: Fri Sep 11, 2009 10:39 am  

Leyther_Matt wrote:

I'm not saying that the skill level is higher as such, but there is more scope to use it as there isn't as big an emphasis on the forwards beating down a path and simply who has the biggest team.

...or the fastest dummy half...

: Fri Sep 11, 2009 11:24 am  

An Ignorant Dog Turd wrote:

Disgrace all round, especially a poor defensive read from a poor player was rewarded!

Widnes should never have won

They were never at the races.

Whilst 'haven were being penalised Widnes got away with murder and fluke tries.

Ah well the consolation is that Widnes are just not good enough to win the grand final and had to rely on loan players to win the Northern Rail Cup.

Their true colours are now beginning to come apparent.

Awww bless still coming out with the usual bitter and ill informed bile? I bet life sucks being you.

: Fri Sep 11, 2009 11:27 am  

wire-quin wrote:

I thought Widnes looked poor.

That's what 3 weeks without a game, missing key players and throwing the kids in does, yet we still managed to win. Give us some credit ffs.

: Fri Sep 11, 2009 12:04 pm  

Im not taking credit away from you winning, just that when I turned it on I would have thought it would be an easy win(if the exist) for Widnes-which it turned out not to be. I suspect you will need to lift your game to progress to the final.

: Fri Sep 11, 2009 12:25 pm  

Leaguefan wrote:

Widnes should never have won

They were never at the races.

Whilst 'haven were being penalised Widnes got away with murder and fluke tries.

.

Jesus wept,you know your RL don't you?Five tries to three.Shame on Widnes for trying the chip and chase and short kick offs that lead to 'fluke' tries.

: Fri Sep 11, 2009 12:28 pm  

Dave T wrote:

I would agree. Not that I think the skill level is higher in the Championship, but by slowing the game down a touch it means a bit more effort is required to break defences.

SL has slowed down the ptb this year, and I have been happy with the change. Saints, not surprisingly are not happy with the change.

i completely disagree,

by slowing down the ptb it means a bit less effort is required to defend, all we will see is closer games, slower games with less effort and more time spent on the floor, almost like a union game,

we will see a return to bigger fatter forwards in the mould of feka or moi-moi who can break through defences because of their size and their massive defensive frailties are covered up by the slow PTB, what we are in effect doing is covering for the fact some players in SL arent up to scratch and it will kill us against the aussies because our lazy attempts to slow the game down will be pinged, whilst thiers which come through good technique will be allowed

besides, when were either cunningham or diskin speedy round the ruck?

: Fri Sep 11, 2009 12:34 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

i completely disagree,

by slowing down the ptb it means a bit less effort is required to defend, all we will see is closer games, slower games with less effort and more time spent on the floor, almost like a union game,

we will see a return to bigger fatter forwards in the mould of feka or moi-moi who can break through defences because of their size and their massive defensive frailties are covered up by the slow PTB, what we are in effect doing is covering for the fact some players in SL arent up to scratch and it will kill us against the aussies because our lazy attempts to slow the game down will be pinged, whilst thiers which come through good technique will be allowed

besides, when were either cunningham or diskin speedy round the ruck?

Utter rubbish. The reason we get tonked by the Aussies, aside from the fact that quite simply they're better at RL than we are, is because Super League puts the emphasis on size rather than skill.

: Fri Sep 11, 2009 12:43 pm  

Leyther_Matt wrote:

Utter rubbish. The reason we get tonked by the Aussies, aside from the fact that quite simply they're better at RL than we are, is because Super League puts the emphasis on size rather than skill.

how can an emphasis on speed also put an emphasis on size? it seems to be one or the other?

if we train players to be fast they will naturally lose bulk, if we allow them to be slow, it allows more bulk, it would seem counter-intuitive for us to have a faster game with bigger players

also are Burrow, Long, Mcguire, Roby, Brown, Sinfield, Pryce, Deacon, Tomkins, Myler, Horne, Orr, etc etc players who rely on their size?

and you're right the reason we get tonked is because they have better players, but there are a few reasons behind that, namely the lack of effort throughout the league on youth developement, the lack of world class coaching, and the actual lack of british players playing at the top level,

: Fri Sep 11, 2009 12:45 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

i completely disagree,

by slowing down the ptb it means a bit less effort is required to defend, all we will see is closer games, slower games with less effort and more time spent on the floor, almost like a union game,

we will see a return to bigger fatter forwards in the mould of feka or moi-moi who can break through defences because of their size and their massive defensive frailties are covered up by the slow PTB, what we are in effect doing is covering for the fact some players in SL arent up to scratch and it will kill us against the aussies because our lazy attempts to slow the game down will be pinged, whilst thiers which come through good technique will be allowed

besides, when were either cunningham or diskin speedy round the ruck?

Did you watch the last world cup?

: Fri Sep 11, 2009 12:50 pm  

LeythIg wrote:

Did you watch the last world cup?

yeah, we were slowed by great tackle technique by the antipodaens and didnt know how to respond to it, we also didnt know how to slow them through similar techniques so were pinged for our poor technique,

allowing poor technnique to slow the game wont help that,


and just for context i am talking purely SL at the moment, the lower leagues are naturally a little slower regardless of the speed allowed at the ptb