What you are describing is basically 7s.
...Which is quite ****.
Sevens is extreme...thirteen as in RL (or even 15).
Regards ball in play...the forwards are bigger and more dominant than ever and control the ball for long spells. The give and goes are a constant (a valid point which Sanzar brought up...how to eradicate this I do not know).
I've decided only really to focus on this part of your comment, as that's really the crux of it. As I've said above, the problem you have here is that you'd really struggle to find a Rugby League fan that sees the play-the-ball as a problem for the game's appeal. And why would they? It's a fast and efficient means of recycling possession in order to get the ball back into action. When rule changes get discussed each year at NRL HQ, it's just not something that would ever come up. Rather, the focus on increasing the speed of the play the ball by looking at how tackles are officiated. A good example would be how the Melbourne Storm started using wrestling trainers to teach their players how to hold guys and make tackles slower so they could get back onside. The NRL then sent out an edict saying that referees had to call players "held" much quicker so the game didn't slow down too much. But it'll be a cold day in hell before you get anyone to talk about introducing rucks into the game.
On Union you're simply flat out wrong on that one. In Australia most people would agree with you, but head to South Africa and fans get bloody excited about scrums... As for line-outs. I actually really like them. They're an interesting mini-game that doesn't take very long to complete and ensures that possession isn't guaranteed. By the same token, I think the "quick line-out" pass in field rule is a great idea, as it changes the calculus of long kicking.
As I said at the outset, you're suggesting things from the perspective of an outsider who is frustrated by both game. The problem is you'd get little support from existing fans of either sport. Put it to you this way: I suggested to my Peruvian born soccer made child-hood friend that soccer's point scoring system was off balance. The game would be far better if penalty kicks in the box were worth less than an open field goal because they're frankly a much easier goal to score. Make box-penalties worth 1 point and open field penalties worth 2 points. Also, instead of warning players with a yellow card, do what Union does and send them to the bin for 10 mins. Would make for a much better spectacle I thought. But no, "you're messing with the DNA of the game when you start changing such long standing fundamentals" he argued. Introducing rucking to League or eliminating the set-piece from union is in the same category.
Thats just it...the ball is "out of action" 600 odd times during a game. This stop start, disjointed routine (which league recognised by trying to lessen it by going from four to six tackles), the ball should be contested every single time. This is the complaint of Union folk.
The most entertaining teams in Union have been Wales, France, Australia and New Zealand. Attacking play, flair and creativity gets the most views. If only South Africa existed there wouldn't be a sport to discuss.
Again these are minority sports we are talking about...popular in pockets in a handful of countries with only NZ having the Union code as the national sport. Contrary to what rats stated I never used "bigger" as an incentive, rather as a footnote after removing the chaff.
Regards football, I'm all for any change that improves the game. Technology for one (to a minimum obviously to avoid it becoming another stop start game). The value for a pen inside the box is the same as a free kick outside for obvious reasons (this applys to any sport). In the box you have a far greater chance of scoring so being fouled should not have any bearing on the value of the penalty. It's like saying the equivalent in Rugby...desperately fouling someone three yards from the tryline, the value of that penalty should be less than a penalty from the halfway line. :lol: Surprised your Peruvian mate didn't laugh.
The flaws I'm pointing in each Rugby code out are only echoing the opposing masses from each code. I'm saying nothing new here. What I'd hope to see is Union change with the game, but it's not adapting with the changes thus the game itself is completely different.
Last edited: