Declining depth

[cat]

What about Brett White? He would only want 6months and looks fit!

Knows the system and plays, could really mentor the boys

I saw BW on the sideline the other night and let me tell ya he needs a bigger shirt..

Maybe he had many layers underneath, it was cold

[BJ]

Bring back Chicka Ferguson!

Before Brett White.

[Kryptonite]

Give Shaun fensom an sos call, todays game is for him! Tapine back up front n fensom to lock

Your joking right? The reset 6 again bell would never stop ringing

[Finchy]

Give Shaun fensom an sos call, todays game is for him! Tapine back up front n fensom to lock

Your joking right? The reset 6 again bell would never stop ringing

Poor old Fenno used to fall asleep on them sometimes!

[Botman]

Give Shaun fensom an sos call, todays game is for him! Tapine back up front n fensom to lock

Your joking right? The reset 6 again bell would never stop ringing

GE would love it, he was always so fond of that bell that used to ring in storm games constantly

[greeneyed]

Give Shaun fensom an sos call, todays game is for him! Tapine back up front n fensom to lock

Your joking right? The reset 6 again bell would never stop ringing

GE would love it, he was always so fond of that bell that used to ring in storm games constantly

The Dragons certainly got some favourable bells on Friday night.

[Seiffert82]

They sure did. I can't figure out what half the resets are for. They are handed out very inconsistently and there isn't a great deal of scrutiny put on it.

[greeneyed]

They sure did. I can't figure out what half the resets are for. They are handed out very inconsistently and there isn't a great deal of scrutiny put on it.

Yes, we don't even have good statistics on it published, so as to ensure transparency. However, based on Fox Sports Lab, I will add that to our match previews going forward. I will compile them. The set re-starts aren't even being reported upon on NRL.com.

[Seiffert82]

They sure did. I can't figure out what half the resets are for. They are handed out very inconsistently and there isn't a great deal of scrutiny put on it.

Yes, we don't even have good statistics on it published, so as to ensure transparency. However, based on Fox Sports Lab, I will add that to our match previews going forward. I will compile them. The set re-starts aren't even being reported upon on NRL.com.

Didn't think so.

It really isn't good or enough. Everyone is waxing lyrical about t how good it is for the game, but it's all happening with zero scrutiny put on the decisions. Some of the calls are entirely random. It's not good enough.

[greeneyed]

They sure did. I can't figure out what half the resets are for. They are handed out very inconsistently and there isn't a great deal of scrutiny put on it.

Yes, we don't even have good statistics on it published, so as to ensure transparency. However, based on Fox Sports Lab, I will add that to our match previews going forward. I will compile them. The set re-starts aren't even being reported upon on NRL.com.

Didn't think so.

It really isn't good or enough. Everyone is waxing lyrical about t how good it is for the game, but it's all happening with zero scrutiny put on the decisions. Some of the calls are entirely random. It's not good enough.

Even on Fox Sports Lab, you can't find the aggregate statistics. They are only available game by game. I'll keep a tab on it from now on though.

[Botman]

I have a few issues with the set restart

1. they seem to call them frequently on early tackles, espescially tackle 1, at which point i say **** the 6 again, give me the kick for territory and 6 tackles from that spot. A penalty is actually not that big a deal for the defence there, its one tackle, probably 8-10 yards not 30+

2. Inside the attacking zone, it's not ideal. Manly got a 6 to go today adjacent to the posts, down 2 with 4 minutes to go. There is no chance they arent kicking for goal, squaring the game up and taking their chances there. If a team infringes there, the team should absolutely have the option to take the penalty if they wish

the trouble with both these situations is, how do you do it in real time?
I would do this...

within your own half as an attacking team (ie you have possession) there is no 6 again, it's a penalty, field position reigns supreme. Even if you're just shy of halfway, a 6 again call is not as beneficial as a penalty and starting a new set 20-30 metres out

If you're in the attacking half, you give them 2 tackles, and if an error is made, accidental or not, you award the penalty from the spot.. so a team can actively promote the footy without fear. Its an advantage play limted to 2 plays. After that you live or die
But this allows for a team who wants the pen to chuck the ball on the ground and take the penalty and tie the game up if that's what suits them, or play it out. And also allows for the situation i've seen a few times where you get the tackle reset and a tackle later an error has occured and what you've gained nothing from the infringement, which would be fine if you had the choice but you dont... i dont know that there is an easy answer here, but choice has to be part of it

The best teams have already figured out that you can just spoil in the red zone and just back your defense and it's fine.

[greeneyed]

I have a few issues with the set restart

1. they seem to call them frequently on early tackles, espescially tackle 1, at which point i say **** the 6 again, give me the kick for territory and 6 tackles from that spot. A penalty is actually not that big a deal for the defence there, its one tackle, probably 8-10 yards not 30+

2. Inside the attacking zone, it's not ideal. Manly got a 6 to go today adjacent to the posts, down 2 with 4 minutes to go. There is no chance they arent kicking for goal, squaring the game up and taking their chances there. If a team infringes there, the team should absolutely have the option to take the penalty if they wish

the trouble with both these situations is, how do you do it in real time?
I would do this...

within your own half as an attacking team (ie you have possession) there is no 6 again, it's a penalty, field position reigns supreme. Even if you're just shy of halfway, a 6 again call is not as beneficial as a penalty and starting a new set 20-30 metres out

If you're in the attacking half, you give them 2 tackles, and if an error is made, accidental or not, you award the penalty from the spot.. so a team can actively promote the footy without fear. Its an advantage play limted to 2 plays. After that you live or die
But this allows for a team who wants the pen to chuck the ball on the ground and take the penalty and tie the game up if that's what suits them, or play it out. And also allows for the situation i've seen a few times where you get the tackle reset and a tackle later an error has occured and what you've gained nothing from the infringement, which would be fine if you had the choice but you dont... i dont know that there is an easy answer here, but choice has to be part of it

The best teams have already figured out that you can just spoil in the red zone and just back your defense and it's fine.

There's a lot of sense there. The NRL has hired some statistics guru, and despite what's happened in 2020, he's still working. Maybe he's paid for by someone else. But no stats on this.

I'd love to be able to break the stats down on when the re-starts are given as well. There isn't much benefit in a seven tackle set, when the first tackle is on a break down.

The thing is... this shouldn't be being trialled in a "live" NRL season! It should never have happened. It should always have been trialled in NSW and Queensland Cup.

[BadnMean]

The only thing it has going for it, is it's simplicity and flow. So adding qualifiers and choices just makes it more infuriating and just as messy at the problem it was supposed to fix. League should be a simple game. Union is for fussy rules.

At the moment there is 6 again + the risk of profesional foul 10 in the bin in the attacking zone. That's probably enough. I haven't seen teams able to thrive off exploiting it mercilessly yet. There will always be edges you can find in any ruling. This set up seems to me to be an improvement in lower "gameability" - slightly less reward or less ease in spoiling play.

Out of your own end, yeah it doesn't add too much sometimes but again, sometimes it really does lead to a big roll on and attacking set. I can live with it.

The issue of wildly inconsistent interpretation- I agree with. It seems subjective. Then again, I HATED how much focus league coverage put on pulling apart refs decisions over the last 5 years or so. The focus was all askew and imo it was bad for the game at all levels. I actually LIKE how now we've remembered that sometimes you just shrug at whatever the ref was thinking, I guess trust they saw something from their up close angle and or accept they are human and get on with it, appreciating they are doing their best too.

The angst and frustration are gone. The endless crucifying and demonising of refs is gone. The onus as if the game is all about ref decisions has lifted like the clouds parting. It's good.

[greeneyed]

The only thing it has going for it, is it's simplicity and flow. So adding qualifiers and choices just makes it more infuriating and just as messy at the problem it was supposed to fix. League should be a simple game. Union is for fussy rules.

At the moment there is 6 again + the risk of profesional foul 10 in the bin in the attacking zone. That's probably enough. I haven't seen teams able to thrive off exploiting it mercilessly yet. There will always be edges you can find in any ruling. This set up seems to me to be an improvement in lower "gameability" - slightly less reward or less ease in spoiling play.

Out of your own end, yeah it doesn't add too much sometimes but again, sometimes it really does lead to a big roll on and attacking set. I can live with it.

The issue of wildly inconsistent interpretation- I agree with. It seems subjective. Then again, I HATED how much focus league coverage put on pulling apart refs decisions over the last 5 years or so. The focus was all askew and imo it was bad for the game at all levels. I actually LIKE how now we've remembered that sometimes you just shrug at whatever the ref was thinking, I guess trust they saw something from their up close angle and or accept they are human and get on with it, appreciating they are doing their best too.

The angst and frustration are gone. The endless crucifying and demonising of refs is gone. The onus as if the game is all about ref decisions has lifted like the clouds parting. It's good.

I think the Roosters we’re taking advantage, as per my TGE columns.

[Coastalraider]

I ‘think’ the issue with interpretation is that like a lot of things that happen with a telecast, the ref communication doesn’t fully explain the decisions.

There are any number of things that can lead to a 6again call - laying too long, second effort, hands on the ball, coming in late, markers not square now as well. So when we see a tackler get off fast, but a 6 again call, we may miss blatantly obvious hand on the ball from the tv angle. And because it’s not a ‘stoppage’ as such we don’t see replays to analyse them.

I too want better stats around it, and I’m sure they will come. Timing is critical, it looks like teams have started to find statistical loopholes in When refs are actually giving the 6again. They are incredibly unlikely to give it on tackle 1 of a 6again set, so players are lying on the play like it’s a surrender. Also less likely to give one on tackle 5 as the ball is released and tackle 5 option in progress by the time the alarm would sound.

Overall I think it’s a great addition so far, my real concern is that while I hate the wrestle we used to have, these new rules take all ability away from a defensive team to influence the flow of game. If you are copping multiple sets, you really have to try and weather the attack and the inevitable fatigue until the attacking side gives away a penalty to get you out of your own end. It’s leading to the standard template of ‘teamA makes early critical error in own half, team B uses territory and 6agains to dominate first half possession, territory, and scoreboard in the first half (how many times are we seeing 60/40 possession splits now!). Team A gets a rest at half time, makes small comeback for 20 minutes before first half fatigue kicks in and team B finish off the game.

[Dusty]

I was just looking at a few off contract (end of 2020) players that aren't getting much time at their current club. Maybe they could be an option for the club to sign immediately for the rest of the season with an incentive to earn a contract in 2021 and beyond.

For 2020
Chris McQueen (Tigers)
Jed Cartwright (Panthers)
Josh King (Knights)

As for targets in 2021 to spend some of J.Bateman's money:
David Fifta (Broncos, unrealistic but lets bump his price up)
Jacob Saifiti (Knights)
Josh Kerr (Dragons)
Jacob Host (Dragons)
Herman Ese'ese (Knights)
Isaiah Papali'i (Warriors)

[theRads]

I was just looking at a few off contract (end of 2020) players that aren't getting much time at their current club. Maybe they could be an option for the club to sign immediately for the rest of the season with an incentive to earn a contract in 2021 and beyond.

For 2020
Chris McQueen (Tigers)
Jed Cartwright (Panthers)
Josh King (Knights)

As for targets in 2021 to spend some of J.Bateman's money:
David Fifta (Broncos, unrealistic but lets bump his price up)
Jacob Saifiti (Knights)
Josh Kerr (Dragons)
Jacob Host (Dragons)
Herman Ese'ese (Knights)
Isaiah Papali'i (Warriors)

I’d take Chris McQueen for the experience

[Dusty]

I was just looking at a few off contract (end of 2020) players that aren't getting much time at their current club. Maybe they could be an option for the club to sign immediately for the rest of the season with an incentive to earn a contract in 2021 and beyond.

For 2020
Chris McQueen (Tigers)
Jed Cartwright (Panthers)
Josh King (Knights)

As for targets in 2021 to spend some of J.Bateman's money:
David Fifta (Broncos, unrealistic but lets bump his price up)
Jacob Saifiti (Knights)
Josh Kerr (Dragons)
Jacob Host (Dragons)
Herman Ese'ese (Knights)
Isaiah Papali'i (Warriors)

I’d take Chris McQueen for the experience

As a former QLD Origin player, at 32 he might be worth a shot. Offer him the chance for 2020 and maybe an incentive for 2021. I'm sure he'd be great insurance to cover the backrow. If needed he could punch out a few minutes in the middle.

[julian87]

A middle forward is needed ASAP, even on loan, not a centre/second rower

[Dusty]

A middle forward is needed ASAP, even on loan, not a centre/second rower

He's hardly a centre anymore. But, he offers cover on the edge which mean Young could play some middle.

He'd be cheap and very keen for an opportunity I'd imagine

[simo]

mcqueen would be an awful panic buy.

[zim]

McQueen might as well be retired at this point. He's just running things out.

[Northern Raider]

A middle forward is needed ASAP, even on loan, not a centre/second rower

He's hardly a centre anymore. But, he offers cover on the edge which mean Young could play some middle.

He'd be cheap and very keen for an opportunity I'd imagine

I agree that getting an edge back rower is good option because Young can play middle. I wouldn't be replacing him with McQueen though. That's downgrading one spot to provide depth in another.

[Northern Raider]

These days you don't need to see who's off contract. Just look at players who can't get a run at the moment and offer a deal.

[zim]

If we're talking middle, cheaper, now then Elijah Taylor might be happy for a 2 year deal but his hands can be a real issue when he gets the yips.

[Andymachine]

I don't know who it is but I think we really need another metre eater - a guy that's going to get us 150m every game. It's common to look at the stats after a game and see Papalii as the only guy in the pack who's run for 3 figures with every other forward running it <10 times for 50-90m each. We carry a lot of low output forwards and Whitehead is the only one of those who I'm completely fine with because he takes different types of carries and contributes so much in other areas. Guler has stepped it up and been our only other real yardage guy so he's a big loss and replacing him with Lui will be a net loss of another 50m per game.

With BJ gone and Bateman out we're well down on field position. We need a big step up in output from Hudson Young, Tapine and Havili. I'm confident Havili will do that if given more than 30 mins per game but the other two need to step it up. For next year, we need another top shelf forward of Bateman's quality, either at prop or second row. We need a Taukeiaho kind of guy up front or a Cordner/Kikau type in the 2R who runs with intent and crashes over the advantage line. We have something around $700k from losing Bateman and it's not looking like any of this year's group will be commanding upgrades for next year so I hope we can bring in a blue chip.

[Botman]

These days you don't need to see who's off contract. Just look at players who can't get a run at the moment and offer a deal.

That's some 101 level stuff... advanced recruitment is now about getting the guy on board for next season and having him agitate for an early release.

[Northern Raider]

I don't know who it is but I think we really need another metre eater - a guy that's going to get us 150m every game. It's common to look at the stats after a game and see Papalii as the only guy in the pack who's run for 3 figures with every other forward running it <10 times for 50-90m each. We carry a lot of low output forwards and Whitehead is the only one of those who I'm completely fine with because he takes different types of carries and contributes so much in other areas. Guler has stepped it up and been our only other real yardage guy so he's a big loss and replacing him with Lui will be a net loss of another 50m per game.

With BJ gone and Bateman out we're well down on field position. We need a big step up in output from Hudson Young, Tapine and Havili. I'm confident Havili will do that if given more than 30 mins per game but the other two need to step it up. For next year, we need another top shelf forward of Bateman's quality, either at prop or second row. We need a Taukeiaho kind of guy up front or a Cordner/Kikau type in the 2R who runs with intent and crashes over the advantage line. We have something around $700k from losing Bateman and it's not looking like any of this year's group will be commanding upgrades for next year so I hope we can bring in a blue chip.

Agree to a point. Be good to have somebody else like that on the roster. Metres Gained can be a deceiving stat sometimes. Game time in possession, field position, tactics etc play a big part. As an example a lot of metres come from returns of restart kicks, particularly drop outs. Also set starts from mid field also see the middle forward taking early hit ups. A higher number of those scenarios will always see guys putting up some big numbers if they're on the park at the time. Conversely returning the ball for a long kick then the outside backs tend to take those hit ups as the forwards work their way back.

We also tend to give all our guys around 40 min each. Ones like Taukeiaho often get 60+ mins. Case in point from Friday, Sutton got 56 mins and rattled up 141m. By comparison Taukeiaho had 65 min and ran 175m so their metres per minute are actually similar.

[Northern Raider]

These days you don't need to see who's off contract. Just look at players who can't get a run at the moment and offer a deal.

That's some 101 level stuff... advanced recruitment is now about getting the guy on board for next season and having him agitate for an early release.

That's almost the norm now. Even happened many years ago when we signed Tapine, but that was more Knights throwing their toys out of the cot. Clubs are becoming wiser to it now. TItans refused to let Arrow go early despite moves for it.

[Toviii]

I say we bring Vaughan and Boyd back home

[Seiffert82]

Jacob Saifiti would be great.

[GreenMachine]

Vaughan - Yes.
Boyd - No.

[kona_dream]

Are we getting far enough into the season where teams are no longer are a chance of making finials and are looking to offload players? If the NRL approves Bateman as a representative injury by my calculations if he misses 12 weeks we should be entitled to $200k of salary cap exemption. Gee that can buy you a pretty good 2nd rower for 6 months of football. Ideally someone who could move to the middle if/when Johnny comes back.

[Timbo]

Would Vaughan play for Stick? I don't think he left on the best of terms.

Also, he has been poor this season at the Dragons. Well, they've all been poor this season at the Dragons, but he's not really putting in much of an effort from what I'm seeing.

[BadnMean]

There has been more positivity shown toward Bateman from Sticky since leaving than Vaughan. I don't think it's viable.

Vaughan was excellent last year, for the most part. He could probably still go good but I don't think it will be at the Raiders.