apparently. The tries he keeps on saying.

"Did you see the quality tries?"

We should have all seen what direction the NRL was heading when they started jamming touch footy down our throats a couple of seasons back.

They score a lot of tries in Super Rugby these days.

 

[Lyonstomenzies]

I just had a chat with Tim Mannah about the speed of the game and Manly not getting any 6 again re-starts or penalties in the game against the knights. He proclaimed very adamantly that if the ref wants to he can just keep the defending team on the back foot till they gas to prove a point.
I told him in the fake against the knights the knights shifted the ball from side to side so quickly when we were defending our line that Tommy ran for over 100 meters each set of six they had covering the play.
He did this soooo many times that he was gased when we got the ball and didn’t chime in like he usually does looping round the back.
The knights plan worked well against us running us off our fear and the pinkies in the middle didn’t help at all.

 

[Ron E. Gibbs]

Without a doubt, V'Landys is the best chairman the nrl has ever had the privilege of being led by.

Fairly certain V'Landys shares your opinion, Pete.

 

[globaleagle]

They score a lot of tries in Super Rugby these days.

Especially against the Waratahs

 

[Pete W]

Fairly certain V'Landys shares your opinion, Pete.

He's not perfect but who do you prefer mate?

 

[Pete W]

Did you watch the weekends footy? If so, we're the games any good?

Not a fan of the 6-again, nor all of this sin-binning crap, and the milking etc. I'm hoping the game naturally adjusts, and that this is all just a teething period. In PVL's defence, there was quite an extensive consultation process re 6-agains, but 100% agree, this really needs to be sorted out moving forward.

 

[Tomay]

He’s got the game moving in the right direction. It will take some teams and coaches longer than others to adapt. As mentioned by others, slight tweaks to the way the rules are implemented might be needed.

He’s a lot better than gallop and even more betterer than Turdy.

 

[Tragic Eagle]

The fact that chairman has so much pull identities weakness on the commission. Frankly we still get wrestled in defence and I still see players looking up at the ref whilst laying on a tackled playing as if to ask “do I get off now”? These rules changes have not solved any problems just created new ones. That’s what happens when you don’t do your due diligence and apply sensible transition. PVs ego is his achilles heal.

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

I get the head knock situation and trying to eradicate it, and players should be binned ( or even sent off) if the intent is to attack the head so as to cause concussion and remove the player from the game.

HOWEVER

Sending multiple players to the bin for accidental head knocks is bull****.

The rule should be ,

Attack on the head with intent , either off or bin ( depending on severity ) and penalty.

Attack on the head possibly accidental , on report , let the match review committee decide , no penalty.

Yes I know the Ref won’t see everything so that’s why you have a bunker , a player can be put on report ( or sent off ) from a bunker tip after they’ve reviewed it during a game.

I can’t see anyone complaining too much about that.

 

[ManEagle]

The fact that chairman has so much pull identities weakness on the commission. Frankly we still get wrestled in defence and I still see players looking up at the ref whilst laying on a tackled playing as if to ask “do I get off now”? These rules changes have not solved any problems just created new ones. That’s what happens when you don’t do your due diligence and apply sensible transition. PVs ego is his achilles heal.

The fact most are comparing V'landy to Greenberg highlights that. Abdo is the man who replaced Grenslime, never hear of him.

Like you said we still have the wrestle 3 men in a tackle, all it's done is penalise the good one on one midriff to ankle tackle encouraging more gang tackles and standing the ball carrier up which increases the chance of head contact and then we get a crackdown on the slightest of head knocks.
Round and round we go.

It may settle but at the moment it is sh1t.

 

[Woodsie]

I am having extreme difficulty taking anything that people calling for V'Landy's to listen to the Coaches and players seriously ...

These are the same coaches and players that introduced and mastered the greatest scurge the game has every seen .. the Wrestle ..

These are the same coaches and players that within minutes of the head high crackdown introduced the next big scurge on the game .... the Hollywood dive ..

These are the same coaches and players that have within minutes of the HIA protocols introduced the free interchange rorting . ..

These are the same coaches and players that will say and do anything for an opportunistic advantage without a thought as to what it will do to the "spectacle of the game ..

 

[mave]

I am having extreme difficulty taking anything that people calling for V'Landy's to listen to the Coaches and players seriously ...

These are the same coaches and players that introduced and mastered the greatest scurge the game has every seen .. the Wrestle ..

These are the same coaches and players that within minutes of the head high crackdown introduced the next big scurge on the game .... the Hollywood dive ..

These are the same coaches and players that have within minutes of the HIA protocols introduced the free interchange rorting . ..

These are the same coaches and players that will say and do anything for an opportunistic advantage without a thought as to what it will do to the "spectacle of the game ..

Which is why rule changes should be brought in that are not necessarily punitive.

Want less high tackles....reward low tackles, don't over punish all remotely high tackles.

Coaches will quick smart change the way they instruct, train and coach players if there in incentive to benefit them.

The NRL gets the result they want, unless the result isn't actually about player welfare, and is more about being "seen" to be doing something.

 

[Woodsie]

Which is why rule changes should be brought in that are not necessarily punitive.

Want less high tackles....reward low tackles, don't over punish all remotely high tackles.

Coaches will quick smart change the way they instruct, train and coach players if there in incentive to benefit them.

The NRL gets the result they want, unless the result isn't actually about player welfare, and is more about being "seen" to be doing something.

Mave ... it is simple ... if sporting codes around the world don't accept an immediate duty of care and introduce rules to minimise the risk of concussions they will be held demonstrably negligent and culpable ... they don't want less high tackles ... they want NO high tackles ...

The NRL commission is charged with the responsibility for the entire future of the game of Rugby League ... and science and potential litigation have given them only one path to follow ..

And the Coaches and players have been given "incentives" that benefit them .. don't hit high and you won't have players sent off ... don't hold down in tackles and you won't have six again against you ..

 

[frank stokes]

These are the same coaches and players that within minutes of the head high crackdown introduced the next big scurge on the game .... the Hollywood dive ..

The NRL provided a massive incentive - there is no point blaming the dog for eating sausages that you left on the BBQ...

These are the same coaches and players that will say and do anything for an opportunistic advantage without a thought as to what it will do to the "spectacle of the game ..

The powers that be are doing a fine job by themself ruining any spectacle...

Coaches and players are not blameless but these are competitive individuals so it is hard to blame them for being competitive... for example, I hate diving - HATE IT!!! BUT, if I am watching another team getting piggy-backed down the field all game (like the tigpies the other night) because they are acting like b*tches then I begin to EXPECT Manly to take the same advantage - does not mean that I think it is a good outcome for the 'spectacle of the game', it just means that I WANT TO WIN....

The powers that be do not have that excuse, they are supposed to be the custodians of the game and when they introduce mid-season rule changes as a knee-jerk reaction, and without giving full consideration to the possible IMPLICATIONS of that decision-making, then imo they are guilty of being ignorant of the game's character and culture at best.... and gross malfeasance at worst...

 

[frank stokes]

Mave ... it is simple ... if sporting codes around the world don't accept an immediate duty of care and introduce rules to minimise the risk of concussions they will be held demonstrably negligent and culpable ... they don't want less high tackles ... they want NO high tackles ...

You are NEVER going to get accidental high shots out of a full-contact body sport...

they are called 'accidental' for a reason.... punish the bad ones on the field and punish the minimal ones (the vast majority) OFF the field...

you will never avoid culpability because you sat a guy in the bin for 10 minutes...

 

[Woodsie]

You are NEVER going to get accidental high shots out of a full-contact body sport...

they are called 'accidental' for a reason.... punish the bad ones on the field and punish the minimal ones (the vast majority) OFF the field...

you will never avoid culpability because you sat a guy in the bin for 10 minutes...

No you won't ... but in a court of law the defining elements will be .. has the Rugby League breached it's duty of care responsibilities or been culpable of negligence ... "accidents" that will occur may be excused quilt .. but failing to provide adequate rules and measures to minimise the potential for accidents or to eliminate careless and reckless will be held accountable ....

 

[jbb/james]

I am having extreme difficulty taking anything that people calling for V'Landy's to listen to the Coaches and players seriously ...

These are the same coaches and players that introduced and mastered the greatest scurge the game has every seen .. the Wrestle ..

These are the same coaches and players that within minutes of the head high crackdown introduced the next big scurge on the game .... the Hollywood dive ..

These are the same coaches and players that have within minutes of the HIA protocols introduced the free interchange rorting . ..

These are the same coaches and players that will say and do anything for an opportunistic advantage without a thought as to what it will do to the "spectacle of the game ..

we need to remember the NRLs tolerance and adjudication of the wrestle. still to this day they allow players to not only wrestle but put standing players to ground well after the ref has called held and apply extra efforts to do so, well after held has been called. when will this bubble burst due to bad media

the crusher tackle has been allowed to fester in the game too long and is now compounding the head knock strategy. its not a new problem but its adding plenty of issues to the latest realignment of the rules. constantly slacking off with rules and interpretations is in the hands of the admin. in fairness its there mess, if they have let it rot why do we believe they have the answers

sure the coaches engineer these tactics but history has shown they will always do so with the interchange and playing dead to earn the side an advantage the latest

Just because we know coaches and players will offer advice that suits them , does in know way mean they have nothing other to offer and arrogance/power trip alone it seems has made them an unnecessary addition to the games decisions. you gotta read the room as a boss as mutiny only derails the course

when did the tripping rule cease to be? who decided that, the judiciary, i presume there was no rule change just a change of heart by a few involved entrusted to overlook the integrity of the games rules

So instead we are taking advice from the broadcasters, wayne pearce and vlandys about rule changes as if they are some footy gods that dont have a vested interest like the coaches. the commission has done very little in its lifetime that instills confidence that they do anything but meet for lunch

i am not calling for vlandys head. better the devil you know, but the league is surrounded by a lot of the same issues that has been nobbling the game for years, in broadcaster influence ,knee jerk reactions, no long term plan, maybe its time some of the usual suspects were shown the door

wether we like it or not coaches are engineering the players we need in the next few years and longer. be good if they knew what the game would look like. should a 16 yo prop, slim down, muscle up, get a sprint coach, start marathons, take acting classes, or just get decent legal rep

 

[Woodsie]

The NRL provided a massive incentive - there is no point blaming the dog for eating sausages that you left on the BBQ...


The powers that be are doing a fine job by themself ruining any spectacle...

Coaches and players are not blameless but these are competitive individuals so it is hard to blame them for being competitive... for example, I hate diving - HATE IT!!! BUT, if I am watching another team getting piggy-backed down the field all game (like the tigpies the other night) because they are acting like b*tches then I begin to EXPECT Manly to take the same advantage - does not mean that I think it is a good outcome for the 'spectacle of the game', it just means that I WANT TO WIN....

The powers that be do not have that excuse, they are supposed to be the custodians of the game and when they introduce mid-season rule changes as a knee-jerk reaction, and without giving full consideration to the possible IMPLICATIONS of that decision-making, then imo they are guilty of being ignorant of the game's character and culture at best.... and gross malfeasance at worst...

So ... the NRL shouldn't have introduced mandatory HIA assessments to stop the scenes of concussed players staggering around, falling over, and staying on the field .... because they should have predicted coaches would try to rort the free interchange rule ...

So the NRL shouldn't have introduced the six again because we all loved watching the slowing down wrestle game so much ... and because a more open game with creative halves coming back into their own and putting on tries is in some way bad ...

and the NRL should have ignored the threat of head trauma litigation because coaches would coach players to take a dive ...

The NRL had to make the big decisions ... and deal with the numbnuttery of coaches and players in the afterwash ...

 

[frank stokes]

No you won't ... but in a court of law the defining elements will be .. has the Rugby League breached it's duty of care responsibilities or been culpable of negligence ... "accidents" that will occur may be excused quilt .. but failing to provide adequate rules and measures to minimise the potential for accidents or to eliminate careless and reckless will be held accountable ....

that is why you sit bloke on the sideline...
a. does not ruin the game
b. shows that the game is serious about the issue
c. makes coaches sit up and take notice

you cannot implement on-field punitive measures for hits that creep up off the ball or from a falling player without changing the ethos of the game... it is not like a crusher where it purely comes down to bad tackling form, these 'high' contacts happen at speed and are often the result of other players (including the attacker) input...

but you can still get some real change by making it a very unattractive outcome and make blokes think about their technique etc....

at the moment the whole thing is nothing but a joke - the 'head high' on Laurie is a perfect example...